The paranormal has been quiet lately, nothing much being reported, even though there seems to be a lot of activity around. People are all worried to death about losing their homes (mine is safe) and their savings (mine are dispersed so I won't lose everything) and about all the debts they have (I have none - but it's time to fill out the tax form so that won't last). They don't seem to be doing much more than worrying and blaming each other, as far as I can see.
Anyway, in among all the bad news, it seems the Ministry of Defence have released a lot of UFO files. I know a few who visit here are interested in UFO's and they probably already know all about this, but in case anyone's missed it, there's a report here.
Interesting stuff. I don't study UFO's myself but I might have a look at those files anyway, since nothing else is being reported to interest me at the moment.
Monday, October 20, 2008
1984 as a manual for government.
Most of the time, a mobile phone (cellphone) is just a nuisance. Especially if someone else knows your number. Sometimes it's vital, such as when you're working somewhere remote at night and if you fell down a hole, nobody would find you for months. Hasn't happened, but it might.
So, as much as I dislike mobile phones, I carry one. It's not a fancy one. I don't want a camera in my phone because phone cameras are, let's face it, rubbish. I don't want a MP3 player in there. I carry one so I can phone or text when it's vital I do so. Nothing more. I'm sure the Apple iPhone is a wonderful thing but I don't want one.
I have a friend who has this phone--he says it's a phone--which looks for all the world like a miniature computer. It works like one too. It browses the Internet in full colour and he can even type on it. The one thing he can't do is answer it when it rings. By the time he's scrolled through the options and put it in 'phone' mode, his caller has given up. He had to buy another, simple phone for calls and now he carries both.
So I have a cheap one. It makes phone calls. It can do texts. It can do other things but that's because those other things are now standard. It does something called 'bluetooth' which doesn't look like something I want a phone to do so I turned it off. It has a camera, which I used once and was disgusted at the result. It's on a pay-as-you-go tarriff, I bought it with cash and my name is not associated with it at all.
That is changing.
Our Government decided that every phone call must be logged, along with every Email and every web page we visit. They claim 'terrorism' as the reason, but the terrorists have been silent for years. The real reason is control.
Someone must have realised that these cheap phones, bought with cash and with no contract attached, cannot be associated with any individual. Their huge database of logged calls will be even more useless if they can't pin a call to an individual. So we will have to register, or the phone will die.
This is supposed to deter criminals. I don't see how it will do that since the criminal only has to steal a phone and their activities will be blamed on the poor sap who is registered to that phone. The only reason to do this is population control. Keeping people scared of government is the Stalin way of doing things. Now it's happening here.
I used to laugh at management. I used to joke that they used Scott Adams' 'Dilbert' books as manuals.
Now it seems our government is using George Orwell's '1984' as their manual.
That's not nearly as funny. It's not funny at all.
So, as much as I dislike mobile phones, I carry one. It's not a fancy one. I don't want a camera in my phone because phone cameras are, let's face it, rubbish. I don't want a MP3 player in there. I carry one so I can phone or text when it's vital I do so. Nothing more. I'm sure the Apple iPhone is a wonderful thing but I don't want one.
I have a friend who has this phone--he says it's a phone--which looks for all the world like a miniature computer. It works like one too. It browses the Internet in full colour and he can even type on it. The one thing he can't do is answer it when it rings. By the time he's scrolled through the options and put it in 'phone' mode, his caller has given up. He had to buy another, simple phone for calls and now he carries both.
So I have a cheap one. It makes phone calls. It can do texts. It can do other things but that's because those other things are now standard. It does something called 'bluetooth' which doesn't look like something I want a phone to do so I turned it off. It has a camera, which I used once and was disgusted at the result. It's on a pay-as-you-go tarriff, I bought it with cash and my name is not associated with it at all.
That is changing.
Our Government decided that every phone call must be logged, along with every Email and every web page we visit. They claim 'terrorism' as the reason, but the terrorists have been silent for years. The real reason is control.
Someone must have realised that these cheap phones, bought with cash and with no contract attached, cannot be associated with any individual. Their huge database of logged calls will be even more useless if they can't pin a call to an individual. So we will have to register, or the phone will die.
This is supposed to deter criminals. I don't see how it will do that since the criminal only has to steal a phone and their activities will be blamed on the poor sap who is registered to that phone. The only reason to do this is population control. Keeping people scared of government is the Stalin way of doing things. Now it's happening here.
I used to laugh at management. I used to joke that they used Scott Adams' 'Dilbert' books as manuals.
Now it seems our government is using George Orwell's '1984' as their manual.
That's not nearly as funny. It's not funny at all.
Thursday, October 16, 2008
Only in America.
An American senator has decided to sue God for making terrorist threats against Omaha. I have two Bibles here, the King James version and the American Standard version (for some reason, they gave us that one in school in the UK, years ago. I doubt it would be allowed now - they'd have to give out the Bhagavad-Gita and the Q'ran and all the others too). Anyway, I've checked in them both, and even had a skim through my New Testament in Welsh, which I can't actually read but keep for historical value, and I can find no mention of Omaha at all.
The judge threw the case out, on the grounds that they don't know where God lives and so can't send out a summons. The senator responded that since the court has tacitly admitted the existence of God, they must also admit he knows everything so he knows about the summons already. Since the common perception of God is that he is everywhere, there's no need to wonder about where he lives either. He's already in the courtroom and always has been.
I'm not sure what point this senator is making. Something to do with accessibility to the law for lunatics, perhaps?
If there is no God, there is no case.
If there is a God, then deliberately irritating him seems like a bad idea. Besides, if there is a God then the law cannot apply. If there is a God, then God made Man, and Man made laws. It's like saying that the heirarchy your pet lizards live by applies equally to you, their owner.
I did find the whole thing amusing. Perhaps it's in one of the lost books of the Bible?
And God spake, and did say 'Adam, thou shalt father my people,and they shall spill forth across the face of the earth. Except Omaha, which is a terrible place. I shall smite all those who abide there.'
And Adam did say 'Yo, whatever, Dad. See you in Omaha. Not!' And he did weave and bob and make gangsta gestures.
And God was displeased, and spake thus: 'Disrespect me not, thou callow youth. Thou art but the dust on my beard. Verily, I will smite Omaha, especially those who name themselves Senator, for they are litiginous filth.'
And so on. I expect the stake will be set up on the village green for me tomorrow night, but well, it is comical, isn't it?
I wish British politicians had a sense of humour. Then again, I just wish they had sense.
The judge threw the case out, on the grounds that they don't know where God lives and so can't send out a summons. The senator responded that since the court has tacitly admitted the existence of God, they must also admit he knows everything so he knows about the summons already. Since the common perception of God is that he is everywhere, there's no need to wonder about where he lives either. He's already in the courtroom and always has been.
I'm not sure what point this senator is making. Something to do with accessibility to the law for lunatics, perhaps?
If there is no God, there is no case.
If there is a God, then deliberately irritating him seems like a bad idea. Besides, if there is a God then the law cannot apply. If there is a God, then God made Man, and Man made laws. It's like saying that the heirarchy your pet lizards live by applies equally to you, their owner.
I did find the whole thing amusing. Perhaps it's in one of the lost books of the Bible?
And God spake, and did say 'Adam, thou shalt father my people,and they shall spill forth across the face of the earth. Except Omaha, which is a terrible place. I shall smite all those who abide there.'
And Adam did say 'Yo, whatever, Dad. See you in Omaha. Not!' And he did weave and bob and make gangsta gestures.
And God was displeased, and spake thus: 'Disrespect me not, thou callow youth. Thou art but the dust on my beard. Verily, I will smite Omaha, especially those who name themselves Senator, for they are litiginous filth.'
And so on. I expect the stake will be set up on the village green for me tomorrow night, but well, it is comical, isn't it?
I wish British politicians had a sense of humour. Then again, I just wish they had sense.
Those ice floes await.
Society in the UK has degraded to the point where old people can no longer trust their relatives.
Someone else put it much more eloquently than I could, so I'll just give a link.
Prepare to be disgusted.
Someone else put it much more eloquently than I could, so I'll just give a link.
Prepare to be disgusted.
Saturday, October 11, 2008
An Expert Speaks.
Many have said that, when it comes to anything that can be called 'paranormal', there are no experts.
It's true. Those of us who devote considerable time and effort to paranormal matters do end up knowing more about them than those who don't study them at all, but that's true of anything. None of us can claim to be 'an expert' because we can't prove any of it to anyone else yet.
If you're an architect, and all the buildings you design stay up, then you're an expert. If you drive a racing car and never crash, whether you win or not you're an expert driver. Things like that are quantifiable - an architect whose buildings are hideous and unsafe is not an expert, one whose buildings are attractive and secure is an expert. The paranormal is not quantifiable in this way because I can't present a ghost on demand, a UFO researcher can't show any piece of a spaceship or an alien, Bigfoot hunters have never caught one, and so on. We can claim to be 'researchers' but we can't claim to be 'expert' because there is no solid evidence as yet so there is nothing to base any claim to expertise on.
When anyone comes up with 'an expert says' as 'proof' that their statements are true, I loose a little more enamel from my teeth when they grind together.
So, let's take a look at the most recent case of this, in which an 'expert' claims that UFO's have been visiting Earth since 1947. Let's not even mention Alexander the Great's claimed sighting, nor any of the others that might or might not have been alien ships in the historical record. Let's hear this expert speak. He's talking about Roswell, the famed 'Area 51'.
The area is surrounded by charred trees and bushes and a mysterious blue substance that dribbles down rocks.
We have stuff like that here. We call it 'water'. Seriously though, if there is a 'mysterious blue stuff' then it should be simple enough to sample and test it. Charred trees and bushes - in a desert - don't sound too surprising either. Dry trees and bushes catch fire easily. We even have occasional forest fires in the UK, where there are no deserts, few forests, and it rains almost every day. So, aside from the mysterious blue substance which, it seems, evades attempts to sample it, there's nothing paranormal so far.
US physician Dr Ronald Rau said in the 1940s high levels of radiation pointed to a ship landing there in the 1940s.
Two things here. First, in the 1940's there were quite a few nuclear bomb tests in the American desert. Nobody knew quite how deadly the radiation was so I'm betting there were no serious attempts to track where the fallout landed. When Chernobyl blew up, in Russia, there were radiation effects here in the UK. So those bomb tests probably spread fallout over quite a lot of desert.
Second, how does Dr. Rau know the propulsion mechanism of unknown alien spacecraft? Even if their engines are nuclear, if they leak radioactive material to the point where it can be detected at landing sites, then their occupants would all be dead on arrival. Would an alien race capable of travelling between worlds really build such shoddy machines?
Saying that high levels of radiation indicate a landing site for an alien ship is not just jumping to conclusions, it's Olympic standard pole-vaulting to them. Science is not advanced by guessing.
It's true. Those of us who devote considerable time and effort to paranormal matters do end up knowing more about them than those who don't study them at all, but that's true of anything. None of us can claim to be 'an expert' because we can't prove any of it to anyone else yet.
If you're an architect, and all the buildings you design stay up, then you're an expert. If you drive a racing car and never crash, whether you win or not you're an expert driver. Things like that are quantifiable - an architect whose buildings are hideous and unsafe is not an expert, one whose buildings are attractive and secure is an expert. The paranormal is not quantifiable in this way because I can't present a ghost on demand, a UFO researcher can't show any piece of a spaceship or an alien, Bigfoot hunters have never caught one, and so on. We can claim to be 'researchers' but we can't claim to be 'expert' because there is no solid evidence as yet so there is nothing to base any claim to expertise on.
When anyone comes up with 'an expert says' as 'proof' that their statements are true, I loose a little more enamel from my teeth when they grind together.
So, let's take a look at the most recent case of this, in which an 'expert' claims that UFO's have been visiting Earth since 1947. Let's not even mention Alexander the Great's claimed sighting, nor any of the others that might or might not have been alien ships in the historical record. Let's hear this expert speak. He's talking about Roswell, the famed 'Area 51'.
The area is surrounded by charred trees and bushes and a mysterious blue substance that dribbles down rocks.
We have stuff like that here. We call it 'water'. Seriously though, if there is a 'mysterious blue stuff' then it should be simple enough to sample and test it. Charred trees and bushes - in a desert - don't sound too surprising either. Dry trees and bushes catch fire easily. We even have occasional forest fires in the UK, where there are no deserts, few forests, and it rains almost every day. So, aside from the mysterious blue substance which, it seems, evades attempts to sample it, there's nothing paranormal so far.
US physician Dr Ronald Rau said in the 1940s high levels of radiation pointed to a ship landing there in the 1940s.
Two things here. First, in the 1940's there were quite a few nuclear bomb tests in the American desert. Nobody knew quite how deadly the radiation was so I'm betting there were no serious attempts to track where the fallout landed. When Chernobyl blew up, in Russia, there were radiation effects here in the UK. So those bomb tests probably spread fallout over quite a lot of desert.
Second, how does Dr. Rau know the propulsion mechanism of unknown alien spacecraft? Even if their engines are nuclear, if they leak radioactive material to the point where it can be detected at landing sites, then their occupants would all be dead on arrival. Would an alien race capable of travelling between worlds really build such shoddy machines?
Saying that high levels of radiation indicate a landing site for an alien ship is not just jumping to conclusions, it's Olympic standard pole-vaulting to them. Science is not advanced by guessing.
Mr Mantle said: "A good friend of mine Ed Gerham first found the site and I flew over as soon as I could. It was a real find and as soon as I arrived there I knew what a special and peculiar place it was. There is nothing around it for around 70 miles, it is literally in the middle of nowhere."
The only thing special about this place, it seems to me, is that nobody wants to go within 70 miles of it. That doesn't lead me to conclude that an alien landed there. It leads me to conclude that this is an especially horrible place to be. Since these aliens must have come a very long way, choosing a landing site that's 70 miles from anything interesting doesn't sound like good planning. Did they really travel all those light years to land somewhere so dreadful that none of the locals want to live there?
I can't see why this expert is so convinced that he's found anything interesting at all. What he appears to have found is a place nobody else wants to visit, so why would an alien find such a place irresistible? And why does it prove that aliens only arrived in 1947?
"Us Brits really have beaten the Americans at their own game and it is really great that we have done that. It really is revolutionary for the UFO world."
Really great? Why? Are you researching or competing? Before you claim glory, it might be an idea to wait until you've discussed your findings with other researchers, and not just UFO researchers. If you have some blue stuff, get a chemist and a geologist to look at it. It might just turn out to be something natural. Have a biologist take a look too, in case it's some kind of lichen.
The 'blue stuff' might turn out to be the UFO equivalent of 'ectoplasm'. Ectoplasm never existed. It was made up by fakes in the 1800's, and was usually muslin, treated to make it glow in the dark. For a long, long time, and still to this day, that faked paranormal phenomenon has dogged those who try to study real paranormal phenomena. It was eventually debunked, proved to be nothing but fakery, and it had fooled some pretty eminent scientists. It absolutely fooled the public.
Ectoplasm is one of the sceptic's main weapons now. This 'blue stuff' could turn out be another such weapon, handed on a plate to those who want to deride an entire subject. The sensible thing to do would be to get it tested every way possible, get it analysed, and get experts (who really can claim the title) in chemistry, geology, biology and any other relevant subject to attest that it has no natural explanation. Then, it's paranormal. If it turns out to be normal after all, then this guy has just made a rod for his own back.
Mr Mantle is set to reveal his full findings at the UFO Data Annual Conference later this month in Leeds.
Unfortunately I won't be able to go. I expect Fortean Times will cover the event so I'll just have to wait for that.
I don't claim the title 'expert' because that particular pedestal is very fragile indeed. It's based on personal experience and theory only. Paranormal research doesn't have collections of samples and artefacts to study. The things I study can fade into the air before my eyes, the UFO's these guys study can fly away and leave no trace (I refuse to believe they have leaky engines). Unless someone else sees them for themselves, there is no way to convince anyone else of their existence. There are no specimens in jars.
Until there is some absolutely incontrovertible evidence, claiming the title 'expert' is just asking to be shot down in flames.
I'll stick with 'researcher'.
Saturday, October 04, 2008
One for the writers.
Whether you write fiction, or you're a journalist (much the same in the UK these days) or just an ordinary blog-babbler like me, this article might be of interest.
Some points:
- I haven't read the story in question and I'm not going to. It sounds like tacky porno to me. Not interested.
- It wasn't on a blog. It was on a porno story site which, I assume (hope!) is members only with safeguards concerning the age of members. Not a public-view blog that anyone could happen across.
- The guy is not a blogger. He's a writer. Possibly a severely twisted writer, but a writer nonetheless.
- It is illegal (in the UK) to write stories including real, living people without their express consent. He hasn't been arrested for that. The band he wrote about have not complained. I'm guessing they knew nothing of this until the story broke.
- He was arrested because some self-appointed watchdog group were scanning the site, looking for something to complain about. I'm afraid we have far too many of these professionally offended types here now.
So he posted a (presumably very unpleasant) story to a (presumably members-only) website, one of the professionally-offended found it because they were looking for it (therefore they must have joined the site), and now he's prosecuted.
What he did was illegal. He wrote about the torture and killing of people who are currently alive, who are in the public eye, and there are individuals out there who are deranged enough to try to act out that fantasy. They might have tried anyway, but his story gave them a specific target and therefore put specific people at risk. He should be prosecuted for that, not for the content of the story.
Although, if the moderators of the site were any use, they should have spotted the legal implications of the story and pulled it at once, then sent him a note to the effect that if he rewrites with fictional characters, he can put it back.
What makes me uneasy is the way in which it happened. His story was not on public view. Someone had to get into a site to see it. A site that only a certain kind of person would be interested in joining. That 'someone' was not just a member, shocked at the story, but was a person who had joined the site with the specific intention of looking for something to complain about.
I'm not interested in porno sites. I'd never have joined this one so I'd never have seen the story. Neither would anyone else who doesn't share that particular interest.
I'm not much interested in Western gunslinger stories, although I enjoy films of that type. So I wouldn't join a line-dancing group or a country and western club or a website set up to cater for those who are interested in the Wild West types of thing.
That does not mean I think such things should be banned. I don't want to see them. All I have to do is not go to those websites, those clubs, those places which are not interesting to me. I would never dream of infiltrating a line dancing group with the intention of seeking out some health and safety risk that would get them shut down.
Okay, nobody could possibly get offended by line dancing. It's completely inoffensive. Just dull.
That, however, is what these self-appointed moral guardians are doing. They are joining clubs they don't like for the specific purpose of looking for things to report to the police.
The police do this sort of thing for legitimate reasons. They watch sites known to be used by terrorists and paedophiles and often catch dangerous people as a result. It is, however, a matter for the police. Not for Web-based vigilante groups with their own ideas of what should be illegal.
It's an underhand form of censorship by self-appointed censors that could have serious repercussions. If they win this case then nothing they disagree with will be safe, whether fiction or reality.
Some points:
- I haven't read the story in question and I'm not going to. It sounds like tacky porno to me. Not interested.
- It wasn't on a blog. It was on a porno story site which, I assume (hope!) is members only with safeguards concerning the age of members. Not a public-view blog that anyone could happen across.
- The guy is not a blogger. He's a writer. Possibly a severely twisted writer, but a writer nonetheless.
- It is illegal (in the UK) to write stories including real, living people without their express consent. He hasn't been arrested for that. The band he wrote about have not complained. I'm guessing they knew nothing of this until the story broke.
- He was arrested because some self-appointed watchdog group were scanning the site, looking for something to complain about. I'm afraid we have far too many of these professionally offended types here now.
So he posted a (presumably very unpleasant) story to a (presumably members-only) website, one of the professionally-offended found it because they were looking for it (therefore they must have joined the site), and now he's prosecuted.
What he did was illegal. He wrote about the torture and killing of people who are currently alive, who are in the public eye, and there are individuals out there who are deranged enough to try to act out that fantasy. They might have tried anyway, but his story gave them a specific target and therefore put specific people at risk. He should be prosecuted for that, not for the content of the story.
Although, if the moderators of the site were any use, they should have spotted the legal implications of the story and pulled it at once, then sent him a note to the effect that if he rewrites with fictional characters, he can put it back.
What makes me uneasy is the way in which it happened. His story was not on public view. Someone had to get into a site to see it. A site that only a certain kind of person would be interested in joining. That 'someone' was not just a member, shocked at the story, but was a person who had joined the site with the specific intention of looking for something to complain about.
I'm not interested in porno sites. I'd never have joined this one so I'd never have seen the story. Neither would anyone else who doesn't share that particular interest.
I'm not much interested in Western gunslinger stories, although I enjoy films of that type. So I wouldn't join a line-dancing group or a country and western club or a website set up to cater for those who are interested in the Wild West types of thing.
That does not mean I think such things should be banned. I don't want to see them. All I have to do is not go to those websites, those clubs, those places which are not interesting to me. I would never dream of infiltrating a line dancing group with the intention of seeking out some health and safety risk that would get them shut down.
Okay, nobody could possibly get offended by line dancing. It's completely inoffensive. Just dull.
That, however, is what these self-appointed moral guardians are doing. They are joining clubs they don't like for the specific purpose of looking for things to report to the police.
The police do this sort of thing for legitimate reasons. They watch sites known to be used by terrorists and paedophiles and often catch dangerous people as a result. It is, however, a matter for the police. Not for Web-based vigilante groups with their own ideas of what should be illegal.
It's an underhand form of censorship by self-appointed censors that could have serious repercussions. If they win this case then nothing they disagree with will be safe, whether fiction or reality.
Wednesday, October 01, 2008
Weasel Stomping Day
Okay. There's a sense of humour, there's a twisted sense of humour, and then there's just plain sick.
I think I just crossed the line because I laughed till I cried at this one. If there's a Hell, this video booked my room.
Yours too.
(I get a 'no longer available' on the link, but it is. It's here).
Tuesday, September 30, 2008
The flying ghost.
I still say the tacky tabloid newspapers are the place to look for ghost stories that the seious papers won't touch, but this one is just too silly.
Yves Rossy has flown over the English channel on a jet wing - no mean feat and not without considerable personal risk. An historic act indeed.
Some idiot took a photo and was shocked to find a UFO following the flying man. The UFO is the same size and shape as M. Rossy and is clearly an internal reflection in the lens.
Genuine paranormal events are hard enough to spot as it is, without junk like this getting in the way.
Worse, Nick Pope, who claims to be an expert, seems to have been completely fooled. That doesn't help at all.
Sometimes I wish I'd been a train driver.
Yves Rossy has flown over the English channel on a jet wing - no mean feat and not without considerable personal risk. An historic act indeed.
Some idiot took a photo and was shocked to find a UFO following the flying man. The UFO is the same size and shape as M. Rossy and is clearly an internal reflection in the lens.
Genuine paranormal events are hard enough to spot as it is, without junk like this getting in the way.
Worse, Nick Pope, who claims to be an expert, seems to have been completely fooled. That doesn't help at all.
Sometimes I wish I'd been a train driver.
Sunday, September 28, 2008
It's how you tell it that counts.
The often bizarre world of the paranormal is quiet at the moment. People have no time to worry about things moving on their own or strange lights and sounds. There are much bigger concerns.
I have already been told (offline) that this proves the non-existence of the paranormal. If it were real, they argue, we would all see it all the time. My argument is that maybe you are seeing it all the time but your mind is occupied with other things, such as trying to budget for a life where prices are going up exponentially and incomes are not.
It all hinges on one thing, really. Can people's perceptions be twisted by a few distractions and some clever manipulation to the extent that they aren't sure what they are seeing, reading, or believing?
Here are two links. One is something we all need to worry about, the other is nothing to worry about at all.
Which is which?
First impressions, please. A little thought will make the difference clear but remember, most people don't apply such reasoning. Most will go with those first impressions.
Then, perhaps, think a little about your day. What do you remember of travelling to and from work? What happened at lunchtime? Who did you see? What were they wearing?
Memory and perception are nowhere near as good as we like to think. Just because you can't remember the colour of your boss's tie doesn't mean he wasn't wearing one.
Or does it?
I have already been told (offline) that this proves the non-existence of the paranormal. If it were real, they argue, we would all see it all the time. My argument is that maybe you are seeing it all the time but your mind is occupied with other things, such as trying to budget for a life where prices are going up exponentially and incomes are not.
It all hinges on one thing, really. Can people's perceptions be twisted by a few distractions and some clever manipulation to the extent that they aren't sure what they are seeing, reading, or believing?
Here are two links. One is something we all need to worry about, the other is nothing to worry about at all.
Which is which?
First impressions, please. A little thought will make the difference clear but remember, most people don't apply such reasoning. Most will go with those first impressions.
Then, perhaps, think a little about your day. What do you remember of travelling to and from work? What happened at lunchtime? Who did you see? What were they wearing?
Memory and perception are nowhere near as good as we like to think. Just because you can't remember the colour of your boss's tie doesn't mean he wasn't wearing one.
Or does it?
Saturday, September 27, 2008
The economy, with swearing.
I came across this in my internet wanderings tonight.
Be warned - if you're sensitive to strong language, this might not be for you.
Maybe Canada would be a better option. Or Australia.
Or Antarctica.
Be warned - if you're sensitive to strong language, this might not be for you.
Maybe Canada would be a better option. Or Australia.
Or Antarctica.
Thursday, September 25, 2008
Sometimes I wish I'd stayed ill...
It takes a while to get back into the swing of things. I'm scanning photos and listening to recordings from my outings earlier in the year. Nothing earth-shattering to report as yet. The recordings are hard work. Hours of night-time sounds coming through earphones are a sure way to get your attention to wander and a very good way to put yourself to sleep. There have been occasional perk-ups but the voice turns out to be me muttering something, the screams turn out to be a cat, or a cow in the distance. Storing up too much data and trying to go through it all afterwards is a very bad idea.
Then, yesterday, I had to go and buy a new keyboard because I sprayed coffee over mine.
Our country is involved in two wars against people who have never threatened us. The soldiers who are fighting those wars are underequipped and when they get home they are treated like dirt. That's not what cost me a keyboard.
We are in the middle of a financial crash that is going to go deep and hurt very hard. One of the worst-hit banks (HBOS) is where most of my money was stashed until I spent a few days moving it. The government have decided to fiddle with the world of finance, about which none of them know anything, and are making it much worse. That didn't cost me a keyboard either.
People are being arrested for littering and convicted in the absence of evidence, and they are denied the chance to prove they weren't even in the country at the time of the alleged 'offence'. Meanwhile, violent criminals are set free because the prisons are full of people who drop litter, overfill their bins and park in the wrong place. That nearly cost me a keyboard, but not quite.
Guns are banned, having a knife in your pocket on the street is banned, and yet gun and knife crime continue to rise. The youth are out of control and uneducated to the point where they know far more about drug use than they do about spelling. Electricity and gas prices rise by double-digit percentages every few months and the government insists on building inefficient windmills while the power stations are falling apart and all our nuclear energy generation is now owned by the French. None of those things cost me a keyboard.
What destroyed my keyboard was the news that, while the country crashes and burns around our ears, our government is spending its time wondering whether a catholic should be allowed to be the King or Queen of Britain.
It might well be an important question to some, and indeed I might weigh in with an argument or two at another time, but wouldn't you think that there are more pressing concerns than which church the Queen visits once a week?
What's it like in America, and does anyone over there have a spare room and an exceptionally tolerant attitude?
Then, yesterday, I had to go and buy a new keyboard because I sprayed coffee over mine.
Our country is involved in two wars against people who have never threatened us. The soldiers who are fighting those wars are underequipped and when they get home they are treated like dirt. That's not what cost me a keyboard.
We are in the middle of a financial crash that is going to go deep and hurt very hard. One of the worst-hit banks (HBOS) is where most of my money was stashed until I spent a few days moving it. The government have decided to fiddle with the world of finance, about which none of them know anything, and are making it much worse. That didn't cost me a keyboard either.
People are being arrested for littering and convicted in the absence of evidence, and they are denied the chance to prove they weren't even in the country at the time of the alleged 'offence'. Meanwhile, violent criminals are set free because the prisons are full of people who drop litter, overfill their bins and park in the wrong place. That nearly cost me a keyboard, but not quite.
Guns are banned, having a knife in your pocket on the street is banned, and yet gun and knife crime continue to rise. The youth are out of control and uneducated to the point where they know far more about drug use than they do about spelling. Electricity and gas prices rise by double-digit percentages every few months and the government insists on building inefficient windmills while the power stations are falling apart and all our nuclear energy generation is now owned by the French. None of those things cost me a keyboard.
What destroyed my keyboard was the news that, while the country crashes and burns around our ears, our government is spending its time wondering whether a catholic should be allowed to be the King or Queen of Britain.
It might well be an important question to some, and indeed I might weigh in with an argument or two at another time, but wouldn't you think that there are more pressing concerns than which church the Queen visits once a week?
What's it like in America, and does anyone over there have a spare room and an exceptionally tolerant attitude?
Thursday, September 18, 2008
The smoking police.
As the pain in my throat subsides, the temptation to have just one cigar increases.
It's not so much addiction. I've been non-smoking (not by choice) for long enough to have flushed that away. It's more a case of... I like cigars.
There is also a definite element of sheer, perverse, bloody-minded disobedience involved.
Read this and tell me I am over reacting. If you say 'Yes, Romulus, you are over reacting' I will smack you one.
It's not just the patronising, officious, overbearing and dictatorial attitude of these people that has sent my blood pressure into dangerous territory. It's the appalling pseudoscience behind it.
I get told, all the time, that hunting for ghosts is pseudoscience. It is not. Hunting for ghosts with equipment that is not proven to find ghosts, and pretending to find evidence which is not evidence at all, is pseudoscience. Science is a method, not a subject of study. Any subject can be approached with either a scientific or a pseudoscientific approach. It is the approach, the experimental design, that determines whether the study is scientific or not. The subject of the study is not pseudoscience. The subject is not science at all. Science is only in the method of study.
In this case, our idiot government insist that smokers in the street must be shown how much carbon monoxide they inhale.
In. The. Street.
Where they will inhale traffic fumes full of carbon monoxide, as will the non-smokers. Non-smokers will not be tested. Only smokers who, in the street, are guaranteed to have carbon monoxide in their lungs. So will everyone else.
The experimental hypothesis here should be 'In a particular environment, the lungs of smokers will contain more carbon monoxide than those of non-smokers'.
The experimental method would be to test smokers and non-smokers equally within a street, within a limited time range. A balanced experiment where overall, there are equal numbers of smokers and non-smokers exposed to the same amount of street with the same average traffic flow. That will show whether there is a difference due to smoking.
Yet all they plan to do is to show smokers that they have carbon monoxide in their lungs and so drum up business for their anti-smoking classes. They plan to do this on the street so that every single test will definitely be positive. There is no control group.
You want pseudoscience? Look to the government. They are the experts in this, not researchers into subjects you don't happen to like.
I still can't smoke. Perhaps I won't, but things like this definitely won't help.
It's not so much addiction. I've been non-smoking (not by choice) for long enough to have flushed that away. It's more a case of... I like cigars.
There is also a definite element of sheer, perverse, bloody-minded disobedience involved.
Read this and tell me I am over reacting. If you say 'Yes, Romulus, you are over reacting' I will smack you one.
It's not just the patronising, officious, overbearing and dictatorial attitude of these people that has sent my blood pressure into dangerous territory. It's the appalling pseudoscience behind it.
I get told, all the time, that hunting for ghosts is pseudoscience. It is not. Hunting for ghosts with equipment that is not proven to find ghosts, and pretending to find evidence which is not evidence at all, is pseudoscience. Science is a method, not a subject of study. Any subject can be approached with either a scientific or a pseudoscientific approach. It is the approach, the experimental design, that determines whether the study is scientific or not. The subject of the study is not pseudoscience. The subject is not science at all. Science is only in the method of study.
In this case, our idiot government insist that smokers in the street must be shown how much carbon monoxide they inhale.
In. The. Street.
Where they will inhale traffic fumes full of carbon monoxide, as will the non-smokers. Non-smokers will not be tested. Only smokers who, in the street, are guaranteed to have carbon monoxide in their lungs. So will everyone else.
The experimental hypothesis here should be 'In a particular environment, the lungs of smokers will contain more carbon monoxide than those of non-smokers'.
The experimental method would be to test smokers and non-smokers equally within a street, within a limited time range. A balanced experiment where overall, there are equal numbers of smokers and non-smokers exposed to the same amount of street with the same average traffic flow. That will show whether there is a difference due to smoking.
Yet all they plan to do is to show smokers that they have carbon monoxide in their lungs and so drum up business for their anti-smoking classes. They plan to do this on the street so that every single test will definitely be positive. There is no control group.
You want pseudoscience? Look to the government. They are the experts in this, not researchers into subjects you don't happen to like.
I still can't smoke. Perhaps I won't, but things like this definitely won't help.
Wednesday, September 17, 2008
Back and furious.
I missed all the furore about the Bigfoot corpse that turned out to be Urko from Planet of the Apes (that's who the photo reminded me of). Well, I didn't so much miss it as felt too ill to comment.
This one, however, I am perfectly well enough to rage at. You think universities and colleges are run by intelligent people?
Think again.
Who are these idiots, and why aren't they wearing tar and feather suits?
This one, however, I am perfectly well enough to rage at. You think universities and colleges are run by intelligent people?
Think again.
Who are these idiots, and why aren't they wearing tar and feather suits?
Tuesday, September 09, 2008
Not yet dead.
I've been ill. Nothing too deadly but seriously inconvenient.
It started with a cold which, it soon became clear, had ambition. It turned into flu. Not very serious but I couldn't stare at the screen so I stayed away from the computer. Since it refused to leave on its own, no matter how much whisky I poured over it, I broke the habit of a lifetime and went to see the doctor.
He was surprised to see me. Apparently he thought I might have died years ago.
Anyway, he gave me antibiotics, Now, I have just enough knowledge of that subject to be dangerous, gleaned from hanging around with microbiologists in universities. I knew that antibiotics had no effect on viruses. I knew I had a virus. So I didn't take them.
What I didn't know (but do now) is that the antibiotics have another purpose. They prevent secondary bacterial infections moving in where the virus has left a mess. Naturally, the bacteria took note of my reluctance to take pills and swiftly moved in.
After much head-shaking by the doctor, I relented and took the antibiotics. It was at that point I discovered I am allergic to penicillin. So the medication made me worse. It was small comfort to point out to the doctor that I had been right not to take them after all.
I'm almost back to normal now. I'll catch up with messages over the next few days.
It started with a cold which, it soon became clear, had ambition. It turned into flu. Not very serious but I couldn't stare at the screen so I stayed away from the computer. Since it refused to leave on its own, no matter how much whisky I poured over it, I broke the habit of a lifetime and went to see the doctor.
He was surprised to see me. Apparently he thought I might have died years ago.
Anyway, he gave me antibiotics, Now, I have just enough knowledge of that subject to be dangerous, gleaned from hanging around with microbiologists in universities. I knew that antibiotics had no effect on viruses. I knew I had a virus. So I didn't take them.
What I didn't know (but do now) is that the antibiotics have another purpose. They prevent secondary bacterial infections moving in where the virus has left a mess. Naturally, the bacteria took note of my reluctance to take pills and swiftly moved in.
After much head-shaking by the doctor, I relented and took the antibiotics. It was at that point I discovered I am allergic to penicillin. So the medication made me worse. It was small comfort to point out to the doctor that I had been right not to take them after all.
I'm almost back to normal now. I'll catch up with messages over the next few days.
Thursday, August 14, 2008
Home again.
You know, it seemed like such a good idea to go for a wander around the countryside with no intenet access for a few weeks. It was, indeed, very pleasant apart from the British weather. When we say the weather is 'changeable', we don't mean by the day. We mean by the minute. Brilliant sunshine can turn into a thunderstorm in moments, so it's a good thing I never go anywhere without a hat.
Anyway, I have no astounding successes to report (which you must have guessed by now or there'd be a photo in this post) but I still have a lot to go through.
One thing I had forgotten about was spam. It turns up every day and I delete it as it comes in if I'm at the computer. Overnight I can expect to get about 20-30 spams, hardly enough to be troubled about. Those that appear while I'm at the computer get wiped at once so I couldn't say for sure how many appear daily.
Over a period of weeks they amass to several thousand! Buried in there are ones I actually want to read but for every good one there are at least a hundred duds! Phishing mails for banks I don't have accounts with, offers of marriage from Russian women (thanks, but I don't speak Russian so it just wouldn't work out), PayPal has apparently frozen my account fourteen times even though there's currently nothing in it, and if I took all those offers to expand my trouser bits I could use the damn thing as a scarf.
Well, I can see how they make money with them. They send millions and they only need a few gullible idiots to make it worthwhile. What I don't get are the ones that have only one line, usually a quote from a book. No link, no attached virus-riddled software, nothing. What are those? Is there a class of spammer now that just wants to be as much of a pain in the backside as possible, without all that bother of selling junk?
Anyway, I have still to clear them all so if you have an email in there, be patient. I'll find it. Eventually.
First, some sleep...
Anyway, I have no astounding successes to report (which you must have guessed by now or there'd be a photo in this post) but I still have a lot to go through.
One thing I had forgotten about was spam. It turns up every day and I delete it as it comes in if I'm at the computer. Overnight I can expect to get about 20-30 spams, hardly enough to be troubled about. Those that appear while I'm at the computer get wiped at once so I couldn't say for sure how many appear daily.
Over a period of weeks they amass to several thousand! Buried in there are ones I actually want to read but for every good one there are at least a hundred duds! Phishing mails for banks I don't have accounts with, offers of marriage from Russian women (thanks, but I don't speak Russian so it just wouldn't work out), PayPal has apparently frozen my account fourteen times even though there's currently nothing in it, and if I took all those offers to expand my trouser bits I could use the damn thing as a scarf.
Well, I can see how they make money with them. They send millions and they only need a few gullible idiots to make it worthwhile. What I don't get are the ones that have only one line, usually a quote from a book. No link, no attached virus-riddled software, nothing. What are those? Is there a class of spammer now that just wants to be as much of a pain in the backside as possible, without all that bother of selling junk?
Anyway, I have still to clear them all so if you have an email in there, be patient. I'll find it. Eventually.
First, some sleep...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)