tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-185233692024-03-07T17:15:46.458+08:00The Second SightScience. Sense. Sarcasm.EoRhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08565450093920373243noreply@blogger.comBlogger870125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18523369.post-64647626878244814992011-01-15T15:13:00.001+08:002011-01-15T15:16:30.409+08:00Journalistic balance: a case studyThe West Australian, Saturday 15th January 2011.<br /><br />Number of pages devoted to <a href="http://bigpondnews.com/articles/AustralianFloodsCrisis/2011/01/15/Flood_missing_revised_down_to_28_564683.html">Queensland</a> floods (current death toll 16): 10.5.<br /><br />Number of pages devoted to <a href="http://www.allnewswebsite.com/2011/science-news/rescuers-struggle-as-brazil-flood-deaths-rise-reuters/">Brazil</a> floods (current death toll 540): 0.5.<br /><br />Number of pages devoted to <a href="http://www.asiaone.com/News/Latest+News/Asia/Story/A1Story20110113-258009.html">Phillipines</a> floods (current death toll 40): 0.<br /><br />Number of pages devoted to <a href="http://print.dailymirror.lk/news/front-page-news/33035.html">Sri Lanka</a> floods (current death toll 27): 0.<br /><br />To be fair, these last stories may have been dropped in order to free the 2 inches devoted to "<a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-12187409">Rodent Bites Genitals</a>".EoRhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08565450093920373243noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18523369.post-1181657547441823982011-01-15T12:34:00.001+08:002011-01-15T12:43:18.039+08:00Q: How many denialists does it take to change a light bulb?<blockquote>A: Light comes from the Sun. Duh.<br /> <br />A: We should wait until it gets dark to see whether the bulb is really broken.<br /> <br />A: The Great Light Bulb Swindle is a scam by Big Light Bulb to sell more light bulbs.<br /> <br />A: The Darkenists don’t even understand basic science. Energy can neither be created nor destroyed, therefore darkness is impossible.<br /> <br />A: Nazi!<br /> <br />A: It’s OK – it has been much darker than this in the past. During the Medieval Dark Ages, there were Vikings in Greenland!<br /> <br />A: If the light bulb needed changing, the market would have changed it by now.<br /> <br />A: Fascist!<br /> <br />A: Darkness is beneficial — it will increase mushroom yields and make life better for owls.<br /> <br />A: There is a natural 24-hour cycle of light and dark which humans have a negligible impact on. Anyway, we are just about to enter a natural darkening period.<br /> <br />A: Genesis 1:3 tells us “Let there be light”. The power of prayer will fix the light bulb.<br /> <br />A: Ad Hominem!</blockquote><br /><br />Via <a href="http://larvatusprodeo.net/2011/01/10/quick-link-climate-and-energy-humour/">Larvatus Prodeo</a>EoRhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08565450093920373243noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18523369.post-31979188434843198252011-01-14T11:28:00.001+08:002011-01-14T11:29:17.278+08:00Thistle thoughts<img style="float:left; margin:0 10px 10px 0;width: 312px; height: 178px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg4K5VOql6HN39thYIOnPlX6CLRP2Fi2VrkHxY2Mk_kU20aGHSPezR-2qmcUhAzTrovtoEG_3dk9aWV7TrootQSviKqefT9COXi8PGYDOq-OmhVT2EHDnLDfawTdEWTUphaK7Wj/s400/eoronathistle.gif" border="0" alt="EoR sits on a thistle" />EoR, having accidentally sat on some thistles, ponders the State of Things...<br /><br />Why do alties spend all their time getting colonic irrigation to remove the nasty stuff from their gut, when real doctors spend time <a href="http://www.elements-science.co.uk/2010/12/faecal-transplants-the-future-therapy-for-clostridium-difficile/">putting them back</a>?EoRhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08565450093920373243noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18523369.post-39530330495942192222011-01-12T11:23:00.002+08:002011-01-12T11:29:10.474+08:00Guest bloggerToday's guest blogger is <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A._A._Milne">A A Milne</a>, on how not to be fooled by the seeming expert.<br /><br /><b>THE ARRIVAL OF BLACKMAN'S WARBLER</b><br /><br />I am become an Authority on Birds. It happened in this way.<br /><br />The other day we heard the Cuckoo in Hampshire. (The next morning the papers announced that the Cuckoo had been heard in Devonshire—possibly a different one, but in no way superior to ours except in the matter of its Press agent.) Well, everybody in the house said, "Did you hear the Cuckoo?" to everybody else, until I began to get rather tired of it; and, having told everybody several times that I <i>had</i> heard it, I tried to make the conversation more interesting. So, after my tenth "Yes," I added quite casually:<br /><br />"But I haven't heard the Tufted Pipit yet. It's funny why it should be so late this year."<br /><br />"Is that the same as the Tree Pipit?" said my hostess, who seemed to know more about birds than I had hoped.<br /><br />"Oh, no," I said quickly.<br /><br />"What's the difference exactly?"<br /><br />"Well, one is tufted," I said, doing my best, "and the other—er—climbs trees."<br /><br />"Oh, I see."<br /><br />"And of course the eggs are more speckled," I added, gradually acquiring confidence.<br /><br />"I often wish I knew more about birds," she said regretfully. "You must tell us something about them now we've got you here."<br /><br />And all this because of one miserable Cuckoo!<br /><br />"By all means," I said, wondering how long it would take to get a book about birds down from London.<br /><br />However, it was easier than I thought. We had tea in the garden that afternoon, and a bird of some kind struck up in the plane-tree.<br /><br />"There, now," said my hostess, "what's that?"<br /><br />I listened with my head on one side. The bird said it again.<br /><br />"That's the Lesser Bunting," I said hopefully.<br /><br />"The Lesser Bunting," said an earnest-looking girl; "I shall always remember that."<br /><br />I hoped she wouldn't, but I could hardly say so. Fortunately the bird lesser-bunted again, and I seized the opportunity of playing for safety.<br /><br />"Or is it the Sardinian White-throat?" I wondered. "They have very much the same note during the breeding season. But of course the eggs are more speckled," I added casually.<br /><br />And so on for the rest of the evening. You see how easy it is.<br /><br />However, the next afternoon a more unfortunate occurrence occurred. A real Bird Authority came to tea. As soon as the information leaked out, I sent up a hasty prayer for bird-silence until we had got him safely out of the place; but it was not granted. Our feathered songster in the plane-tree broke into his little piece.<br /><br />"There," said my hostess—"there's that bird again." She turned to me.<br />"What did you say it was?"<br /><br />I hoped that the Authority would speak first, and that the others would then accept my assurance that they had misunderstood me the day before; but he was entangled at that moment in a watercress sandwich, the loose ends of which were still waiting to be tucked away.<br /><br />I looked anxiously at the girl who had promised to remember, in case she wanted to say something, but she also was silent. Everybody was silent except that miserable bird.<br /><br />Well, I had to have another go at it. "Blackman's Warbler," I said firmly.<br /><br />"Oh, yes," said my hostess.<br /><br />"Blackman's Warbler; I shall always remember that," lied the earnest-looking girl.<br /><br />The Authority, who was free by this time, looked at me indignantly.<br /><br />"Nonsense," he said; "it's the Chiff-chaff."<br /><br />Everybody else looked at me reproachfully. I was about to say that "Blackman's Warbler" was the local name for the Chiff-chaff in our part of Somerset, when the Authority spoke again.<br /><br />"The Chiff-chaff," he said to our hostess with an insufferable air of knowledge.<br /><br />I wasn't going to stand that.<br /><br />"So <i>I</i> thought when I heard it first," I said, giving him a gentle smile. It was now the Authority's turn to get the reproachful looks.<br /><br />"Are they very much alike?" my hostess asked me, much impressed.<br /><br />"Very much. Blackmail's Warbler is often mistaken for the Chiff-chaff, even by so-called experts"—and I turned to the Authority and added, "Have another sandwich, won't you?"—"particularly so, of course, during the breeding season. It is true that the eggs are more speckled, but—"<br /><br />"Bless my soul," said the Authority, but it was easy to see that he was shaken, "I should think I know a Chiff-chaff when I hear one."<br /><br />"Ah, but do you know a Blackman's Warbler? One doesn't often hear them in this country. Now in Algiers—"<br /><br />The bird said "Chiff-chaff" again with an almost indecent plainness of speech.<br /><br />"There you are!" I said triumphantly. "Listen," and I held up a finger.<br />"You notice the difference? <i>Obviously a Blackman's Warbler</i>."<br /><br />Everybody looked at the Authority. He was wondering how long it would take to get a book about birds down from London, and deciding that it couldn't be done that afternoon. Meanwhile he did not dare to repudiate me. For all he had caught of our mumbled introduction I might have been Blackman myself.<br /><br />"Possibly you're right," he said reluctantly.<br /><br />Another bird said "Chiff-chaff" from another tree and I thought it wise to be generous. "There," I said, "now that <i>was</i> a Chiff-chaff."<br /><br />The earnest-looking girl remarked (silly creature) that it sounded just like the other one, but nobody took any notice of her. They were all busy admiring me.<br /><br />Of course I mustn't meet the Authority again, because you may be pretty sure that when he got back to his books he looked up Blackman's Warbler and found that there was no such animal. But if you mix in the right society, and only see the wrong people once, it is really quite easy to be an authority on birds—or, I imagine, on anything else.<br /><br /><i>from</i>: A A Milne: <a href="http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/13441">The Sunny Side</a> (1922)EoRhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08565450093920373243noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18523369.post-5604091659173548052011-01-10T10:19:00.003+08:002011-01-10T10:23:33.401+08:00A Plimer footnoteProfessor Ian Plimer has not been averse in the past to pontificating on areas in which he is not qualified, such as <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/uon/2654218167/">economics</a> in 1985:<br /><br /><blockquote>Inflation is not expected to disappear and hence gold will remain and important component of investment portfolios. Any rapid increase in price would cause gold to be dishoarded and adversely affect industrial demand. As a result, the price would stabilise. Therefore, gold mines look good business in the coming uncertain years.</blockquote><br /><br />He also predicted:<br /><br /><blockquote>Some projections suggest by the period 1995 to 2000, the USSR will produce more gold than South Africa South Africa is the biggest world producer of gold, chromium, vanadium, diamonds and platinoids, with the USSR being the seconde biggest producer for each of these essential commodities.</blockquote><br /><br />How wrong can you be? In <a href="http://www.goldsheetlinks.com/production.htm">2000</a> Russia (not the USSR) was a distant sixth in world production, producing only 5.5% of the world's gold. In <a href="http://www.gold-eagle.com/editorials_08/thomes051110.html">2010</a> China was the largest producer, a country not even mentioned by Professor Plimer.<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/fabricated-quote-used-to-discredit-climate-scientist-1894552.html?action=Gallery&ino=10"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px; height: 286px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiuWcJUHntREM7sxhI2MmOqnhdjl3QjJnTS2wK8yRnCr4X00DM36VSvMv4S8Ne5Y5r_SrcpWhP8RSA07JrI0zDsjtlOKsMum9Gaez8asUEc1LB-3vJrhp5nwAtedApYRIOy5Wsd/s400/bunch_of_fossils.jpg" border="0" alt="Spot the fossil" title="Spot the fossil" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5560376377458483746" /></a>EoRhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08565450093920373243noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18523369.post-18023602960447597702011-01-08T10:58:00.003+08:002011-01-08T11:10:10.241+08:00Meryl Dorey pwned<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://www.photohistory-sussex.co.uk/UckfieldphtgrsAG.htm"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px; height: 234px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEguKhBHH5FLBJ0HQ9fUtlRBrdh9p_Q18EZpx4do6rckYEgY7RTf01iY7kjW4NTv6ZqePy3cpYO_8q-A00ETh0LcdrBUZZW-vWNyC_O0XGzE_rSaUIgo7g-_tzU3aFVFUH06_HzX/s400/UckFrisbyPiltdown03.jpg" border="0" alt="Laying the groundwork for Andrew Wakefield's science" title="Laying the groundwork for Andrew Wakefield's science" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5559646691054391410" /></a><br />The <a href="http://skeptvet.com/Blog/2011/01/study-finds-maternal-use-of-cam-decreases-compliance-with-recommended-childhood-vaccinations/">SkeptVet comments</a> on an Irish study looking at how the mother's use of complementary and alternative medicine is associated with a lower uptake of MMR vaccine. As the study notes in its introduction, these mothers aren't making a decision for their own child, they are actively affecting the health of other children who (along with their parents) have had no say in such delusional decisions since they're too young to be vaccinated, but old enough to be infected with diseases.<br /><br /><blockquote>Since August 2009 there has been a large outbreak of measles in Ireland, with 320 cases of whom 206 were unvaccinated, 36% of the cases were hospitalised, but no deaths were reported up to February 2010. Fifty-six cases were aged under 1 year and so not eligible for vaccination, showing that in communities were vaccination uptake is low, younger children are vulnerable to infection.</blockquote><br /><br />It also shows how it only takes a minority to have these beliefs and, even if those vaccinating are in the majority, herd immunity becomes ineffective:<br /><br /><blockquote>This linkage cohort study showed that most children aged 5 years had received their first MMR immunisation, but below the recommended threshold for population protection.</blockquote><br /><br />So how many children died because of <a href="http://www.bmj.com/content/342/bmj.c7452.full">one man's fraudulent science</a>?<br /><br />And why aren't there more people in the media giving delusional nutter Meryl Dorey the <a href="http://media.mytalk.com.au/2ue/audio/070111dory.mp3">treatment she deserves</a>?EoRhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08565450093920373243noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18523369.post-65164495089938212252011-01-07T10:21:00.003+08:002011-01-07T10:31:18.656+08:00WA Creationists SkepticsC J O'Brien has an excellent post at Northstate Science discussing the <a href="http://northstatescience.wordpress.com/2011/01/01/correcting-creationists-redux-was-lucy%e2%80%99s-pelvis-reconstruction-a-fraud/">pelvis of Lucy</a> (<i>Australopithecus afarensis</i>) and how creationists attempt to use this to disprove paleontological arguments about it. The introductory discussion, however, could be applied verbatim to the <a href="http://thesecondsight.blogspot.com/2011/01/wa-skeptics-deniers.html">WA Skeptics</a>. Simply replace 'creationists' with 'climate deniers'.<br /><br /><blockquote>Creationists go to great lengths to discredit the discovery and its implications, which is not a problem as far as it goes, but the total lack of any kind of intellectual honesty used in doing so just emphasizes how much of a scientific and philosophical corner these people are backed into. I mentioned in a previous post how infuriating it is to constantly correct the distortions, misinterpretation, quote mining and outright falsehoods regurgitated <i>ad nausem</i> by creationist proponents. It’s not that it’s difficult. Creationists rely on an audience that refuses to look critically at the information they are being presented and ask some simple questions: Is this true? Did the author really mean that? What evidence is not being presented? Most of us who have any claim to intellectual thought processes actually <i>work</i> at understanding an issue. We spend the (often considerable) time reading, reasearching and thinking about the issue. That includes reading creationist literature (we’re often accused of not reading the “other side” of the issue, but I can tell that’s one reason I don’t a lot of creationist argument in my Anthropology class – students learn really quickly I know the creationist literature much better they do!). I see no evidence that creationists actually make an honest effort to look at the information being presented. Instead, Creationist arguments have to be made by pimping the scientific data for the creationist cause: misquoting exports, cherry-picking information, ignoring information that doesn’t fit, using out-of-date information, and frequently just making stuff up!</blockquote><br /><br />Meanwhile, the Australian Bureau of Meteorology has released its <a href="http://www.bom.gov.au/announcements/media_releases/climate/change/20110105.shtml">Annual Australian Climate Statement</a> for 2010. It's certainly been a roller coaster year, with record breaking floods in the North and East, but with record breaking drought here in the Southwest.<br /><br />Its been the coolest year since 2001, which is a rather unfortunate headline since it's still above the longterm average, and the decade has been the hottest on record. EoR expects the deniers to seize on that first point only, as they try to convince themselves that if they argue hard enough they can pull the planet into <a href="http://www.croatiantimes.com/news/General_News/2010-02-10/8836/Croat_scientist_warns_ice_age_could_start_in_five_years">a new Ice Age</a>. Alarmingly, sea surface temperatures also continue to rise.<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjEeOv9sCjN3ZreEZUNoX5Xn3fjnuPxd-3ghH8F-Yu1CXUG04WnUIwcDhXTBRDkMgmQYUUcVZ0VkfpbfXxz9jkc02GXZq1e7e5q9IDOR6AxvRJwopTMNIdAZrSR3hpg_8ltkYK4/s1600/20110105climatehighlights10.png"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 320px; height: 212px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjEeOv9sCjN3ZreEZUNoX5Xn3fjnuPxd-3ghH8F-Yu1CXUG04WnUIwcDhXTBRDkMgmQYUUcVZ0VkfpbfXxz9jkc02GXZq1e7e5q9IDOR6AxvRJwopTMNIdAZrSR3hpg_8ltkYK4/s320/20110105climatehighlights10.png" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5559264486318186914" /></a><br /><br />Unlike the deniers, EoR urges readers to consider the full statement, all the facts and, if you care to, download the <a href="http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/change/hqsites/">Bureau data</a> yourself.EoRhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08565450093920373243noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18523369.post-77449801706671242952011-01-06T10:54:00.002+08:002011-01-06T11:21:15.419+08:00WA Skeptics Deniers (2)Just a little more about the anti-skeptical WA Skeptics and their recent anti-science conversion. On their edited <a href="http://www.undeceivingourselves.com/A-late.htm">conspiracy diatribe</a> (editted in the sense that when an error is pointed out the error is not corrected, but further errors are piled on top to confuse and obscure) the following claim is made:<br /><br /><blockquote>Even more recently the total of dissenting international scientists exceeded 1000, among them 46 climate specialists who once worked for the IPCC but have now resigned or become dissenters. Here are six examples of their views:<br /><br />[Out of context quotes snipped by EoR]<br /><br />Remember these are not crackpot deniers but climate specialists who once worked for the IPCC. Nor are they the only group of informed scientists who are criticising the IPCC's findings, there are at least a dozen others such as The Heidelberg Appeal with 4000 signatures including 62 Nobel prizewinners</blockquote><br /><br />The Heidelberg Appeal? Well, EoR followed the WA Skeptics' own advice and used the two most important recommended resources to find Teh Truth About Global Warming: Google and Wikipedia.<br /><br />The top two hits for "Heidelberg Appeal" are Wikipedia (clearly because it's a reputable source according to the WA Skeptics) and SourceWatch (clearly because Google is another trustworthy source).<br /><br /><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heidelberg_Appeal">Wikipedia says</a>:<br /><br /><blockquote>Parts of the Heidelberg Appeal endorse environmental concerns, such as a sentence that states, "We fully subscribe to the objectives of a scientific ecology for a universe whose resources must be taken stock of, monitored and preserved." Its 72 Nobel laureates include 49 who also signed the "World Scientists' Warning to Humanity", which was circulated that same year by the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) and attracted the majority of the world's living Nobel laureates in science along with some 1,700 other leading scientists. In contrast with the vagueness of the Heidelberg Appeal, the "World Scientists' Warning" is a very explicit environmental manifesto, stating that "human beings and the natural world are on a collision course" and citing ozone depletion, global climate change, air pollution, groundwater depletion, deforestation, overfishing, and species extinction among the trends that threaten to "so alter the living world that it will be unable to sustain life in the manner that we know." Moreover the Heidelberg Appeal has been, if not specifically misrepresented, at least broadly interpreted out of context, for example, by The National Center for Public Policy which asserts "The appeal warns industrialized nations that no compelling scientific consensus exists to justify mandatory greenhouse gas emissions cuts." Although the Heidelberg Appeal may be open to such an interpretation, as the text below shows it is not what the document said.</blockquote><br /><br />So, not only does it not criticise the IPCC (it doesn't even mention it), but it doesn't even explicitly deny (or even implicitly) the reality of human caused global warming.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Heidelberg_Appeal">SourceWatch</a> describes the document as:<br /><br /><blockquote>a scam perpetrated by the asbestos and tobacco industries in support of the GCC [Global Climate Coalition]. It was later funded and controlled by a coalition which included coal, oil and energy interests, so the two denial strands merged. The Appeal document and the conferences which gave it life were organized by S. Fred Singer and his Science and Environmental Policy Project</blockquote><br /><br />As such, the Appeal finds its rightful place at <a href="http://tobaccodocuments.org/pm/2028385371.html">Tobacco Documents Online</a> (documents which the tobacco industry were legally forced to make publicly available, detailing their efforts to subvert science and cover up the truth).<br /><br />So it seems that the WA Skeptics (or their anonymous author who is using the Appeal to Authority of posting on their website) either:<br />a) Haven't read the document they support, or<br />b) Cite the document for propaganda purposes, knowing they're misrepresenting the truth.<br /><br />But what does Wikipedia, that font of wisdom have to say about the bigger issue? The WA Skeptics' article isn't explicit about whether Wikipedia should be consulted for <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_change">climate change</a> or <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming">global warming</a> but, in the former case it says:<br /><br /><blockquote>In the context of climate variation, anthropogenic factors are human activities that change the environment. In some cases the chain of causality of human influence on the climate is direct and unambiguous (for example, the effects of irrigation on local humidity), while in other instances it is less clear. Various hypotheses for human-induced climate change have been argued for many years. Presently the scientific consensus on climate change is that human activity is very likely the cause for the rapid increase in global average temperatures over the past several decades. Consequently, the debate has largely shifted onto ways to reduce further human impact and to find ways to adapt to change that has already occurred.</blockquote><br /><br />and in the latter:<br /><br /><blockquote>Most of the observed temperature increase since the middle of the 20th century has been caused by increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases, which result from human activity such as the burning of fossil fuel and deforestation.</blockquote><br /><br />EoR could go through all the other 'facts' offered but really, the group has consistently shown that they either don't read or understand their sources, or their sources are misquoted. They fail to correct false information, simply adding more errors to hide the original error. They make emotive, politically charged statements free of science. To deal with all their assertions would only cause them to offer more distractions (apparently sourced mainly from Watts Up With That — a blog the WA Skeptics consider "arguably the most informative climate website" — rather than the peer reviewed press) and would only give the group unwarranted attention and bore EoR's readers.<br /><br />Elsewhere, to mark the 350th anniversary of the Royal Society the <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/nov/30/10-big-questions-science-must-answer">Guardian</A> asks a number of people what scientific problems they'd like to see solved. Physicist Brian Cox ponders:<br /><br /><blockquote>Can we make a scientific way of thinking all pervasive?<br /><br />This would be the greatest achievement for science over the coming centuries. I say this because I do not believe that we currently run our world according to evidence-based principles. If we did, we would be investing in an energy Manhattan project to quickly develop and deploy clean energy technologies. We would be investing far larger amounts of our GDP in the eradication of diseases such as malaria, and we would be learning to live and work in space – not as an interesting and extravagant sideline, but as an essential part of our long-term survival strategy.<br /><br />One only has to look at the so-called controversies in areas such as climate science or the vaccination of our children to see that the rationalist project is far from triumphant at the turn of the 21st century – indeed, it is possible to argue that it is under threat. I believe that we will only be able to build a safer, fairer, more prosperous and more peaceful world when a majority of the population understand the methods of science and accept the guidance offered by an evidence-based investigation of the challenges ahead. Scientific education must therefore be the foundation upon which our future rests.</blockquote><br /><br />Of course, it would be nice — for a start — if so-called skeptic groups engaged in a scientific way of thinking.EoRhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08565450093920373243noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18523369.post-27309148440243791482011-01-05T10:41:00.003+08:002011-01-05T10:46:27.588+08:00Something to chew onWell, there's been a little bit of to-and-fro lately about some <a href="http://www.nature.com/news/2010/101231/full/news.2010.700.html">ancient teeth found in Israel</a>. What species of <i>homo</i> are they? Do they completely rewrite the narrative of human expansion? The media, as always, are prepared to leap to conclusions before all the evidence is in.<br /><br />Of much more pressing concern to EoR, however, is the fact that an archaeologist behind this paper is nominatively deterministically called Avi <i>Gopher</i>.<br /><br />There is no freewill, only predetermination.EoRhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08565450093920373243noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18523369.post-59324100263920242002011-01-04T09:41:00.002+08:002011-01-04T09:45:34.350+08:00Back to the future<b>California Uber Alles</b><br /><br /><object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/zaQTkJQ7sIk?fs=1&hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/zaQTkJQ7sIk?fs=1&hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object><br /><br />I am Governor <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE7024EV20110103">Jerry Brown</a><br />My aura smiles<br />And never frowns<br />Soon I will be president...<br /><br />Carter Power will soon go away<br />I will be Fuhrer one day<br />I will command all of you<br />Your kids will meditate in school<br />Your kids will meditate in school!<br /><br />[Chorus:]<br />California Uber Alles<br />California Uber Alles<br />Uber Alles California<br />Uber Alles California<br /><br />Zen fascists will control you<br />100% natural<br />You will jog for the master race<br />And always wear the happy face<br /><br />Close your eyes, can't happen here<br />Big Bro' on white horse is near<br />The hippies won't come back you say<br />Mellow out or you will pay<br />Mellow out or you will pay!<br /><br />[Chorus]<br /><br />Now it is 1984<br />Knock-knock at your front door<br />It's the suede/denim secret police<br />They have come for your uncool niece<br /><br />Come quietly to the camp<br />You'd look nice as a drawstring lamp<br />Don't you worry, it's only a shower<br />For your clothes here's a pretty flower.<br /><br />DIE on organic poison gas<br />Serpent's egg's already hatched<br />You will croak, you little clown<br />When you mess with President Brown<br />When you mess with President Brown<br /><br />[Chorus]EoRhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08565450093920373243noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18523369.post-44709343482842321042011-01-03T10:28:00.004+08:002011-01-03T10:48:04.984+08:00WA Skeptics DeniersEoR has been trying to ignore the <a href="http://thesecondsight.blogspot.com/2010/12/online-poll-proves-global-warming-just.html">WA Skeptics' descent into climate denialism</a> (and wondering why they are still listed on the Australian Skeptics website as a WA affiliate when they have clearly become an agenda driven organisation), but he feels it's time to have another look at their recent rant against the world of corrupt science.<br /><br />The original <a href="http://www.undeceivingourselves.com/A-late.htm">web page</a> has quietly been changed without noting the amendments.<br /><br />Rather than correcting the record, it's just a <a href="http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Gish_Gallop">Gish gallop</a> of further irrelevancies (it's ironic that a once skeptical organisation is using a technique pioneered by creationists). A list of books damning science by various people has been added, including those by "scientists who really know the field". EoR isn't sure what criteria is used to determine that accolade, but if there's any doubt, he's urged to Google their names. Because Google is, you know, all sciency and true. The first really-knowing scientist is Ian Plimer. He of the numerous scientific errors. And who <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/clumsy-denier-ian-plimer-limps-away-finish-line">refuses to correct</a> his <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/6553592/Climate-change-sceptic-Ian-Plimer-argues-CO2-is-not-causing-global-warming.html">errors</a> when they're <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/georgemonbiot/2009/dec/16/ian-plimer-versus-george-monbiot">pointed</a> out <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/transcripts/s2889174.htm">to him</a>. <a href="http://watchingthedeniers.wordpress.com/2010/04/21/ian-plimer-caught-out-again-co2-is-magic-argument-continues-to-lie-about-volcanoes/">Repeatedly</a>. In fact, EoR is quite shocked that Plimer would even be mentioned. Especially since <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ian_Plimer#Volcanoes_and_CO2">Wikipedia notes</a> that Plimer's claim about volcanoes "has no factual basis". And Wikipedia is the Truth, according to the anonymous author of this page. Or is the author just cherry picking claims that suit his (apparently political) agenda?<br /><br />Cherry picking, regardless of truth, seems to be the main argumentative method employed here. The citing of a Scientific American poll to prove the author's case has been slightly amended also. There's now a note that the poll was seriously biased by anti-science interests, "in which case why did Scientific American publish the results in the first place?" Oh, now we're down to cheap innuendo as well.<br /><br />Well, Scientific American probably published it because they thought it would be interesting to see what their readers thought. Doing which, they clearly showed how ignorant they were of the applicability of internet poll data. Why did the anonymous WA Skeptic, on the other hand, think that an <i>internet poll</i> was in any sense at all scientific? Why is the corrupt data still there on his page? Is it simply to show how an interest group can skew the data to misrepresent the science? Is it, in fact, some subtle double play by the author to show the dissimulation employed by deniers? If it is, it's too subtle for EoR.<br /><br />The author also goes on at some length about various petitions from <i>real</i> scientists who have <i>proved</i> climate science corrupt and wrong (the latest of which has been labelled elsewhere as a <a href="http://greenfyre.wordpress.com/2010/12/09/new-improved-climate-skeptic-list-fraud/">fraud</a>). Sort of a slightly more official sounding internet poll form of evidence. Of course, if you doubt it, you can always go to that most scientific source of truth, Wikipedia (yes, Anonymous Author apparently uses this to form his scientific views). EoR almost hurt himself laughing.<br /><br />Of course, you can also find <a href="http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/22722">petitions of scientists</a> who <a href="http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/filesDB-download.php?command=download&id=660">don't believe in evolution</a>. Real scientists. Who <i>know</i> evolution is a scientific fraud. And it's only a <i>theory</i> anyway.<br /><br />EoR presumes Anonymous Author (and, by implication, the WA Skeptics) dismisses evolution, on the same evidentiary basis that he dismisses climate science. Or does he maintain the amazing ability to hold two contradictory views simultaneously? Either way, it must be terribly uncomfortable.<br /><br />The <a href="http://www.undeceivingourselves.com/A-cont.htm">WA Skeptics claim</a><br /><br /><blockquote>we insist on accuracy and anti-sensationalism</blockquote><br /><br />Personally, EoR is skeptical of that claim (and won't believe it until it's on Wikipedia).<br /><br /><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;width: 400px; height: 300px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi1W-9-r0HhXNxCHroFHgWg1E_DuGyX25sDRh_8dCDmmSKhwpSBW8GbNafhuZCwQj2VUHdVvGfcu5bBumJGuweQMYML3neSKr3mZExO1i88V1Lv8qh7waZnIFdsoRmgiC1wy4Jq/s400/speptical.jpg" border="0" alt="A skeptic" title="A skeptic" /><br />A skeptic.<br /><br /><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;width: 300px; height: 386px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhVOqoZmON8NwRQTGdSrv_aCTcO-aKRrdgYWjHM4mvMYmmQZOM77AX8SZKMeOlif8MIU5Ird1LLN_kIM94YsQcqdtPeC5ryH8FczeHZ5oNTLl2TwO2o2hWSRgbzWJL0f2vevu3H/s400/sockpuppet.jpg" border="0" alt="Not a skeptic" title="Not a skeptic" /><br />Not a skeptic.<br /><br /><hr /><br />Australian Academy of Science: <a href="http://www.science.org.au/policy/climatechange.html">The Science of Climate Change: Questions and Answers</a>EoRhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08565450093920373243noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18523369.post-29887458025776916292011-01-01T11:16:00.007+08:002011-01-01T11:50:18.403+08:00Only 0.73% of climate scientists think that humans are affecting the climate!!1!Polymath Andrew Bolt helpfully <a href="http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/if_the_evidence_were_so_strong_thered_be_no_need_for_such_untruths/">points to an article by Dennis Ambler</a> demolishing the belief that there's any consensus (how the deniers detest that word, even as they promote petitions to prove an anti-consensus) that the world is warming. In fact, only "<a href="http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/images/stories/papers/originals/consensus_opiate.pdf">0.73% of climate scientists</a> think that humans are affecting the climate".<br /><br />The article, published by the right wing <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Science_and_Public_Policy_Institute">SPPI</a>, disputes the truth of <a href="http://tigger.uic.edu/~pdoran/012009_Doran_final.pdf">Examining the Scientific Consensus on Climate Change</a> (Doran, P.T., & Zimmerman, M.K. 2009. Examining the scientific consensus on climate change. <i>EOS</i> 90(3): 21-22.).<br /><br />Doran and Zimmerman received 3146 responses to a survey asking Earth scientists various questions, including whether they thought temperatures had risen, fallen or stayed the same; and whether they thought humans were contributing to changing temperatures.<br /><br />What they found was that the more active the scientists were in publishing, and the greater their specialisation in climate science, they more likely they were to consider that humans had caused temperatures to rise (EoR's emphasis):<br /><br /><blockquote>Results show that <b>overall, 90% of participants answered “risen” to question 1 and 82% answered yes to question 2</b>. In general, as the level of active research and specialization in climate science increases, so does agreement with the two primary questions (Figure 1). In our survey, the most specialized and knowledgeable respondents (with regard to climate change) are those who listed climate science as their area of expertise and who also have published more than 50% of their recent peer-reviewed papers on the subject of climate change (79 individuals in total). <b>Of these specialists, 96.2% (76 of 79) answered “risen” to question 1 and 97.4% (75 of 77) answered yes to question 2.</b></blockquote><br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhR2QUvAW7gcpCeMPBQ1vXfg8Kg09y36Ydf0iD0O49W-kdUXU2EuvDo50RQuaYVtW-FUb0_um6IVmdMzEMZliq40Py3pAvvbFKI4Y0NnpfnpBiv4kod9AxnyfUqR7tkocUbVn-l/s1600/survey.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px; height: 276px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhR2QUvAW7gcpCeMPBQ1vXfg8Kg09y36Ydf0iD0O49W-kdUXU2EuvDo50RQuaYVtW-FUb0_um6IVmdMzEMZliq40Py3pAvvbFKI4Y0NnpfnpBiv4kod9AxnyfUqR7tkocUbVn-l/s400/survey.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5557053976523664818" /></a><br /><br />After various marginal arguments, the contrarian article comes to its damning point (author's emphasis):<br /><br /><blockquote>It is disingenuous to now use the “climate scientists” as a new population sample size. The response figure of 3,146 is the figure against which the 75 out of 77 should be compared and in this case we get not 97% but <b>just 2.38%.</b></blockquote><br /><br />That's right: the responses of <i>all</i> the other scientists are magically reset by Ambler to a dissenting view, even though the Doran and Zimmerman paper clearly show that 82% believe humans are increasing temperatures. Now <i>that's</i> disingenuous!<br /><br />Denialism: when the facts don't fit, make your own.<br /><br />But it gets even better. Ambler's amazing statistical insight enables him to <i>know</i> that a sample doesn't extrapolate to a population. If someone didn't respond, then <i>obviously</i> they don't believe in human caused warming. Thus you can take the non-responders to the survey as well in order to twist your statistics (author's emphasis again).<br /><br /><blockquote>The original number contacted was 10,157 and of those, 69% decided they didn’t want any part of it, but they were the original target population. When the figure of 75 believers is set against that number, we get a <b>mere 0.73% of the scientists they contacted</b> who agreed with their loaded questions.</blockquote><br /><br />Ambler concludes:<br /><br /><blockquote>What a gross travesty of the truth, and such appalling reporting, but these are the messages fed to acquiescent politicians who do not bother to check the facts, and criticise those who do. How low has science sunk, that scientists will dispense this sort of disinformation to promote their own agenda? </blockquote><br /><br />He's directing his vitriol at climate scientists when, in reality, it describes his own article exactly.<br /><br />Of course, he probably doesn't care how bad his mathematics is, he just wants to have that "Only 0.73% of climate scientists think that humans are affecting the climate" quote sent around the denialosphere as a meme, to be uncritically picked up by the numerically illiterate. Which Andrew Bolt dutifully has done (and why EoR keeps quoting it as well, in the hope that some people searching for it might actually find this post instead and realise how wrong the claim is).<br /><br /><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;width: 400px; height: 301px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj20tefb5QZfonw5HMAWnzoJweBlcO5IFO7IncPTzHSVseVcFTLw5T3w0qxaJD3iG1gmAr8y5jQvYkoFOyHBBDd8V288mUTuupO-pH-V1L_qShsC9WSa4xxCxMBuSLbmfRgwuwO/s400/math_thumb.jpg" border="0" alt="SPPI mathematics primer" />EoRhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08565450093920373243noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18523369.post-44778643836552691602010-12-31T12:32:00.006+08:002010-12-31T12:47:05.533+08:00It's snowing! It's snowing! The world's going to freeze!On January 23rd 2010 Anthony Watts, fearless independent climatologist, <a href="http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/01/23/arctic-temperatures-above-80%C2%B0n-are-the-lowest-in-six-years/">posted this graph</a> from the Danish Meteorological Institute, chortling over just how low and how rapidly Arctic temperatures were <i>dropping</i>. Clearly that's all deniers need to disprove the multiple lines of proof of climate science: three weeks worth of data. Note that Watts described the green line as 'normal' — a meaningless statement without some sort of context, and a strange term to use when the deniers claim that 'climate is always changing'.<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg_g21r1TwcI7tsUrC6IIbLF9G3sOiFoGw6CxYrR-ROYH-eJGhzFAq5dD49kDj0CO5MKP8nWRECRHm9Jrsvm6gOoFJbbgfU7mUZVtHeA5JmK8e3HsuXNymrNC5unY2ZVXmoD6U7/s1600/meant_2010.png"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px; height: 267px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg_g21r1TwcI7tsUrC6IIbLF9G3sOiFoGw6CxYrR-ROYH-eJGhzFAq5dD49kDj0CO5MKP8nWRECRHm9Jrsvm6gOoFJbbgfU7mUZVtHeA5JmK8e3HsuXNymrNC5unY2ZVXmoD6U7/s400/meant_2010.png" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5556699902648790370" /></a><br /><br />Even as the gloating amongst his followers commenced, the data started moving back up again. Watts then posted this updated version:<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgO4F7ljVlxrewINzKTPvu9mBqM83EsLsPedxMNNfz9M7FpPhqISgZSe3OAq5XQrBlom91wgvdtpwurkKbgH8zDoqYW31IUryqUXPaecYFV3G-XytrZIUTpG91FS7Y6yNAnkn11/s1600/meant_2010-b.png"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px; height: 267px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgO4F7ljVlxrewINzKTPvu9mBqM83EsLsPedxMNNfz9M7FpPhqISgZSe3OAq5XQrBlom91wgvdtpwurkKbgH8zDoqYW31IUryqUXPaecYFV3G-XytrZIUTpG91FS7Y6yNAnkn11/s400/meant_2010-b.png" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5556700077395301234" /></a><br /><br />What did his remarkable insight, his knowledge of climate, atmospherics, geology and politics suggest as a hypothesis that might explain this? What would follow? Watts didn't know, merely asking rather hopefully "will it oscillate back?" Comments on the post ceased on January 28th.<br /><br />EoR decided to check to see whether it had 'oscillated' back or not. Here is the <a href="http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/meant80n.uk.php">full graph for 2010</a> (the green line, rather than being 'normal' represents daily mean temperatures for the period 1958-2002).<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjSp2-ns2DK4h-oN5IRx8xRBCWm5wOqCkRapcxkU4ghI7JwAasVlyztV4_jMNoMeLvs4K5SInk0-UAKB7MzTwUxKds3-YQIG_uNBxA7W4tmird3hpPzA3AutvrlfCSmvvE1gLK3/s1600/meanT_2010+FULL.png"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px; height: 267px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjSp2-ns2DK4h-oN5IRx8xRBCWm5wOqCkRapcxkU4ghI7JwAasVlyztV4_jMNoMeLvs4K5SInk0-UAKB7MzTwUxKds3-YQIG_uNBxA7W4tmird3hpPzA3AutvrlfCSmvvE1gLK3/s400/meanT_2010+FULL.png" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5556700832155124274" /></a><br />Not only did it not 'oscillate' back, it was for most of the year above the averaged mean, and the greatest variations were also largely in the warmer rather than the colder range.<br /><br />Arctic sea ice extent, as graphed by the <a href="http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/">National Snow and Ice Data Center</a> is also low.<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiyalom1c-zHL-FNxqwGFPNITqavL9agy7NuiAb0dlOTbmAvhBz8XaAPM5wIfG1tE4Y47lgEfGmeaao9ixXYA13j00eoSXc-QFNOAQMtkjbOlsqOG0pTk8mAGA3H4EX2eXgpw6U/s1600/20101206_Figure2.png"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px; height: 320px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiyalom1c-zHL-FNxqwGFPNITqavL9agy7NuiAb0dlOTbmAvhBz8XaAPM5wIfG1tE4Y47lgEfGmeaao9ixXYA13j00eoSXc-QFNOAQMtkjbOlsqOG0pTk8mAGA3H4EX2eXgpw6U/s400/20101206_Figure2.png" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5556701166483415202" /></a><br /><br />While the average monthly Arctic sea ice extent continues its inexorable decline.<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhLIZSiOVyENI-7DW8952I1d1SxG3QxlxrF1Y_TmvELLo1vqn1uBRDKRijNcLKGpl5j6rUymA01sT8H0SPTgPGjmnfkJVufKnrnNIzj0rNM2GYPB5fncIInduUIQaot_ZJlKZix/s1600/20101206_Figure3.png"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px; height: 289px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhLIZSiOVyENI-7DW8952I1d1SxG3QxlxrF1Y_TmvELLo1vqn1uBRDKRijNcLKGpl5j6rUymA01sT8H0SPTgPGjmnfkJVufKnrnNIzj0rNM2GYPB5fncIInduUIQaot_ZJlKZix/s400/20101206_Figure3.png" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5556701342318698146" /></a><br /><br />But surely we're <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/environment/weather/theres-a-mini-ice-age-coming-says-man-who-beats-weather-experts-20101221-1945a.html">entering a new Ice Age</a>? Isn't the world currently being blanketed by unprecedented amounts of snow? <a href="http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/2010november/">James Hansen</a> at NASA notes<br /><br /><blockquote>Back to the cold air in Europe: is it possible that reduced Arctic sea ice is affecting weather patterns? Because Hudson Bay (and Baffin Bay, west of Greenland) are at significantly lower latitudes than most of the Arctic Ocean, global warming may cause them to remain ice free into early winter after the Arctic Ocean has become frozen insulating the atmosphere from the ocean. The fixed location of the Hudson-Baffin heat source could plausibly affect weather patterns, in a deterministic way — Europe being half a <a href="http://weatherfaqs.org.uk/node/145">Rossby wavelength</a> downstream, thus producing a cold European anomaly in the trans-Atlantic seesaw. Several ideas about possible effects of the loss of Arctic sea ice on weather patterns are discussed in papers referenced by Overland, Wang and Walsh.<br /><br />However, we note in our Reviews of Geophysics paper that the few years just prior to 2009-2010, with low Arctic sea ice, did not produce cold winters in Europe. The cold winter of 2009-2010 was associated with the most extreme Arctic Oscillation in the period of record. Figure 3, from our paper, shows that 7 of the last 10 European winters were warmer than the 1951-1980 average winter, and 10 of the past 10 summers were warmer than climatology. The average warming of European winters is at least as large as the average warming of summers, but it is less noticeable because of the much greater variability in winter.</blockquote><br /><br />In Canada, "the Hudson Bay region of Canada had monthly mean anomalies greater than +10°C." It's interesting that this isn't receiving the same amount of coverage that the snowstorms in Europe and the US are. Or the <a href="http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/hazards/">flooding</a> in the Balkans, Central America and Australia (unless you happen to be in one of those areas). And the <a href="http://www.wmo.int/pages/mediacentre/press_releases/pr_904_en.html">World Meterological Organisation</a> reports:<br /><br /><blockquote>The year 2010 is almost certain to rank in the top 3 warmest years since the beginning of instrumental climate records in 1850, according to data sources compiled by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO). The global combined sea surface and land surface air temperature for 2010 (January–October) is currently estimated at 0.55°C ± 0.11°C1 (0.99°F ± 0.20°F) above the 1961–1990 annual average of 14.00°C/57.2°F. At present, 2010’s nominal value is the highest on record, just ahead of 1998 (January-October anomaly +0.53°C) and 2005 (0.52°C)2. The ERA-Interim3 reanalysis data are also indicating that January-October 2010 temperatures are near record levels. The final ranking of 2010 will not become clear until November and December data are analysed in early 2011.</blockquote>EoRhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08565450093920373243noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18523369.post-72480627575212173882010-12-28T10:08:00.003+08:002010-12-28T10:19:01.433+08:00In which an advertisement is foundWhile EoR was doing some research on anti-global warming science he was forced to read the IPA Review, the house publication of a right wing think tank called the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Institute_of_Public_Affairs">Institute of Public Affairs</a>. IPA Review is the favoured home of Bob Carter and Ian Plimer. In the December 2006 issue, however, EoR discovered this amusing advertisement.<br /><br /><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhwNs57NATEKqdx_smiPq8pZKz0kapOZaUi9L9R33nSrRpr_AhQKyniCFdDm8x8E21KcVMBpDl-Gz5w1fE8TWXssKeu9cxz_wbOFMFEONQujhw7zkqEI1pTSV9I38oczbgK3S6i/s1600/parasitic_ipa.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 230px; height: 320px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhwNs57NATEKqdx_smiPq8pZKz0kapOZaUi9L9R33nSrRpr_AhQKyniCFdDm8x8E21KcVMBpDl-Gz5w1fE8TWXssKeu9cxz_wbOFMFEONQujhw7zkqEI1pTSV9I38oczbgK3S6i/s320/parasitic_ipa.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5555550950125952226" /></a><br /><br />The message is rather droll: don't give your money to the parasitic state, give it to the parasitic conservatives instead!<br /><br />It also demonstrates the lack of scientific understanding of the right, since EoR can't see any parasites in the image (unless the human has a tapeworm).<br /><br />It also seems remarkably strange that the social(ist) ants appear to be helping our fearless Libertarian Hero.EoRhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08565450093920373243noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18523369.post-1770238898744447952010-12-27T10:10:00.003+08:002010-12-27T10:21:30.537+08:00Free pr0n for asylum seekersSpiegel Online reports how the Czech Republic tests whether applicants for asylum are <a href="http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/0,1518,734422,00.html">telling the truth or not</a> when they claim they would be persecuted for being gay. It seems the report may have been written by Benny Hill, since it notes that<br /><br /><blockquote>the only way to obtain hard evidence was to administer a test using a phallometric device.</blockquote><br /><br />People who make such puns should be given a stiff dressing down. EoR just won't stand for it.<br /><br />Furthermore, the person administering these tests is a physician and sex therapist called Dr. Ondrej <a href="http://www.trojancondoms.com/default.aspx">Trojan</a>. More proof of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nominative_determinism">Nominative Determinism</a>.<br /><br />It also seems that Dr Trojan has difficulty determining patient/doctor boundaries:<br /><br /><blockquote>A former patient claims that he offered to masturbate in front of her while she was under his treatment, and she says that she intends to produce video recordings as evidence. Trojan insists that he was merely applying a method known as "demonstration therapy," which even he admits is "controversial."</blockquote><br /><br />EoR doesn't know which is worse. That a sex therapist offered to masturbate in front of a patient, or that the patient was <i>videotaping the whole thing</i>.EoRhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08565450093920373243noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18523369.post-22949190247146206712010-12-25T11:05:00.003+08:002010-12-25T11:15:59.560+08:00Merry Cthulumas!<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEinXYGd0ITHDaWbIExZA5_6YqezLkZCf-EcVR18nt7X7i8RrNWuwecfSzksOaL3lx3CKaeRHrH7A0z_suINPPow0z9vWQQfRzlaQJ7mPZE7m6aGflGXZScsJa92-UsirbshVfcN/s1600/cthulhusanta.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 214px; height: 320px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEinXYGd0ITHDaWbIExZA5_6YqezLkZCf-EcVR18nt7X7i8RrNWuwecfSzksOaL3lx3CKaeRHrH7A0z_suINPPow0z9vWQQfRzlaQJ7mPZE7m6aGflGXZScsJa92-UsirbshVfcN/s320/cthulhusanta.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5554450777188695506" /></a><br />Merry <a href="http://www.conceptart.org/forums/showthread.php?p=2055412">Cthulhumas</a>! It's that special day of the year when the Elder Gods wake at R'lyeh, and travel the world visiting all the good little boys and girls delivering <i>fear and terror and tentacles and <a href="http://www.newlibertycreation.com/merry-cthulhumas/">unspeakable horrors</a>!</i><br /><br /><object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/KSvsy11PHxM?fs=1&hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/KSvsy11PHxM?fs=1&hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>EoRhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08565450093920373243noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18523369.post-66997468577705521362010-12-24T11:05:00.002+08:002010-12-24T11:15:39.732+08:00Homeopathy: proudly advancing science into the 1800sEoR has been browsing through <i>Homeopathy: Medicine for the New Millennium</i> (1985, 26th edition copyrighted 2000) by George Vithoulkas in which he "Describes the foundations upon which this seemingly miraculous method is built". As the cover proudly declaims, Vithoulkas was:<br /><br /><blockquote>Awarded the Alternative Nobel Prize for Health 1996.</blockquote><br /><br />His biography inside also emphasises this achievement:<br /><br /><blockquote>In 1996 his untiring endeavours to spread classical homeopathy were acknowledged internationally when he received the Alternative Nobel Prize for Health in the Swedish Parliament for his 'Outstanding contribution to the revival of classical homeopathy.'</blockquote><br /><br />This just demonstrates how homeopaths like to skew results to claim any thin legitimacy they desperately crave. The <a href="http://www.rightlivelihood.org/award.html?&no_cache=1">Right Livelihood Awards</a> are, indeed, known as the Alternative Nobel Prize, but that is not their official designation and it seems like desperation to splash the 'Nobel' word across the front of a homeopathic book. The claim that it was awarded in the category of 'Health' also seems spurious:<br /><br /><blockquote>Unlike the Nobel Prizes (for Physics, Physiology/Medicine, Chemistry, Literature, and Peace), the Right Livelihood Award has no categories. It recognises that, in striving to meet the human challenges of today's world, the most inspiring and remarkable work often defies any standard classification. For example, people who start out with an environmental goal frequently find themselves drawn into issues of health, human rights and/or social justice. Their work becomes a holistic response to community needs, so that sectoral categories lose their meaning.</blockquote><br /><br />Regardless of its millennial claims, the book is replete with phrases such as "we must look back again to the days of Hahnemann". Perhaps EoR misread, and the millennium referred to was the previous one? Like any good text on homeopathy, there are invocations equally to God and Einstein so that those who believe in religious cures are catered for, as well as those who demand <i>science</i> (even if it's magical science). Quoting nineteenth century homeopath J T Kent (who features prominently throughout the book as an authority for the New Millennium):<br /><br /><blockquote>They will tell you that the bacillus is the cause of tuberculosis. But if man had not been susceptible to the bacillus he could not have been affected by it... The bacteria are results of the disease... the microscopical little fellows are not the disease cause, but they come after... They are the outcome of the disease, are present wherever the disease is, and by the microscope it has been discovered that every pathological result has its corresponding bacteria. The Old School considered these the cause...but the cause is much more subtle than <br />anything that can be shown by a microscope.</blockquote><br /><br />There's also a lot about vital forces and miasms. And the true believer will, of course, not use any real drugs at all (not least because it seems homeopathy is so fickle and weak, almost anything can interfere with it):<br /><br /><blockquote>Allopathic drugs are among the most powerful interfering factors. An occasional aspirin for temporary aches or pains is generally no problem, but consistent use of analgesics, tranquillizers, antibiotics, contraceptive pills and especially cortisone can completely counteract the action of homeopathic remedies. In some instances, even dental work can produce the same effect. Therefore, homeopathic patients should refrain from all other therapies except for true emergencies and, if possible, only after consulting the homeopath.</blockquote><br /><br />Of course, the anecdote is required evidence (indeed, the only evidence), and there are plenty of them, many involving cancer cures. The best is this one, about a woman with serious metastasised lung cancer who Vithoulkas initially refuses to treat (because he considered the case too 'serious'!). The tale is long, but EoR felt that any editing would reduce the overwhelming crescendo of madness and improbability:<br /><br /><blockquote>She then started pleading with me to at least listen to her symptoms. Seeing my insistence in refusing to take her case, she told us a story which made me change my mind. She said "One night I prayed to God to help me with my health, and then I heard the voice of God telling me, 'Go to Vithoulkas, he will cure you'" and this was the reason why she was insisting so much to see me. I said to her again: "I do not know what God told you, but what I do know is that with homeopathy it is impossible to cure such a case". She kept on pleading so much that I finally agreed to listen to her case. As it came out it was one of the strangest stories I have ever heard in my whole career. She was a 43 year old woman from a very rich family in Australia. Her father had died several years before but the strange thing was that her mother had developed a really vicious hatred for her, to the extent that in one of their fights she had wished openly that her daughter, the patient, would die from cancer. Two years after the mother's vicious wish, the daughter actually developed cancer of the lungs, which was soon metastasized to the bones and then to the brain. The patient had also developed an equally strong hatred for the mother, to the extent that she also wished her dead. The complication for the patient was that in spite of the fact that the family was very rich, the wealth was controlled totally by the mother in Australia, who provided very little to the daughter. She, in turn, mixed with the high society of London, borrowed money from her affluent friends to cope with living in the style of the rich and in the hope that when the mother died - she was already approaching her eighties - she would be able to pay them back. As I progressed with the taking of her case, listening to all the symptoms, I found out that the indicated remedy - strangely enough - was clear in this case, something that happens very rarely and indicates that there is really hope for the patient. Homeopathy has different ways of evaluating the strength of the defence mechanism which is actually stimulated and brings about the cure. Therefore, after 3 hours of taking her case, I had come to the conclusion that there was actually a possibility for an improvement in this woman. I then told her this but the problem was that she was taking many strong painkillers and the homeopathic remedy would not work together with them. I explained the situation to her, to which she answered immediately that this was not a problem, she could stop the painkillers right now! I said that this would be impossible as the pains on the bones would be so intensely aggravated before the homeopathic remedy could act that she would not be able to stand them even for a few days. She left for London the next day. After a week I received a telephone call from her. Her first words were: 'I am well.' I asked what she meant, had she really stopped the painkillers? She said, "Yes, the same day I started your medicine". "And there was no pain?" She said none! I could not believe my ears. Anyhow I gave further instructions and forgot about the case. In three months she telephoned to say that she had been back in the hospital in London where they monitored her case and she told them how well she was. She said, "I danced in front of them in order for them to believe that I could walk again without pain". I still could not believe my ears, but anyhow I gave further instructions for the medication. A month later I received a telephone call in my house, very early in the morning, about 3 a.m. in London and 5 a.m. in Athens. She was on the phone screaming that she most probably broke her ribs during her sleep in the night and the pain was excruciating, unbearable. She could hardly speak from the pain. I told her that these pains were a relapse from the metastasis and not from a broken rib! I thought that's it, I could never control the pain again, but all the same I instructed her to try a remedy and to phone me in the evening. Sure enough she telephoned to say that there was no more pain any more! These relapses happened another three times in the 11 months of treatment, and were always controlled by the homeopathic remedy. One day she telephoned in a panic saying that the right eye was bulging out and could not see. There was also a severe pain in the head. Again the homeopathic remedy controlled the symptoms. After a year she considered herself cured and stopped telephoning. Three years later I inquired from the lady in charge of the clinic in London who had initially phoned me about the patient to know what had happened with this case. And she told me the most amazing story I could have heard. The mother in Australia had died but before her death, she gave all her property to a foundation in Australia, leaving the daughter with all her debts. The patient despaired so much that she went to an expensive restaurant in London, ordered a luxurious meal and took with it enough pills to kill herself. I mention this case here though I cannot know to what extent the improvement really was, whether after a year or two the cancer would have come back and killed her, as the case was monitored from the London hospital and I had no access to their findings. But this case really shows the extent to which homeopathy can be effective if it is practised properly. For many decades, homeopathy was practiced in a very bad manner. Instead of trying to find the indicated remedy for each individual case, which requires a lot of time, doctors would prefer to give ten, fifteen or even twenty remedies together hoping that the right one would be within these twenty. With such a practice results were very poor and people got the impression that this method was good only for simple ailments like common colds and headaches.</blockquote><br /><br />You can't <a href="http://www.perthnow.com.au/news/nurse-tells-how-cancer-patient-penelope-dingle-was-writhing-in-pain/story-e6frg12c-1225880033776">make this sort of stuff up</a>.EoRhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08565450093920373243noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18523369.post-78994013245449685332010-12-23T10:26:00.002+08:002010-12-23T10:40:40.275+08:00Santa's just an old pervertThe festive season is all about fun and celebrating traditional values.<br /><br /><a href="http://graphic-design.tjs-labs.com/show-picture?id=1229542711"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 311px; height: 400px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi_qsVH-JIG_DP8MObCCzpzl9ltCP1OUIVBq5VzSykxD0WR7zuIvwjoUyTjgKZVxL5V9cMkNyCeA6Y7p7vYU6vFQwQoGg8oVlbhInNvBrbVi9AO4bprP6Jz5A0ySteyiCGq06iE/s400/camel-whc-12-01-1952-999-M5.jpg" border="0" alt="Christmas cheer"id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5553701416432535154" /></a><br /><br />Like smoking. And surprising your loved one under the Cthulhumas tree with a new <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prince_Albert_piercing">Prince Albert</a> (link very much NSFW).EoRhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08565450093920373243noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18523369.post-81007563694966551142010-12-22T11:42:00.003+08:002010-12-22T11:58:38.654+08:00The adventures of Christopher Monckton in the real world (Episode two)<img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;width: 300px; height: 400px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi07baNxOrX9snm6ar9ynslQUXP6Ri8qWcxMxeUoIVaWPKrA8UxBeNnQTuDCtFfbKyu7EbQG-WVQuASnalDC1-2uop_U7ZO3efcc5yoD7nGx67JK4DUSofCib7MKQDGEAIgL3Vg/s400/361705-lord-christopher-monckton.jpg" border="0" alt="What a proper education can do for you" /><br /><br />The Telegraph have replaced the blatantly warmist propaganda piece that was so horribly out of place on their website which insinuated that the Lord of the <del>Dance</del> Climate Skeptics agreed climate was warming due to anthropogenic causes, with a much cosier <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/climatechange/8210739/The-climate-bugaboo-is-the-strangest-intellectual-aberration-of-our-age.html">rant from the man himself</a>, in which the Loony Lord, who so detests the vile <i>ad hominens</i> thrown at him by the alarmist brigade in lieu of any <i>actual science</i>, refers in the first line to a "bearded, staring enviro-zomb with the regrettable T-shirt". EoR doesn't know why the T-shirt was 'regrettable' since the Illogical Lord fails to give a reason.<br /><br />Monckton laments the loss of:<br /><br /><blockquote>Perspective, the Olympian capacity to see events as they affect not just us and our mates but everyone, and not just in the excitement of the present but sub specie aeternitatis, in the long, calm, kindly shadow of eternity: this has gone from what passes for education in the West.</blockquote><br /><br />Are we, then, to assume that Monckton considers himself one of the Olympians, possessing, as he does, a transcendent vision of humanity, the world and existence that far outstrips the average mortal schmuck? Monckton has always evidenced a grandiosity complex, but it grows worse every day.<br /><br />The global warming scam has been so successful, he claims, for three reasons.<br /><br /><blockquote>The climate bugaboo, the strangest intellectual aberration of our age, rampages because in the me and now we have cast aside three once-universal [sic] forms of learning that gave us perspective: a Classical education, to remind us that in reason and logic there is a difference between true and false; a scientific education, to show us which is which; and a religious education, to teach us why the distinction matters.</blockquote><br /><br />Which does rather expose the real agenda of the deniers: godlessness and atheism are the heathen evils to be fought. If we were only more godly (presumably, worshipping Olympians like Monckton himself) then we wouldn't be so stupid. And the Flying Spaghetti Monster could just magic away global warming.<br /><br />Monckton also neglects to mention that part of a Classical education was the art of rhetoric. EoR does agree that a classical education would be helpful, since it would make more people knowledgeable about the <a href="http://www.iep.utm.edu/sophists/">Sophists</a>, those who would argue a cause whether it was true or false, or whether they believed in it or not. Indeed, the description of Sophists could be applied directly to Monckton without any difficulty at all:<br /><br /><blockquote>[The Sophists] wandered about Greece from place to place, gave lectures, took pupils, and entered into disputations. For these services they exacted large fees, and were, in fact, the first in Greece to take fees for teaching wisdom.<br /><br />[,,,]<br /><br />The most popular career of a Greek of ability at the time was politics; hence the sophists largely concentrated on teaching rhetoric. The aims of the young politicians whom they trained were to persuade the multitude of whatever they wished them to believed. The search for truth was not top priority. Consequently the sophists undertook to provide a stock of arguments on any subject, or to prove any position. They boasted of their ability to make the worse appear the better reason, to prove that black is white. Some, like <a href="http://www.classicallibrary.org/plato/dialogues/15_gorgias.htm">Gorgias</a>, asserted that it was not necessary to have any knowledge of a subject to give satisfactory replies as regards it. Thus, Gorgias ostentatiously answered any question on any subject instantly and without consideration. To attain these ends mere quibbling, and the scoring of verbal points were employed. In this way, the sophists tried to entangle, entrap, and confuse their opponents, and even, if this were not possible, to beat them down by mere violence and noise. They sought also to dazzle by means of strange or flowery metaphors, by unusual figures of speech, by epigrams and paradoxes, and in general by being clever and smart, rather than earnest and truthful. Hence our word “sophistry”: the use of fallacious arguments knowing them to be such.</blockquote><br /><br />Monckton's education in grammar and debate also seem to be failing. At times, he refers to himself in the article in the third person, and at others in the first person. It seems he is dissociated from himself in an almost Freudian way.<br /><br />Monckton attacks "another headline last week [that] shrieked" he had admitted global warming was real and human caused. Monckton (in whatever person) doesn't mention it was in the same paper. His argument that the claim is wrong? He admitted four years ago that global warming was real and it was human caused. So much for your "Classical" logic and reason.<br /><br />Would someone please tuck the good Lord into bed, give him a warm drink, turn the lights out, and gently steal away.<br /><br />Meanwhile, for those with an interest in the actual science, rather than schoolboy rhetorical exercises, Miloslav Nic has created a wonderful online searchable database for the <a href="http://zvon.org/eco/ipcc/ar4/index.html">IPCC Fourth Assessement Report</a>.EoRhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08565450093920373243noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18523369.post-22797710811667764682010-12-21T10:26:00.004+08:002010-12-21T10:52:11.689+08:00The adventures of Christopher Monckton in the real world<img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;width: 259px; height: 250px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEifcSZhGpol1xQDFFgcCwGNdMHvROqDFyP40lIYMrkM22bz0C7N3kZfkrIfr_ImwVCw6n8QWjd-eHDdp97ogzFauleJwFzvnplLF-OjFEVDPBTWlHwNlDcMouldolEyEx3MONrS/s400/NWO-ahead.jpg" border="0" alt="" /><br /><br />EoR is a little disappointed with the rather poor efforts of climate change deniers of late. Andrew Bolt used to post monthly temperature graphs to 'prove' there was no global warming. Then he posted monthly temperature graphs to 'prove' there was no global warming because there was only a slight increase. Now he doesn't bother at all. There's only the occasional post claiming sea levels aren't rising <a href="http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/drowning_in_the_gillard_governments_hype/">quite as fast</a> as some people claim. Though they are still rising.<br /><br />The Lord Clown of Deniers, Christopher Monckton, also seems to have been quiet lately, but maybe that's just because the media have become bored with his repetitive schtick. And the fact that you can't really be a Lord High Denier and All Round Genius to the conspiracy set when you admit that <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/climatechange/8194951/Cancun-climate-change-summit-Viscount-Monckton-admits-that-global-warming-is-happening.html">global warming is happening, and it's caused by humans</a> (the Telegraph, for whatever ulterior reason, has deleted the relevant article — it is, however, <a href="http://hendrawanm.wordpress.com/2010/12/11/cancun-climate-change-summit-viscount-monckton-admits-that-global-warming-is-happening/">still available on the internet</a>). Oh dear. EoR bets all the cardigan-wearing set have torn his posters from the wall in a fit of right wing pique.<br /><br /><blockquote>Lord Monckton admitted the world is warming as a result of mankind’s activities. <br /><br />“Some warming is to be accepted as a result of our activities but on balance not very much,” he said. <br /><br />In a bizarre press conference attended by a handful of journalists and a ‘climate sceptic activist’ dressed in a polar bear suit with a sign reading ‘I am fine’, Lord Monckton spoke out about his theories on climate change.</blockquote><br /><br />His <i>theories</i>? How many does he have?<br /><br />Monckton was introduced as the 'Lord of the climate skeptics'. It reminds EoR of when tours of insane asylums were undertaken, and people would be introduced as 'Napoleon'.<br /><br />John Vidal at the Guardian reports how the man who was incensed at 'Hitler youth' at Copenhagen is now <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2010/dec/07/cancun-monckton-crashes-business-lunch">employing the same tactics</a>.<br /><br /><blockquote>But it seems that the man who in Copenhagen last year compared young protesters to Hitler Youth because they gatecrashed a meeting of climate sceptics, had not actually been invited to the largest business conference of the summit that featured Lord Stern, Richard Branson and several Mexican billionaires.<br /><br />After an hour of tolerating Monckton, the patience of the organisers wore thin. "Who is this man?" asked one American green venture capitalist. "These are weird views," said another. A few minutes later he was asked to leave.</blockquote><br /><br />You can listen to a <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/audio/2010/dec/07/cancun-climate-change-summit-monckton">7 minute interview with Monckton</a> at the conference. Monckton argues that modelling is wrong, and when he was taught science "measurement and observation were the appropriate processes". This is a line taken by Ian Plimer in <i>Climate changing: How global warming lost its science and support</i> (IPA Review, March 2010). EoR wonders who's copying their argument from whom?<br /><br /><blockquote> My scientific critics are decades younger, had a postmodernist education, are scientifically narrow, play with computer models and lack the ability to argue logically. This is probably why ad hominem attacks had spelling errors and poor English.</blockquote><br /><br />Of course, the irony of Plimer calling his opponents 'illogical', 'scientifically narrow', 'bad spellers' and users of 'poor English' and then crying about <i>ad hominen</i> attacks <i>against</i> him is hilarious.<br /><br />In the audio interview, Monckton also refers to a question in the House of Lords, which he had to get a sitting member to put. But isn't Monckton <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/aug/11/christopher-monckton-house-of-lords-claims">a member of the House of Lords</a>? If that particular lie was true, he could have asked the question himself.<br /><br />Monckton is not a climatologist (nor any sort of scientist, in fact) but a rhetorician, as a post by <a href="http://blogs.ft.com/rachmanblog/2010/10/a-night-at-the-oxford-union/">Gideon Rachman</a> demonstrates. Rachman, who was about to take part in a (non climate related) Oxford debate with Monckton, spoke to him. Or was spoken at.<br /><br /><blockquote>I began to think that Viscount Monckton might be a formidable opponent during the debate. Then he told me that he has discovered a new drug that is a complete cure for two-thirds of known diseases - and that he expects it to go into clinical trials soon. I asked him whether his miracle cure was chiefly effective against viruses or bacterial diseases? “Both”, he said, “and prions”. At this point I felt a little more relaxed about the forthcoming debate.</blockquote><br /><br />Monckton disputes this account, and has written a rebuttal which Rachman has published:<br /><br /><blockquote>Lord Monckton has pointed out an inadvertent inaccuracy and unfairness in my account of the medical invention on which he is working. Though there is a substantial body of theoretical and empirical evidence that his invention <i>may</i> prove efficacious against multiple infectious and auto-immune diseases, he did not and does not make any claim that the invention <i>will</i> prove efficacious. That is precisely why, as he told me when we met at Oxford, a series of appropriately sceptical clinical trials will commence shortly in the United States.</blockquote><br /><br />Personally, EoR thinks Monckton is just hiding the decline in his intellectual abilities, which has been occurring since at least 1998.EoRhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08565450093920373243noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18523369.post-24115237033317434932010-12-20T10:21:00.006+08:002010-12-20T10:32:19.782+08:00The forgotten genius of Henry HokeIt's always good to see a forgotten genius finally being recognised, especially when he's Australian. <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/rn/artworks/stories/2010/2909697.htm">Henry Hoke</a> is the Australian Einstein or Alexander Graham Bell (both of whom he knew — he corresponded on a first name basis with Einstein) and was the subject earlier this year of a long overdue <a href="http://www.historyweek.sa.gov.au/events/2010/the-lost-tools-of-henry-hoke">exhibition at the South Australian Maritime Museum</a>.<br /><br />Hoke, of Hoke's Tool Company, was a neglected but wide ranging inventor, producing myriad ideas. Sadly, he is now mostly forgotten, though (like Tesla) many of his inventions were stolen by others and have become well known in these copies. There's the Quack of Doom (so powerful and dangerous the US military decided to go with the atom bomb instead). He was also a pioneer of alternative energy, developing a clockwork car (this is now lost, though the key — Hoke's Giant Wind-Up — still exists). Some of his other prescient inventions include:<br /><br />Refined Bulldust, so beloved of alties. Similar to Philip Pullman's <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dust_(His_Dark_Materials)">Dust</a>, it is everywhere.<br /><br /><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;width: 205px; height: 350px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhR7mWDuZ0_a03nh8AN2PqhY-Rb88AEg5kuEGygmNTFDsJGnRmDavyzSLNabXzre17rPON5C8AYvF8VTGZa_m0gakAhO3KKlOqj-x08793eWHVQtOz1KMPq1VaYFwI-gzI7lvPA/s400/bulldust_lite.jpg" border="0" alt="Hoke's bulldust" /><br /><br />Willing's Suspension of Disbelief, another altie favourite, most effectively employed with the Bulldust.<br /><br /><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;width: 189px; height: 350px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgjWlSkPB3o3aGw9DYO24xPARdVEi-RudbBftzcO1c4hyphenhyphen6Zd_0RERSazYj92JfD8uX4X6ZGY3xmCsbV8BQZwDSh8ql4njFUv9IuzO87iU5Jh3vkj7lA7HT5GC6Fi8qOz1MAkHkx/s400/willing_suspension_of_disbelief.jpg" border="0" alt="Suspension of disbelief" /><br /><br />And Dehydrated Water Pills ("Instructions for use: Add alcohol, preferably gin"). Today, these incredible pills are to be <a href="http://www.youngausskeptics.com/2009/03/australian-skeptics-take-aim-at-the-pharmacists-of-australia/">found in pharmacies everywhere</a> with, criminally, no recognition of Hoke at all.<br /><br /><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;width: 400px; height: 376px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjIRaZCUdpwayMuDRymCAa0KRznhot6kFV3zOBhUgmJEUeD4csI9p7btdxAsIhPNlPmxOSskVCye1oF2-ZcXo4aNtB7mN98zjEM_w2aomwmq9sOzJWurUMxUS03S3c1bcTOOGqz/s400/dehydpillslite.jpg" border="0" alt="Dehydrated water pills" /><br /><br /><a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/dees-image/tags/henryhoke/">Flickr gallery of the exhibition</a>EoRhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08565450093920373243noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18523369.post-21192998689834128702010-12-19T11:12:00.001+08:002010-12-19T11:13:51.446+08:00Thistle thoughts (12)<img style="float:left; margin:0 10px 10px 0;width: 312px; height: 178px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg4K5VOql6HN39thYIOnPlX6CLRP2Fi2VrkHxY2Mk_kU20aGHSPezR-2qmcUhAzTrovtoEG_3dk9aWV7TrootQSviKqefT9COXi8PGYDOq-OmhVT2EHDnLDfawTdEWTUphaK7Wj/s400/eoronathistle.gif" border="0" alt="EoR sits on a thistle" />EoR, having accidentally sat on some thistles, ponders the State of Things...<br /><br />It's all very well UFOs abducting people and anally probing them, but why do they have to keep returning them?EoRhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08565450093920373243noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18523369.post-57119965557038002652010-12-18T11:31:00.002+08:002010-12-18T11:49:04.827+08:00Sandy Craw'Tis the season for those old familiar standards, such as <a href="http://blogfiles.wfmu.org/LG/Christmas/Joseph_Spence_-_Santa_Claus_Is_Comin_To_Town.mp3">Santa Claus is Coming to Town</a>, as unforgettably performed by <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Spence_(musician)">Joseph Spence</a>. This is simply the most brilliant postmodernist critique of the consumerist devotion to affluenza EoR has ever heard. And if Spence influenced Ry Cooder and Taj Mahal, how can he be all bad?<br /><br />After this, no other Christmas songs satisfy. Except, just possibly, John Cage's <a href="http://www.examiner.com/music-news-in-san-francisco/cage-against-the-machine-s-christmas-moment-of-silence-not-a-bad-thing">4'33"</a>.EoRhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08565450093920373243noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18523369.post-51098751057512133552010-12-17T10:32:00.003+08:002010-12-17T10:45:45.519+08:00National Broadband Network will kill us all!Maybe EoR just imagined all this but, listening to Howard Sattler's radio show on Wednesday he heard MP Dr Dennis Jensen apparently prophesying the end of the world due to the National Broadband Network. EoR didn't hear the whole thing, so he may have totally misinterpreted Dr Jensen's alarmist ranting, but it seems the terminating nodes for the NBN which were originally to be placed outside buildings will now be placed inside them. The terrible outcome is that these release chlorine gas when they burn. And chlorine gas is what the Germans used!!!<br /><br />EoR may be unusual but, if his house was burning, he wouldn't be hanging around to breathe in any fumes, toxic or otherwise. And what gases are released by burning televisions? Computers? Carpets? Plastics? Treated wood? Stored pool chemicals?<br /><br />Will Dr Jensen also call for the banning of <a href="http://www.betterhealth.vic.gov.au/bhcv2/bhcarticles.nsf/pages/Wood_fires_and_breathing_problems?open">wood fires</a>?<br /><br />Dennis Jensen, though he's a legitimate scientist (his specialty is materials engineering on ceramics) doesn't seem to cope with technology well. His <a href="http://www.dennisjensen.com.au/">webpage</a>, for instance, <i>still</i> includes a call to "Oppose the Government's Emissions Trading Scheme". He also seems to release a media statement every six months or so. Which is probably considered value for taxpayers' money these days. But nothing about the NBN or chlorine gas is evident there. There's no mention of it on the 6PR website. And Google also seems ignorant of these claims (whether made by Jensen or anyone else).<br /><br />Dr Jensen is on <a href="http://www.facebook.com/dennisjensenmp">Facebook</a> but EoR didn't have the strength to become his friend. He does, however, note that Dr Jensen 'likes' Carl Sagan <i>and</i> Climate-gate (sic). And his favourite movie is "Not Evil Just Wrong".<br /><br />Then there's his <a href="http://twitter.com/DennisJensenMP">Twitter</a> account with its regular tweets (averaging about one a month). The most recent:<br /><br /><blockquote>No reputable scientist would claim 100% certainty that humans are causing climate change, but govt advisor Prof Will Steffen does!</blockquote><br /><br />Any reputable conservative politician, however, would claim that global warming is fake 100% of the time! Also, isn't that statement defamatory, since it clearly implies that <a href="http://www.anu.edu.au/climatechange/content/author/will">Professor Will Steffen</a> (Executive Director ANU Climate Change Institute, BSc, MSc, PhD) is <i>not</i> a reputable scientist? But, again, nothing about the NBN and how it's going to kill everyone.<br /><br />On the 24th February he tweeted:<br /><br /><blockquote>Rudd is totally lacking human feeling. 4 deaths from his insulation disaster, and he cannot even express sympathy</blockquote><br /><br />Well, Rudd is probably just as <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dennis_Jensen">inhuman as Dr Jensen</a>:<br /><br /><blockquote>Dr Jensen boycotted Parliament on the day that the formal apology to the Stolen Generations was made by Prime Minister Kevin Rudd.</blockquote><br /><br />Perhaps EoR <i>was</i> having a really strange dream? Or is this just the stalking horse for an <a href="http://www.heraldsun.com.au/business/terry-mccranns-column/nbn-fiasco-whole-lot-worse-than-insulation/story-e6frfig6-1225836290544">'NBN is the new Insulation debacle'</a> initiative by the opposition?EoRhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08565450093920373243noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18523369.post-40658572236664798292010-12-16T10:17:00.003+08:002010-12-16T10:30:40.693+08:00Why Andrew Bolt is so gayThe sky is falling! We're all doomed to slide down the slippery slope of faulty logic to an incestuous fate!!<br /><br />According to <a href="http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/if_gays_may_marry_why_not_a_brother_and_sister_too/">psychic Andrew Bolt</a> ("Two years ago I warned") the result of allowing godless gays to marry will not only destroy our wonderful conservative, capitalist, Bible-sanctioned lifestyle, but next thing you know, incest will be legal!!! Before you know it men will be kissing. In public!<br /><br /><a href="http://aurelio-obrien.livejournal.com/5026.html"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 373px; height: 311px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhX6B65pJL9Xg8ua7kfbNcj7KCRqlhldlnAq0egyhZrzBRnd7ldAa7Gn1p9B4DHioo5taESIazbl1MDACdHU2XHeywcoh7f4tLrsozBhJCG9GSLUPJyyaU8FEJHZVTYZY2PzMFu/s400/BushKissingSaudiPrince.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5551101604788980418" /></a><br /><br />This is obvious, since Switzerland already has registered partnerships which — as if you couldn't guess — are supported by the Green Party of Switzerland. Being one of Australia's top journalists, Bolt links to a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Registered_partnership_in_Switzerland">Wikipedia entry</a>. Knowing his audience, he's probably certain none of them will even go there and read the article, which shows that, regardless of his random sniping at the Greens, the Swiss partnerships are far from the same as marriage, and 58% of the <i>Swiss people</i> approved the change. But the evil Greens want full marriage equivalence!<br /><br />But now the Swiss government has drafted laws <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/switzerland/8198917/Switzerland-considers-repealing-incest-laws.html">decriminalising sex between consenting family members</a> (Bolt is more nuanced here, linking to the rightwing Telegraph). If Bolt's Believers follow the link, they'd see that the law relates to adults only. Whether you consider sex between related individuals right or wrong, it's not about all family members:<br /><br /><blockquote>Switzerland, which recently held a referendum passing a draconian law that will boot out foreigners convicted of committing the smallest of crimes, insists that children within families will continue to be protected by laws governing abuse and paedophilia.</blockquote><br /><br />If the left commie pinko green unionists are running the political agenda, how did that draconian law get through? The article also notes that there have only been three cases of incest since 1984.<br /><br />But what about <a href="http://www.salon.com/life/sex/?story=/mwt/broadsheet/2010/12/13/swiss_incest">China, France, Israel, the Ivory Coast, the Netherlands, Russia, Spain and Turkey</a>? All countries which have no prohibitions on "consensual incest between adults". Why does Bolt single out a possible new law in Switzerland and ignore all these countries which already allow consensual incest?<br /><br />Bolt also fails to explain why his argument that allowing gay marriage will lead to incestuous marriage. Switzerland made registered partnerships legal in 2003, but changing the incest law has been around <a href="http://worldradio.ch/wrs/news/switzerland/proposal-to-lift-incest-ban-highlights-moral-legal.shtml?22219">much longer</a>:<br /><br /><blockquote>In fact, the issue’s popped up periodically since the 1980s. Each time though uproar among the cantons or among the population has derailed the plan.</blockquote><br /><br />Perhaps Bolt doesn't believe in democracy?<br /><br />As always, the best part of Bolt's outrage is the wonderful comments from his literate, well informed (informed by Bolt's posts) readers. The very first comment invokes GOD (yes, in CAPITALS). Nonna, demonstrating that she (?) likes to think through issues and not rely on steretypes, comments<br /><br /><blockquote>I blame the holes in Swiss cheese and too much jodelling [sic] across the alpine valleys. Maybe the resonating sound of Swiss horns has an effect on the human brain.</blockquote><br /><br />Sonnshine says<br /><br /><blockquote>Hey gay couples, it’s not about you being discriminated against for any reason whatsoever when I say this -it is simply a Christian tradition that says Man and Woman. Been going on since Adam was a boy - you can’t change it to suit yourself. </blockquote><br /><br />Actually, all the children of Adam and Eve were related. Talk about rampant incest!<br /><br />Of course, there's the usual mish-mash of anti-Muslim sentiment as well, mixed in with suicide bombers, 'refugees' (in Boltland there are no real refugees — the word must therefore always be in quotes), and impending Sharia law in Australia (even though that would, presumably, outlaw homosexuality and incest).<br /><br />Next thing you know, there'll be <a href="http://news.discovery.com/animals/mice-stem-cells-101209.html">offspring with two fathers</a> and <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/12/15/3093738.htm">Conservatives sleeping with the Greens</a>. Now that sort of thing must really scare Bolt.<br /><br />And please, don't anyone tell him that those evil scientists think incest may actually <a href="http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20827893.700-why-incest-among-animals-cuts-male-sexual-aggression.html">lower sexual violence</a>.<br /><br />Or that people have fulminated on exactly where (and where not) to place genitalia for many centuries (readers of a nervous disposition should be advised that the following poem contains strong language):<br /><br /><blockquote><i>Oh what damned age do we live in</i><br /><br />Oh what damned age do we live in<br />Since there is no Christian soul<br />But old Father Patrick and Griffin<br />Dare put their pricks in the right hole.<br /><br />Oh, why do we keep such a bustle<br />'Bout putting a prick in an arse,<br />Since Harvey's long-cunted muscle<br />Serves Stuart instead of a tarse.<br /><br />Since fucking is not as 'twas wont<br />The ladies have got a new trick:<br />As an arsehole serves for a cunt.<br />So a clitoris serves for a prick.<br /><br />Besides, the damned tailors of France<br />To Great Britain's defamation<br />Have made better pintles by chance<br />Than the gods of the English nation.<br /><br />But now there's nothing will do,<br />Their cunts are grown so wide,<br />Except with a French leather dildo<br />They get on each other and ride.<br /> attrib. John Wilmot, Earl of Rochester (1647-1680)</blockquote>EoRhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08565450093920373243noreply@blogger.com0