As the dust settles after the UK vote to leave the EU, lawyers are picking over the landscape and legal opinions are emerging as to how the UK's departure from the European Union might be slowed or even stopped.
They fall into three main areas:
-The operation of Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty
-A Scottish "block"
-A second national referendum
As I see it, there are several ways in which this madness could, plausibly, still be prevented. Although there is not much mood in Parliament right now to block it or hold a second referendum, even Michael "twerpface" Gove (who, unlike Boris, is a true Euroskeptic) is saying he wouldn't trigger A50 until he was ready. That means we have several months at least for things to change. And at the rate at which things are currently changing, stopping Brexit is beginning to seem less and less like wishful thinking.
A Scottish block, even if it were legally possibly, wouldn't work. That would probably alienate voters as much as humanly possible. But a cross-party decision by MPs from all countries to block legislation might have a chance of not provoking a constitutional catastrophe (we're already deep into the "crisis" stage), if there was a clear public mood for it. With several months of this to go, there's a very real chance that could develop.
If the petition grew to show a clear majority of the electorate now favoured Remain, that might be tantamount to the revolution and might possibly trigger the unthinkable. But four million is a long way off that.
I think they're not giving it due credit, it's by far and away the most successful e-petition. It's not that people don't care about various other issues, it's simply that they don't sign e-petitions. The key factor is how many people signing it are disgruntled Leave voters who are now feeling lied to, or those who inexplicably insist on using referendums as a protest votes ("What would you like for dinner, sausages or roast turkey ?", "No thanks I'll have the dog food".... "Well, you asked for it...").
Possibly the most likely option is a snap general election. Although currently almost all bets are off, I can't imagine this not happening in the highly likely event of new leaders of both Labour and the Tories in the next few weeks/months (Corbyn is really shooting himself in the feet by refusing to leave, he's damaging his reputation as a man of honour at this point). If the campaign was based on a promise to prevent Brexit, that would probably satisfy enough people that a second referendum would not be likely.
But who knows, right now it looks just as plausible that the Monster Raving Loony party will sweep to victory.
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-uk-leaves-the-eu-36671629
Thursday, 30 June 2016
Tuesday, 28 June 2016
Best cake ever
I hate posting pictures of food but I make exceptions whenever they're outstandingly awesome. This observatory cake at today's seminar, celebrating someone's career, certainly qualifies.
Monday, 27 June 2016
Justice
"When has justice ever been as simple as a rule-book ?"
[I'm preserving this one mainly for the comments, although sadly the main response has been removed]
[I'm preserving this one mainly for the comments, although sadly the main response has been removed]
Abusing democracy
[This post did not get captured by the exporter tool for some reason so I did it manually. Unfortunately that means copy and pasting the comments by hand, so they appear in the main text rather than separately. I cut off the discussion here at the point where it ceased to add anything useful and became a bit uncivil.]
So many, many people are screaming, "PROTECT DEMOCRACY !!!!" as though it were a sacrosanct, inviolable, perfect system that must be preserved even if it means we all decided to throw ourselves into a volcano. Well, guess what, people sometimes make collectively stupid decisions. Happens in suicide cults all the time, and you don't see people clamouring to protect their "democratic rights". You don't let lunatics run the asylum. You don't vote on the value of pi. No sane person votes for self harm. No-one with any sense fails to change their mind when the lies and misinformation on which their choice was based are exposed for all to see. Screaming "we MUST jump into the volcano because votes !" makes no sense whatsoever. None.
Dan Weese
Democracy was once a synonym for anarchy. Kinda still is..
Tim Stoev
with the exponential growth of the amount of subsystems and their connection between each other each modern state goes closer to anarchy than any form of government..there is simply too much information to process and not enough tool to do it in a meaningful way
Brian Fitzgerald
In the realm of software development, there can be several "release candidates" which are each tested in turn to discover potentially disastrous inconsistencies. Eventually, one is deemed sufficiently stable to make it into distribution and deployment. Democracy might benefit from a similar scheme.
Dan Weese
+Brian Fitzgerald As in software, governments are seldom constituted for the benefit of the many but rather by and for the few. The many must bear the consequences of the decisions of those Elite Few. Nobody seems to learn from any of these Release Candidates: subsequent iterations seldom fix the fundamental issues but are mere reactions to the disastrous inconsistencies as they graduate from Potential to Actual.
This lack of foresight has kept me in business as a consultant for three decades and more. Occasionally, I feel like a fraud, for wading into the flaming, steaming wreckage and coming out again, to tell the Elite Few exactly what their own subordinates have been telling them for years - often weeping as they tell me. But that uncomfortable sensation subsides, as the Outside Consultant becomes the guy who shepherds the Cassandras through the rewrite.
Tim Stoev
+Dan Weese that was strong mate...cheers :DD
Mark Ruhland
+Rhys Taylor Pi has the value of 3.2... Supposedly in Indiana (US) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indiana_Pi_Bill. I about fell off my wheelchair as I read the article, laughing hysterically.
Winchell Chung
About this point in the discussion somebody has the bright idea that the solution is to restrict who can vote.
Things tend to explode into a flamewar then, as they argue over how to define who is excluded from the franchise.
Robert Heinlein had an essay a long time ago where he explores this, giving various solutions and uncovering their drawbacks. None of them really worked.
Thing like
[1] the voting machine gives you a random differential equation. Solve the equation and you can vote
[2] only women can vote
[3] since intelligent savy people are successful, a vote cost one troy ounce of gold. And you can buy as many votes as you can afford.
etc.
Dan Weese
+Winchell Chung Let's cut to the chase on this, avoiding just such flamewars by admitting the obvious:
We shall never be able to keep Stupid Persons from voting.
Populism isn't a particularly good scheme for governance. Populism has an unfortunate and entirely predictable tendency to devolve into mob rule. We do want representative government, but we also want our elected officials, especially judges, to have enough mandate to make necessary and painful - and yes, unpopular decisions.
There's another interesting set of essays on this subject. Most of them were written by James Madison, quite a few by Alexander Hamilton and John Jay. They are called The Federalist Papers. You may have heard of them.
Elie Thorne
+Winchell Chung Yes, that's one insidious reaction.
Obviously, many (if not most) people are clearly irresponsible in their way of voting, putting the entire democratic system in peril.
The obvious solution would be to forbid them to vote (but it is indeed impossible to come up with a better subset of voters than the current universal one). As this is an unworkable solution, it can be put forth again and again, to fix thing "this time for good", until only a small elite or one individual can vote.
But there is a more difficult, but potentially better solution: turn people into responsible voters.
This requires an efficient general education system and balanced investigation/analysis media, two very hard but not impossible endeavours.
This is, by the way, what Enlightenment philosophers considered mandatory for the democracy they envisioned.
Of course, the flamewar can now begin about how to implement those.
Rhys Taylor
My biggest fear in all of this is that large numbers of people are simply physiologically too stupid to make sensible decisions. We can do an awful lot about poor education, strong ideological beliefs, etc., but if it's because people's brains are just too small then we haven't got a hope in hell.
Now, I hope and believe that that is not the case. In this case we must improve the education system and take some fairly drastic action with regards to the media.
The education system needs a lot more investment. We still need to teach people basic facts, but with the omnipresence of the internet rote learning is becoming less important. We need to teach people how to think, to consider the larger context, the deeper underlying meanings and implications. And we've got to make learning more fun. This may mean using unconventional techniques seen as "dumbing down", so be it - I rather enjoy long, detailed books, but most people don't. A system that only works for people like me is not a good system ! Science is inherently an anarchic system of play and it should be seen as such, not the dry series of equations that it all too often becomes in the classroom.
Science classes should, wherever possible, encourage students to come to their own conclusions, ahead of teaching them what's already been established. This can be done using canned data where it isn't possible for them to get direct access to high-end facilities. Although some things will always need to be simplified, and not everything can be done by experiment, the priority should be getting people to think for themselves as much as possible. And they have to enjoy doing it, and the relevancy of it emphasised (if that means "because you can get rich doing this", then fine). That, I hope, will encourage them to be rational in all aspects of life, not just in science.
My thoughts on the humanities are well-known, so I will just state they need as much emphasis as the sciences. They are an area which require just as much in the way of reasoning and logic.
As to the media, something has gone badly wrong and I'm not sure how to fix it. I know the end state we need to achieve, but I have less idea about the route. Most British tabloids read like campaign leaflets - they are not in the least impartial, which should be a journalist's first duty. Their second duty should be in choosing what to publish, i.e. freedom of speech guarantees than you can say a great many things without being locked up, but that does not necessarily mean you get to come into people's homes and lecture them. Similarly saying something Bloody Stupid should not be a guarantee that it gets published in a major newspaper just because it's provocative or exciting; they ought to at least try to establish if it's true. They need to use far, far less prejudicial language when reporting, unless a very large OPINION PIECE label appears in great big letters.
Perhaps some sort of basic qualification should be necessary to be a journalist. But this will count for little unless we reform who can own media outlets and how many.
Mark Ruhland
+Rhys Taylor Hey, my asylum runs fairly well... But, then again, I run it. I don't do things outside my realm, though. I know my limitations;-D
Tim Stoev
+Rhys Taylor the more you think on the issues the more complicated it gets. At some point you will realize that one needs to start somewhere and hope to get it right, but this is pretty much what is happening right now. Nevertheless you look in the right direction.
Winchell Chung
+Rhys Taylor unfortunately here in the States there is such a strong "cult of ignorance" and anti-intellectualism that a person of suspicious mind suspects it is all part of a master plan.
The US conservatives got a rude shock with the advent of television, suddenly discovering that other places in the world were not like the sleepy little towns they lived and died in.
But it really didn't hit the fan until the 1960s with all those young people going to colleged and being corrupted with all that book larning and stuff.
Since then it would seem like education has been under a stealthy attack. And every despot knows that an uneducated population is easier to control. All you have to do is make them tired of listening to experts.
Dan Weese
+Winchell Chung The 'cult of ignorance' is very old. It's not even American. It's German. Populism lies at the heart of the Reformation. As America became a largely Protestant nation, the same ethos of the pious burgher rising by dint of hard labour, clean living and just enough education to read the Bible, use a sextant, a pair of calipers, and raise a barn roof - came to be the American rags-to-riches myth.
These people are not entirely ignorant. They are both literate and numerate. They just don't like anyone to question their assertions, any more than Cardinal Bellarmine was prepared to give Galileo a fair hearing on the basis of the evidence. As with Bellarmine in his day, today's conservatives want to present such notions as Evolution and modern cosmology as mere hypotheses.
Higher education was always the province of the elites until the post-WW2 GI Bill gave ordinary joes the opportunity to go to college. Today's Fox News crowd was once a gaggle of earnest young things who considered themselves quite progressive, doffing their uniforms and going to the state university, for free, too. Also pushing out little Baby Boomers in those ticky-tacky little two bedroom jobs paid for by generous GI Bill housing loans.
Now here's what happened: where college was a deserved reward for national service, university became a bolthole for those who did not wish to serve in the Vietnam War, including many in the Cult of Ignorance's own ranks. Donald Trump was one such draft dodger. Most modern Republicans have never worn a uniform, where a great many modern Democrats have.
Don't underestimate these conservatives - they're not conservatives as any political scientist might interpret that word. They are mere reactionaries, as were their forebears. Furthermore, they are reasonably cosmopolitan. If Fox News caters to them, it's just what the ur-Protestant peasant has always wanted, a strenuous Hell Fire Sermon about someone else's evils.
So many, many people are screaming, "PROTECT DEMOCRACY !!!!" as though it were a sacrosanct, inviolable, perfect system that must be preserved even if it means we all decided to throw ourselves into a volcano. Well, guess what, people sometimes make collectively stupid decisions. Happens in suicide cults all the time, and you don't see people clamouring to protect their "democratic rights". You don't let lunatics run the asylum. You don't vote on the value of pi. No sane person votes for self harm. No-one with any sense fails to change their mind when the lies and misinformation on which their choice was based are exposed for all to see. Screaming "we MUST jump into the volcano because votes !" makes no sense whatsoever. None.
Dan Weese
Democracy was once a synonym for anarchy. Kinda still is..
Tim Stoev
with the exponential growth of the amount of subsystems and their connection between each other each modern state goes closer to anarchy than any form of government..there is simply too much information to process and not enough tool to do it in a meaningful way
Brian Fitzgerald
In the realm of software development, there can be several "release candidates" which are each tested in turn to discover potentially disastrous inconsistencies. Eventually, one is deemed sufficiently stable to make it into distribution and deployment. Democracy might benefit from a similar scheme.
Dan Weese
+Brian Fitzgerald As in software, governments are seldom constituted for the benefit of the many but rather by and for the few. The many must bear the consequences of the decisions of those Elite Few. Nobody seems to learn from any of these Release Candidates: subsequent iterations seldom fix the fundamental issues but are mere reactions to the disastrous inconsistencies as they graduate from Potential to Actual.
This lack of foresight has kept me in business as a consultant for three decades and more. Occasionally, I feel like a fraud, for wading into the flaming, steaming wreckage and coming out again, to tell the Elite Few exactly what their own subordinates have been telling them for years - often weeping as they tell me. But that uncomfortable sensation subsides, as the Outside Consultant becomes the guy who shepherds the Cassandras through the rewrite.
Tim Stoev
+Dan Weese that was strong mate...cheers :DD
Mark Ruhland
+Rhys Taylor Pi has the value of 3.2... Supposedly in Indiana (US) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indiana_Pi_Bill. I about fell off my wheelchair as I read the article, laughing hysterically.
Winchell Chung
About this point in the discussion somebody has the bright idea that the solution is to restrict who can vote.
Things tend to explode into a flamewar then, as they argue over how to define who is excluded from the franchise.
Robert Heinlein had an essay a long time ago where he explores this, giving various solutions and uncovering their drawbacks. None of them really worked.
Thing like
[1] the voting machine gives you a random differential equation. Solve the equation and you can vote
[2] only women can vote
[3] since intelligent savy people are successful, a vote cost one troy ounce of gold. And you can buy as many votes as you can afford.
etc.
Dan Weese
+Winchell Chung Let's cut to the chase on this, avoiding just such flamewars by admitting the obvious:
We shall never be able to keep Stupid Persons from voting.
Populism isn't a particularly good scheme for governance. Populism has an unfortunate and entirely predictable tendency to devolve into mob rule. We do want representative government, but we also want our elected officials, especially judges, to have enough mandate to make necessary and painful - and yes, unpopular decisions.
There's another interesting set of essays on this subject. Most of them were written by James Madison, quite a few by Alexander Hamilton and John Jay. They are called The Federalist Papers. You may have heard of them.
Elie Thorne
+Winchell Chung Yes, that's one insidious reaction.
Obviously, many (if not most) people are clearly irresponsible in their way of voting, putting the entire democratic system in peril.
The obvious solution would be to forbid them to vote (but it is indeed impossible to come up with a better subset of voters than the current universal one). As this is an unworkable solution, it can be put forth again and again, to fix thing "this time for good", until only a small elite or one individual can vote.
But there is a more difficult, but potentially better solution: turn people into responsible voters.
This requires an efficient general education system and balanced investigation/analysis media, two very hard but not impossible endeavours.
This is, by the way, what Enlightenment philosophers considered mandatory for the democracy they envisioned.
Of course, the flamewar can now begin about how to implement those.
Rhys Taylor
My biggest fear in all of this is that large numbers of people are simply physiologically too stupid to make sensible decisions. We can do an awful lot about poor education, strong ideological beliefs, etc., but if it's because people's brains are just too small then we haven't got a hope in hell.
Now, I hope and believe that that is not the case. In this case we must improve the education system and take some fairly drastic action with regards to the media.
The education system needs a lot more investment. We still need to teach people basic facts, but with the omnipresence of the internet rote learning is becoming less important. We need to teach people how to think, to consider the larger context, the deeper underlying meanings and implications. And we've got to make learning more fun. This may mean using unconventional techniques seen as "dumbing down", so be it - I rather enjoy long, detailed books, but most people don't. A system that only works for people like me is not a good system ! Science is inherently an anarchic system of play and it should be seen as such, not the dry series of equations that it all too often becomes in the classroom.
Science classes should, wherever possible, encourage students to come to their own conclusions, ahead of teaching them what's already been established. This can be done using canned data where it isn't possible for them to get direct access to high-end facilities. Although some things will always need to be simplified, and not everything can be done by experiment, the priority should be getting people to think for themselves as much as possible. And they have to enjoy doing it, and the relevancy of it emphasised (if that means "because you can get rich doing this", then fine). That, I hope, will encourage them to be rational in all aspects of life, not just in science.
My thoughts on the humanities are well-known, so I will just state they need as much emphasis as the sciences. They are an area which require just as much in the way of reasoning and logic.
As to the media, something has gone badly wrong and I'm not sure how to fix it. I know the end state we need to achieve, but I have less idea about the route. Most British tabloids read like campaign leaflets - they are not in the least impartial, which should be a journalist's first duty. Their second duty should be in choosing what to publish, i.e. freedom of speech guarantees than you can say a great many things without being locked up, but that does not necessarily mean you get to come into people's homes and lecture them. Similarly saying something Bloody Stupid should not be a guarantee that it gets published in a major newspaper just because it's provocative or exciting; they ought to at least try to establish if it's true. They need to use far, far less prejudicial language when reporting, unless a very large OPINION PIECE label appears in great big letters.
Perhaps some sort of basic qualification should be necessary to be a journalist. But this will count for little unless we reform who can own media outlets and how many.
Mark Ruhland
+Rhys Taylor Hey, my asylum runs fairly well... But, then again, I run it. I don't do things outside my realm, though. I know my limitations;-D
Tim Stoev
+Rhys Taylor the more you think on the issues the more complicated it gets. At some point you will realize that one needs to start somewhere and hope to get it right, but this is pretty much what is happening right now. Nevertheless you look in the right direction.
Winchell Chung
+Rhys Taylor unfortunately here in the States there is such a strong "cult of ignorance" and anti-intellectualism that a person of suspicious mind suspects it is all part of a master plan.
The US conservatives got a rude shock with the advent of television, suddenly discovering that other places in the world were not like the sleepy little towns they lived and died in.
But it really didn't hit the fan until the 1960s with all those young people going to colleged and being corrupted with all that book larning and stuff.
Since then it would seem like education has been under a stealthy attack. And every despot knows that an uneducated population is easier to control. All you have to do is make them tired of listening to experts.
Dan Weese
+Winchell Chung The 'cult of ignorance' is very old. It's not even American. It's German. Populism lies at the heart of the Reformation. As America became a largely Protestant nation, the same ethos of the pious burgher rising by dint of hard labour, clean living and just enough education to read the Bible, use a sextant, a pair of calipers, and raise a barn roof - came to be the American rags-to-riches myth.
These people are not entirely ignorant. They are both literate and numerate. They just don't like anyone to question their assertions, any more than Cardinal Bellarmine was prepared to give Galileo a fair hearing on the basis of the evidence. As with Bellarmine in his day, today's conservatives want to present such notions as Evolution and modern cosmology as mere hypotheses.
Higher education was always the province of the elites until the post-WW2 GI Bill gave ordinary joes the opportunity to go to college. Today's Fox News crowd was once a gaggle of earnest young things who considered themselves quite progressive, doffing their uniforms and going to the state university, for free, too. Also pushing out little Baby Boomers in those ticky-tacky little two bedroom jobs paid for by generous GI Bill housing loans.
Now here's what happened: where college was a deserved reward for national service, university became a bolthole for those who did not wish to serve in the Vietnam War, including many in the Cult of Ignorance's own ranks. Donald Trump was one such draft dodger. Most modern Republicans have never worn a uniform, where a great many modern Democrats have.
Don't underestimate these conservatives - they're not conservatives as any political scientist might interpret that word. They are mere reactionaries, as were their forebears. Furthermore, they are reasonably cosmopolitan. If Fox News caters to them, it's just what the ur-Protestant peasant has always wanted, a strenuous Hell Fire Sermon about someone else's evils.
Sunday, 26 June 2016
You're not helping, Nicola
Scotland's First Minister Nicola Sturgeon has told the BBC that Holyrood could try to block the UK's exit from the EU. She was speaking following a referendum on Thursday which saw Britain vote by 52% to 48% to leave Europe. However, in Scotland the picture was different with 62% backing Remain and 38% wanting to go. SNP leader Ms Sturgeon said that "of course" she would ask MSPs to refuse to give their "legislative consent".
This wouldn't help. Scotland vetos Brexit => support for SNP surges => Scotland becomes independent => England and Wales exit. Thus, no change in the current situation.
Oh what a tangled web we weave...
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-36633244
This wouldn't help. Scotland vetos Brexit => support for SNP surges => Scotland becomes independent => England and Wales exit. Thus, no change in the current situation.
Oh what a tangled web we weave...
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-36633244
Irony, thy name is Leave voters
Irony level is off the charts.
[Let's also not forget Farage's statement that a 52:48 split would be grounds for a second referendum in the event of a Remain win. That a Leave win of equal magnitude is in strong contrast the undeniable "will of the people" says quite a lot about the lack of thought processes going on here.]
The petition for a second EU referendum with 3 million signatures was started by a leave voter last month worried the remain camp would win. William Oliver Healey, an English Democrat activist, claims it has been "hijacked" and has tried to distance himself from what has become the largest petition of its kind in history.
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/william-oliver-healey-referendum-petition_uk_576f8b28e4b0232d331e1b39
[Let's also not forget Farage's statement that a 52:48 split would be grounds for a second referendum in the event of a Remain win. That a Leave win of equal magnitude is in strong contrast the undeniable "will of the people" says quite a lot about the lack of thought processes going on here.]
The petition for a second EU referendum with 3 million signatures was started by a leave voter last month worried the remain camp would win. William Oliver Healey, an English Democrat activist, claims it has been "hijacked" and has tried to distance himself from what has become the largest petition of its kind in history.
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/william-oliver-healey-referendum-petition_uk_576f8b28e4b0232d331e1b39
Voting for pi
Goodwin wasn’t going to let something trivial like the proven mathematical impossibility of his task deter his efforts, though. He persevered, and in 1894 he even convinced the upstart journal American Mathematical Monthly to print the proof in which he “solved” the squaring-the-circle problem.... One of the odd side effects of Goodwin’s machinations was that the value of pi morphed into 3.2.
He didn’t just publish his faulty method in journals; he copyrighted it.... The state could avoid paying royalties if and only if the legislature would accept and adopt this “new mathematical truth” as state law. Goodwin convinced Representative Taylor I. Record to introduce House Bill 246, which outlined both this bargain and the basics of his method.
Professor C.A. Waldo of Purdue University was in Indianapolis while the pi hoopla was unfolding, and after watching part of the debate at the statehouse he was so thoroughly horrified that he decided to intervene. After receiving Waldo’s coaching, the Senate realized that the new bill was a very, very bad idea. Senator Orrin Hubbel moved that a vote on the bill be postponed indefinitely, and Goodwin’s new math died a quiet legislative death. The Indiana legislature hasn’t tried to rewrite the basic principles of math in all the years since.
Consider the possibility that Indiana had voted to set pi exactly equal to 3.2. This is objectively false. Would it then really be "undemocratic" to call for a second vote after the legislators were properly informed ?
http://mentalfloss.com/article/30214/new-math-time-indiana-tried-change-pi-32
He didn’t just publish his faulty method in journals; he copyrighted it.... The state could avoid paying royalties if and only if the legislature would accept and adopt this “new mathematical truth” as state law. Goodwin convinced Representative Taylor I. Record to introduce House Bill 246, which outlined both this bargain and the basics of his method.
Professor C.A. Waldo of Purdue University was in Indianapolis while the pi hoopla was unfolding, and after watching part of the debate at the statehouse he was so thoroughly horrified that he decided to intervene. After receiving Waldo’s coaching, the Senate realized that the new bill was a very, very bad idea. Senator Orrin Hubbel moved that a vote on the bill be postponed indefinitely, and Goodwin’s new math died a quiet legislative death. The Indiana legislature hasn’t tried to rewrite the basic principles of math in all the years since.
Consider the possibility that Indiana had voted to set pi exactly equal to 3.2. This is objectively false. Would it then really be "undemocratic" to call for a second vote after the legislators were properly informed ?
http://mentalfloss.com/article/30214/new-math-time-indiana-tried-change-pi-32
Friday, 24 June 2016
Corbyn has the right policies but is a useless leader
I like Corbyn. I agree with probably 90% or more of his policies. But as a leader he is useless.
Two Labour MPs have submitted a motion of no confidence in their leader Jeremy Corbyn for failing to give party voters a clear message on the EU referendum. Dame Margaret Hodge and Ann Coffey confirmed the move in a letter to the Parliamentary Labour Party chairman. The motion has no formal constitutional force but calls for a discussion at their next PLP meeting on Monday.
Asked if he will resign, Mr Corbyn, who campaigned on the losing Remain side, said: "No, I'm carrying on.
"I'm making the case for unity, I'm making the case of what Labour can offer to Britain, of decent housing for people, of good secure jobs for people, of trade with Europe and of course with other parts of the world. Because if we don't get the trade issue right, we've got a real problem in this country," he told Channel 4 News.
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-36621777
Two Labour MPs have submitted a motion of no confidence in their leader Jeremy Corbyn for failing to give party voters a clear message on the EU referendum. Dame Margaret Hodge and Ann Coffey confirmed the move in a letter to the Parliamentary Labour Party chairman. The motion has no formal constitutional force but calls for a discussion at their next PLP meeting on Monday.
Asked if he will resign, Mr Corbyn, who campaigned on the losing Remain side, said: "No, I'm carrying on.
"I'm making the case for unity, I'm making the case of what Labour can offer to Britain, of decent housing for people, of good secure jobs for people, of trade with Europe and of course with other parts of the world. Because if we don't get the trade issue right, we've got a real problem in this country," he told Channel 4 News.
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-36621777
Fact-checking Brexit
I'll have more to say on this in the not-too-distant future, but this is the real danger of allowing a cult of ignorance, anti-science and anti-expertise to flourish. If you start saying that facts aren't worth a damn in one area, then they quickly aren't worth a damn at all. Yes, Creationism may be fine by itself, and denying the existence of dark matter doesn't make you an evil person. But if you allow bullshit to replace reality in once instance, there's nothing holding back the bullshit everywhere else.
At every single turn, I found that the Leave campaign’s arguments were founded on lies. Sorry, it’s as simple as that. I wish it wasn’t. They lie about how much money we spend on the EU. I’d love to say “they’re misinformed”, or “they exaggerate”, but they don’t. They lie. Outright.
They lie about the business case for Leave. I still have found absolutely no support whatsoever for the figures that are confidently quoted here. They lie about the state of democracy in the EU. The more I investigate the EU, the more I find out it’s fairer and better set up than the UK’s government. Just today I discovered that the European Commission’s role in legislation is actually far more balanced than I thought.
Remain’s campaign has been criticised for being dull, being negative, and being led by people who are thoroughly disliked. All of those claims are entirely reasonable. Personally I intensely dislike both Cameron and Osborne. I’m about as much of a fan of the current UK government as I am of bowel cancer. But every claim of theirs I’ve checked — even the ones that had pro-Remain friends shouting about how over the top and ridiculous they were has turned out to be more or less sound.
https://medium.com/im-trying-to-fact-check-brexit/fact-checking-brexit-the-conclusion-c1f56ba4cb70#.uw6uhe3s2
At every single turn, I found that the Leave campaign’s arguments were founded on lies. Sorry, it’s as simple as that. I wish it wasn’t. They lie about how much money we spend on the EU. I’d love to say “they’re misinformed”, or “they exaggerate”, but they don’t. They lie. Outright.
They lie about the business case for Leave. I still have found absolutely no support whatsoever for the figures that are confidently quoted here. They lie about the state of democracy in the EU. The more I investigate the EU, the more I find out it’s fairer and better set up than the UK’s government. Just today I discovered that the European Commission’s role in legislation is actually far more balanced than I thought.
Remain’s campaign has been criticised for being dull, being negative, and being led by people who are thoroughly disliked. All of those claims are entirely reasonable. Personally I intensely dislike both Cameron and Osborne. I’m about as much of a fan of the current UK government as I am of bowel cancer. But every claim of theirs I’ve checked — even the ones that had pro-Remain friends shouting about how over the top and ridiculous they were has turned out to be more or less sound.
https://medium.com/im-trying-to-fact-check-brexit/fact-checking-brexit-the-conclusion-c1f56ba4cb70#.uw6uhe3s2
The loneliest fish
A tiny species of fish can claim some of the most unenviable of all records. The so-called Devils hole pupfish survives within one of the driest places in the world, in the heart of the Mojave desert in the US. Each fish is less than one inch-long (2.5cm), and perhaps fewer than 50 individuals survive.
Even more remarkably, every member of this species has existed in the wild, since they first appeared thousands of years ago, within an area no bigger than the living room in your house. Which makes the Devils hole pupfish perhaps the rarest of all fish, the world’s loneliest species, and the most isolated animal species on Earth.
[This came out immediately after the Brexit referendum, because that's exactly how the BBC rolls.]
http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20160622-the-worlds-loneliest-species
Even more remarkably, every member of this species has existed in the wild, since they first appeared thousands of years ago, within an area no bigger than the living room in your house. Which makes the Devils hole pupfish perhaps the rarest of all fish, the world’s loneliest species, and the most isolated animal species on Earth.
[This came out immediately after the Brexit referendum, because that's exactly how the BBC rolls.]
http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20160622-the-worlds-loneliest-species
Do owls exist ?
As a warning against the follies of voters and the illegitimacy of non-binding referenda, I ran a poll on Google Plus. Here are the final results.
My apologies
It's not over yet, nonetheless I would like to apologise on behalf of my country. It looks very much as though we've done - or at the very least come close to doing - something really, incredibly stupid. Absolutely every credible figure and country in the world could see this, but apparently we can't.
I honestly do not understand this result at all. I mean, I can understand why people vote Tory, even though I personally would rather be punched in the mouth than ever do such a thing. But who is it who goes about their daily life genuinely thinking that they're suffering in any way because of the E.U. ? Why ? How does anyone even care so much ? Most of the time no-one even bothers voting for the MEPs. Even Wales voted for Leave, which just boggles the mind.
It feels like all the progress we've made over the last 50 years has counted for nothing. The xenophobic bigotry of Nigel Farage has won the day. Oh, great job team. Slow clap. This isn't going to end well.
I honestly do not understand this result at all. I mean, I can understand why people vote Tory, even though I personally would rather be punched in the mouth than ever do such a thing. But who is it who goes about their daily life genuinely thinking that they're suffering in any way because of the E.U. ? Why ? How does anyone even care so much ? Most of the time no-one even bothers voting for the MEPs. Even Wales voted for Leave, which just boggles the mind.
It feels like all the progress we've made over the last 50 years has counted for nothing. The xenophobic bigotry of Nigel Farage has won the day. Oh, great job team. Slow clap. This isn't going to end well.
Thursday, 23 June 2016
Gun control : we can't agree on the simplest things
.... how 'bout y'all just hold a referendum.... ?
(runs and hides under a huge mountain of pillows, puts fingers in ears and screams LA LA LA LA LA !)
Depending on one's perspective, the sit-in was either a shameless publicity stunt in advance of a dangerous piece of legislation or the purest expression of democracy and civil disobedience since the 1960s. But as Democrats chanted, waved signs and sang in protest, there was no debating it was a historic break with congressional traditions that has little precedent in modern times.
The display seems unlikely to alter the dynamic in a House dominated by conservatives overwhelmingly opposed to new gun regulations. If anything, after a night of sniping and rancour across the partisan divide, the two sides may be even more deeply entrenched.
Republicans view the use of the terrorist watch list to prevent firearm purchases as giving the government the power to suspend due process with next to no judicial oversight. Democrats counter that it is a common-sense first step towards addressing rampant gun violence. Both see their position as guided by principles to be defended to the end, a prospect that makes this dispute likely to be settled only at the ballot box in November.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-36598736
(runs and hides under a huge mountain of pillows, puts fingers in ears and screams LA LA LA LA LA !)
Depending on one's perspective, the sit-in was either a shameless publicity stunt in advance of a dangerous piece of legislation or the purest expression of democracy and civil disobedience since the 1960s. But as Democrats chanted, waved signs and sang in protest, there was no debating it was a historic break with congressional traditions that has little precedent in modern times.
The display seems unlikely to alter the dynamic in a House dominated by conservatives overwhelmingly opposed to new gun regulations. If anything, after a night of sniping and rancour across the partisan divide, the two sides may be even more deeply entrenched.
Republicans view the use of the terrorist watch list to prevent firearm purchases as giving the government the power to suspend due process with next to no judicial oversight. Democrats counter that it is a common-sense first step towards addressing rampant gun violence. Both see their position as guided by principles to be defended to the end, a prospect that makes this dispute likely to be settled only at the ballot box in November.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-36598736
Wednesday, 22 June 2016
Almost time to vote
Mercifully, this bitter campaign is almost over. I see no problems with the E.U. that would be helped by us leaving as opposed to staying in and at least trying to fix them, just as we don't scrap Parliament when it does something wrong.
Mind you, we could all do ourselves a massive favour and actually vote at the next European Parliament elections. That way we might get people in charge who would try and get something done and make things better, rather than our current bunch of UKIP MEPs who think the E.U. is fundamentally flawed and decide to make personal insults to its members instead of trying to make the system work. Of course the system is flawed if you vote in MEPs who hate the system !
And I have a confession to make... I didn't vote at the last EP election. I really wish I had, because the demonstrably xenophobic and racist (http://astrorhysy.blogspot.cz/2015/03/yes-ukip-you-are-being-racist.html) policies of UKIP are an anathema to everything I believe in. The problem is that Europe, most of the time, just ticks along quietly not doing anything that I ever notice. Its benefits - like freedom of movement, which has allowed me to have the job I have now - go by quietly unsung, while its flaws are loudly trumpeted as the sign of the apocalypse.
I have yet to see a single credible argument in favour of Brexit. Those who want us out routinely champion the benefits of the E.U. but think we'd get the same benefits outside. Well, perhaps we would. But at the absolute least we'd have to re-negotiate all of them, and that would take years. What's the point ? Why not just stay in and enjoy the benefits we've worked for ?
Mind you, we could all do ourselves a massive favour and actually vote at the next European Parliament elections. That way we might get people in charge who would try and get something done and make things better, rather than our current bunch of UKIP MEPs who think the E.U. is fundamentally flawed and decide to make personal insults to its members instead of trying to make the system work. Of course the system is flawed if you vote in MEPs who hate the system !
And I have a confession to make... I didn't vote at the last EP election. I really wish I had, because the demonstrably xenophobic and racist (http://astrorhysy.blogspot.cz/2015/03/yes-ukip-you-are-being-racist.html) policies of UKIP are an anathema to everything I believe in. The problem is that Europe, most of the time, just ticks along quietly not doing anything that I ever notice. Its benefits - like freedom of movement, which has allowed me to have the job I have now - go by quietly unsung, while its flaws are loudly trumpeted as the sign of the apocalypse.
I have yet to see a single credible argument in favour of Brexit. Those who want us out routinely champion the benefits of the E.U. but think we'd get the same benefits outside. Well, perhaps we would. But at the absolute least we'd have to re-negotiate all of them, and that would take years. What's the point ? Why not just stay in and enjoy the benefits we've worked for ?
Tuesday, 21 June 2016
Re-usable rockets are getting real
NASA does great things when they're allowed to get on with them. The trouble is they're constantly subject to the worst sort of government interference that capitalists rightly object to. No sort of Haldane Principle (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haldane_principle) appears to be enforced. If it was, perhaps the space age would have worked out differently.
Then again, space exploration is neither about pure science nor pure politics nor pure adventuring. It's a strange hybrid of all of these, which political systems are ill-equipped to handle. This is also true in Europe, where despite a run of 72 successful Ariane 5 launches, ESA still does nothing more than make occasional, pathetic squeaks about developing a human capsule, or worse, insists that it doesn't have a reliable launcher.
On the other hand the private institutions are currently relatively free to do whatever they wish, and their founders grew up fully expecting manned space exploration to be routine. They've been allowed much greater freedom to innovate than the government agencies and no-one is changing their mandate every five years. True, at the end of the day they're seeking profit just like any other private company... but they're also rather more philanthropic and forward-thinking than many other companies. This model has been rather successful in the past (https://www.jrf.org.uk/).
Though it's worth remembering that SpaceX would not be where they are today without NASA as their principle contractor. They've effectively been given government money for a government project without nearly as many of the government rules as NASA has to follow. This model appears to be delivering rich rewards thus far, and since rockets are damnably expensive to start with, even a profit-motivated company cannot help but get things cheaper (unlike, for example, the pharmaceutical industry).
Eventually though, we're going to get large numbers of people in space. At that point some form of government oversight is likely to be required. Corporations are currently great for space innovation, but it's hard to see them being so successful at regulating people's lives.
Originally shared by Kevin C
http://arstechnica.com/science/2016/06/some-real-talk-about-the-future-of-rockets/
Then again, space exploration is neither about pure science nor pure politics nor pure adventuring. It's a strange hybrid of all of these, which political systems are ill-equipped to handle. This is also true in Europe, where despite a run of 72 successful Ariane 5 launches, ESA still does nothing more than make occasional, pathetic squeaks about developing a human capsule, or worse, insists that it doesn't have a reliable launcher.
On the other hand the private institutions are currently relatively free to do whatever they wish, and their founders grew up fully expecting manned space exploration to be routine. They've been allowed much greater freedom to innovate than the government agencies and no-one is changing their mandate every five years. True, at the end of the day they're seeking profit just like any other private company... but they're also rather more philanthropic and forward-thinking than many other companies. This model has been rather successful in the past (https://www.jrf.org.uk/).
Though it's worth remembering that SpaceX would not be where they are today without NASA as their principle contractor. They've effectively been given government money for a government project without nearly as many of the government rules as NASA has to follow. This model appears to be delivering rich rewards thus far, and since rockets are damnably expensive to start with, even a profit-motivated company cannot help but get things cheaper (unlike, for example, the pharmaceutical industry).
Eventually though, we're going to get large numbers of people in space. At that point some form of government oversight is likely to be required. Corporations are currently great for space innovation, but it's hard to see them being so successful at regulating people's lives.
Originally shared by Kevin C
http://arstechnica.com/science/2016/06/some-real-talk-about-the-future-of-rockets/
Monday, 20 June 2016
Behold the Statolaunch !
I never heard of this before.
With a gargantuan wingspan of 385 feet (117 m) and six engines, the plane is taking a new approach in the private space race, by launching satellites and spacecraft into orbit from high altitude. The advantage of the approach will be the ability to position the plane so satellites can be directly delivered into very precise orbits and do so quickly, without launch range scheduling issues and weather-related delays, Chuck Beames, who oversees Allen's space ventures, said.
Initially, the system is intended to deliver satellites weighing up to about 13,500lbs (6,124 kg) into orbits between 112 miles and 1,243 miles (180 km and 2000 km) above Earth.
Instead of a satellite, the Stratolaunch airplane could launch a Dream Chaser spaceship. This could act as a mini-shuttle to reach low Earth orbit destinations and return astronauts or payloads to runway within 24 hours.
I know the Guardian has a reputation for spelling mistakes, but honestly this Daily Fascist article is chock full of 'em. And it has this hugely annoyingfeature bug where if you copy and paste text it somehow adds into the clipboard, "read more at dailmailonline blah blah blah weblink", which is extremely irritating.
Originally shared by George Virginia
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3649882/Paul-Allens-space-company-nears-debut-worlds-biggest-plane.html
With a gargantuan wingspan of 385 feet (117 m) and six engines, the plane is taking a new approach in the private space race, by launching satellites and spacecraft into orbit from high altitude. The advantage of the approach will be the ability to position the plane so satellites can be directly delivered into very precise orbits and do so quickly, without launch range scheduling issues and weather-related delays, Chuck Beames, who oversees Allen's space ventures, said.
Initially, the system is intended to deliver satellites weighing up to about 13,500lbs (6,124 kg) into orbits between 112 miles and 1,243 miles (180 km and 2000 km) above Earth.
Instead of a satellite, the Stratolaunch airplane could launch a Dream Chaser spaceship. This could act as a mini-shuttle to reach low Earth orbit destinations and return astronauts or payloads to runway within 24 hours.
I know the Guardian has a reputation for spelling mistakes, but honestly this Daily Fascist article is chock full of 'em. And it has this hugely annoying
Originally shared by George Virginia
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3649882/Paul-Allens-space-company-nears-debut-worlds-biggest-plane.html
Sunday, 19 June 2016
Most Facebook users reshare without reading more than the headline
Automatically makes me feel guilty about sharing it even though I did read it first.
But most interesting, for our purposes, is this habit of sharing without clicking — a habit that, when you think about it, explains so much of the oft-demoralizing cesspool that is internet culture. Among the many phenomena we'd tentatively attribute, in large part, to the trend: the rise of sharebait (nee clickbait) and the general BuzzFeedification of traditional media; the internet hoax-industrial complex, which only seems to be growing stronger; and the utter lack of intelligent online discourse around any remotely complicated, controversial topic.
This was, incidentally, the Science Post's inspiration for its recent "lorem ipsum" gag on the subject. The editor of the site, who writes anonymously, told The Washington Post that he had tired of seeing the sheer number of misunderstood, misrepresented or straight-up fictitious bunk that people gleefully signal-boost across the internet. The Science Post is run by professors and doctors, he explained: It pains them to see bad information spread this way.
Which is precisely why clickbaity science headlines are so damaging.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2016/06/16/six-in-10-of-you-will-share-this-link-without-reading-it-according-to-a-new-and-depressing-study/?utm_term=.010b1f70304a
But most interesting, for our purposes, is this habit of sharing without clicking — a habit that, when you think about it, explains so much of the oft-demoralizing cesspool that is internet culture. Among the many phenomena we'd tentatively attribute, in large part, to the trend: the rise of sharebait (nee clickbait) and the general BuzzFeedification of traditional media; the internet hoax-industrial complex, which only seems to be growing stronger; and the utter lack of intelligent online discourse around any remotely complicated, controversial topic.
This was, incidentally, the Science Post's inspiration for its recent "lorem ipsum" gag on the subject. The editor of the site, who writes anonymously, told The Washington Post that he had tired of seeing the sheer number of misunderstood, misrepresented or straight-up fictitious bunk that people gleefully signal-boost across the internet. The Science Post is run by professors and doctors, he explained: It pains them to see bad information spread this way.
Which is precisely why clickbaity science headlines are so damaging.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2016/06/16/six-in-10-of-you-will-share-this-link-without-reading-it-according-to-a-new-and-depressing-study/?utm_term=.010b1f70304a
Paying people not to be criminals
Interesting implications for a UBI.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-36552930
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-36552930
Friday, 17 June 2016
Spiders, inspiring kinky sex and Celtic monuments
If they did not have to mate with females, male spiders would certainly avoid them altogether. Females are larger, more aggressive, and often eat their suitors before or after sex. Male nursery web spiders have a more legs-on approach: they tie the female down with shackles of silk. These "bridal veils" have long been suspected to help males avoid becoming a sexual dessert. But this idea was not empirically tested until February 2016.
In 2013, photos of silken structures comprising a vertical pillar surrounded by an intricate fence of white were uploaded to Reddit and Facebook. They went viral, passed around the public and sent to expert entomologists. After three days, a tiny spider popped out. Silkhenge is a spider egg sac. The species remains a mystery, however.
And my personal favourite :
By crawling backwards along this dragline, net spiders – colloquially known as slingshot spiders – convert their web into an elastic cone, with themselves at the centre. And there they wait, until they detect a nearby fly on the wing. "For a long time, people thought that if something is vibrating nearby they would activate the slingshot," says Torres. "But most studies have now indicated that they wait for something to fly into the web." When this happens, the spider lets go of the coiled up dragline, firing itself – and the web – at high speeds into its prey.
http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20160617-forget-webs-spiders-also-make-slingshots-and-silkhenges
In 2013, photos of silken structures comprising a vertical pillar surrounded by an intricate fence of white were uploaded to Reddit and Facebook. They went viral, passed around the public and sent to expert entomologists. After three days, a tiny spider popped out. Silkhenge is a spider egg sac. The species remains a mystery, however.
And my personal favourite :
By crawling backwards along this dragline, net spiders – colloquially known as slingshot spiders – convert their web into an elastic cone, with themselves at the centre. And there they wait, until they detect a nearby fly on the wing. "For a long time, people thought that if something is vibrating nearby they would activate the slingshot," says Torres. "But most studies have now indicated that they wait for something to fly into the web." When this happens, the spider lets go of the coiled up dragline, firing itself – and the web – at high speeds into its prey.
http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20160617-forget-webs-spiders-also-make-slingshots-and-silkhenges
Wednesday, 15 June 2016
It's always nice to see idiots shoot themselves in the foot
[The thing about racists is, they're inherently stupid people. Here we witness Britain First using a picture of Czechoslovakian RAF pilots to suggest that we'd be better off without the support of our European friends.]
And there's a really bad-ass monument for them in the center of Prague.
https://beyondprague.files.wordpress.com/2014/06/img_3124.jpg
Originally shared by Ray Radlein
http://indy100.independent.co.uk/article/britain-first-just-used-a-picture-of-czechslovakian-wwii-pilots-to-tell-people-to-leave-the-eu--W1xen5R1rEZ
And there's a really bad-ass monument for them in the center of Prague.
https://beyondprague.files.wordpress.com/2014/06/img_3124.jpg
Originally shared by Ray Radlein
http://indy100.independent.co.uk/article/britain-first-just-used-a-picture-of-czechslovakian-wwii-pilots-to-tell-people-to-leave-the-eu--W1xen5R1rEZ
Tuesday, 14 June 2016
Electric microbes at the bottom of the sea
At the bottom of the ocean lie vast reserves of methane, released by microbes feeding on the remains of dead algae and animals as they sink down from the surface. If the methane escaped into the atmosphere the gas would exacerbate global warming, but luckily a consortium of microbes seem to keep it in check.
The microscope revealed thin wire-like structures protruding from the bacterial cells. Although only a few nanometres wide, the wires were several micrometres long, which is much longer than the cells themselves. It seems that the bacteria use these nanowires to hook up with the archaea.
The archaea feed on electrons from methane, oxidising the gas to generate carbonate. They then pass the electrons on to their partner bacteria along the nanowires, which act like power cables. Finally the bacteria deposit the electrons onto sulphate, producing energy that the cell can use in the process.
In a more extreme version of this process, some bacteria can link up to form long "cables". Cable bacteria live on sea floors and river beds where there is little oxygen. Without oxygen, they have nowhere to donate their electrons. To cope with this the cable bacteria, which belong to the family Desulfobulbaceae, form chains, one cell in diameter, extending thousands of cells and distances of several centimetres – a huge distance for a bacterium only 3 or 4 micrometres long – until they finally reach a habitat with oxygen.
http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20160613-there-are-microbes-that-eat-and-poo-nothing-but-electricity
The microscope revealed thin wire-like structures protruding from the bacterial cells. Although only a few nanometres wide, the wires were several micrometres long, which is much longer than the cells themselves. It seems that the bacteria use these nanowires to hook up with the archaea.
The archaea feed on electrons from methane, oxidising the gas to generate carbonate. They then pass the electrons on to their partner bacteria along the nanowires, which act like power cables. Finally the bacteria deposit the electrons onto sulphate, producing energy that the cell can use in the process.
In a more extreme version of this process, some bacteria can link up to form long "cables". Cable bacteria live on sea floors and river beds where there is little oxygen. Without oxygen, they have nowhere to donate their electrons. To cope with this the cable bacteria, which belong to the family Desulfobulbaceae, form chains, one cell in diameter, extending thousands of cells and distances of several centimetres – a huge distance for a bacterium only 3 or 4 micrometres long – until they finally reach a habitat with oxygen.
http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20160613-there-are-microbes-that-eat-and-poo-nothing-but-electricity
Monday, 13 June 2016
Post-satire era
From ClickHole :
http://www.clickhole.com/article/6-convoluted-ways-thinking-about-orlando-shooting--4519
1. Although the gunman specifically attacked a gay nightclub during Pride Month, this is really just an attack on the American way of life of going out on the weekends: There’s no need to defend the rights of gay people when you could instead just talk about how we’re not going to be scared away from fun nightlife activities. You could even consider using a completely beside-the-point hashtag like #NoToFearYesToWeekends when you post your labyrinthine arguments online.
And Sky "News" presenters actually freakin' used this argument as though it wasn't batshit crazy.
God almighty.
Via Evan Brody.
Originally shared by A.V. Flox
Watch gay erasure in real time, as SkyNews host Mark Longhurst repeatedly interrupts gay Guardian columnist Owen Jones, saying the #Orlando mass-shooting was an attack against "human beings trying to enjoy themselves, whatever their sexuality."
Broadcaster Julia Hartley-Brewer, who was also present, accused Jones of "taking ownership" of the tragedy, as though his pointing out that the targets of the attack were LGBTQ somehow denied anyone's right to grieve.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/owen-jones-walks-off-sky-news-after-presenters-deflect-homophobia-behind-orlando-shooting-a7078891.html
http://www.clickhole.com/article/6-convoluted-ways-thinking-about-orlando-shooting--4519
1. Although the gunman specifically attacked a gay nightclub during Pride Month, this is really just an attack on the American way of life of going out on the weekends: There’s no need to defend the rights of gay people when you could instead just talk about how we’re not going to be scared away from fun nightlife activities. You could even consider using a completely beside-the-point hashtag like #NoToFearYesToWeekends when you post your labyrinthine arguments online.
And Sky "News" presenters actually freakin' used this argument as though it wasn't batshit crazy.
God almighty.
Via Evan Brody.
Originally shared by A.V. Flox
Watch gay erasure in real time, as SkyNews host Mark Longhurst repeatedly interrupts gay Guardian columnist Owen Jones, saying the #Orlando mass-shooting was an attack against "human beings trying to enjoy themselves, whatever their sexuality."
Broadcaster Julia Hartley-Brewer, who was also present, accused Jones of "taking ownership" of the tragedy, as though his pointing out that the targets of the attack were LGBTQ somehow denied anyone's right to grieve.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/owen-jones-walks-off-sky-news-after-presenters-deflect-homophobia-behind-orlando-shooting-a7078891.html
The full story of Oppenheimer's most famous quote
Thought-provoking stuff via Vladimir Pecha.
What was going through J. Robert Oppenheimer’s head when he saw the great fireball of the Trinity test looming above him? According to his brother, Frank, he only said, “it worked.” But most people know a more poetic account, one in which Oppenheimer says (or at least thinks) the following famous lines: "Now I am become death, the destroyer of worlds."
The story of the Gita is that of Arjuna, a human prince who has been summoned to a war between princely cousins. Arjuna doesn’t want to fight — not because he lacks courage, or skill, but because it is a war of succession, so his enemies are his own cousins, his friends, his teachers. The text of the Gita is mostly Krishna telling Arjuna why Arjuna must go to war, even if Arjuna does not want to do it.
So let’s step back and ask who Oppenheimer is meant to be in this situation. Oppenheimer is not Krishna/Vishnu, not the terrible god, not the “destroyer of worlds” — he is Arjuna, the human prince! He is the one who didn’t really want to kill his brothers, his fellow people. But he has been enjoined to battle by something bigger than himself — physics, fission, the atomic bomb, World War II, what have you — and only at the moment when it truly reveals its nature, the Trinity test, does he fully see why he, a man who hates war, is compelled to battle. It is the bomb that is here for destruction. Oppenheimer is merely the man who is witnessing it.
http://blog.nuclearsecrecy.com/2014/05/23/oppenheimer-gita
What was going through J. Robert Oppenheimer’s head when he saw the great fireball of the Trinity test looming above him? According to his brother, Frank, he only said, “it worked.” But most people know a more poetic account, one in which Oppenheimer says (or at least thinks) the following famous lines: "Now I am become death, the destroyer of worlds."
The story of the Gita is that of Arjuna, a human prince who has been summoned to a war between princely cousins. Arjuna doesn’t want to fight — not because he lacks courage, or skill, but because it is a war of succession, so his enemies are his own cousins, his friends, his teachers. The text of the Gita is mostly Krishna telling Arjuna why Arjuna must go to war, even if Arjuna does not want to do it.
So let’s step back and ask who Oppenheimer is meant to be in this situation. Oppenheimer is not Krishna/Vishnu, not the terrible god, not the “destroyer of worlds” — he is Arjuna, the human prince! He is the one who didn’t really want to kill his brothers, his fellow people. But he has been enjoined to battle by something bigger than himself — physics, fission, the atomic bomb, World War II, what have you — and only at the moment when it truly reveals its nature, the Trinity test, does he fully see why he, a man who hates war, is compelled to battle. It is the bomb that is here for destruction. Oppenheimer is merely the man who is witnessing it.
http://blog.nuclearsecrecy.com/2014/05/23/oppenheimer-gita
Sunday, 12 June 2016
It's good to be periodically reminded of how stupid can be
[These days I try not to read stuff like this because literally all it does is anger up the blood. Nevertheless, sometimes it's worth being reminded that the world is indeed chock-full of idiots and angry people, and we ignore this at our peril.]
"I've gotten tired of girls like you who shamelessly attempt to pry into my career and really the kind of money/earning potential I have," he then messaged. "I put my job in my profile. I now use it as a vetting process to determine the truly shameless and unintelligent ones on here." He later added: "I don't fall victim... to this neo-liberal, Beyonce, feminist cancer which plagues society."
Ah yes, Beyonce : undoubtedly the fifth horseperson of the apocalypse, hell-bent on crushing us all beneath her mighty feet in a storm of uninteresting music. Will she never desist ??? Or will this terrible movement of freedom and equality bring forth demons from the hell-pit to devour the world in a carnal orgy of liberal hoity-toity fannying about ?*
*https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=syPlnB9IQQ4
http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/article/36488867/bumble-dating-app-blocks-and-shames-small-minded-misogynist
"I've gotten tired of girls like you who shamelessly attempt to pry into my career and really the kind of money/earning potential I have," he then messaged. "I put my job in my profile. I now use it as a vetting process to determine the truly shameless and unintelligent ones on here." He later added: "I don't fall victim... to this neo-liberal, Beyonce, feminist cancer which plagues society."
Ah yes, Beyonce : undoubtedly the fifth horseperson of the apocalypse, hell-bent on crushing us all beneath her mighty feet in a storm of uninteresting music. Will she never desist ??? Or will this terrible movement of freedom and equality bring forth demons from the hell-pit to devour the world in a carnal orgy of liberal hoity-toity fannying about ?*
*https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=syPlnB9IQQ4
http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/article/36488867/bumble-dating-app-blocks-and-shames-small-minded-misogynist
Friday, 10 June 2016
Cold blooded goats
Hibernation is the obvious exception. But there are also a very few cases where mammals are just not very good at generating internal heat :
Respect also to those who gave a shout out to the naked mole rat. "Naked mole rats are interesting from a thermoregulatory standpoint, because they don't control their body temperature very well," says Boyles. This does not mean they are failed mammals. Rather, it is simply that they spend all their lives in underground tunnels where the temperature is fairly predictable, usually somewhere between 29 and 32C."They don't have to spend the energy on thermoregulation," says Boyles. "It's the perfect example of an evolutionary adaptation, not a physiological limitation."
Finally, Jennifer Jones highlighted an extinct species of goat called Myotragus balearicus. It has been claimed that this goat was properly ectothermic: that is, entirely dependent on heat from its environment. The evidence is indirect. "The bone microstructure indicates that Myotragus grew unlike any other mammal but similar to crocodiles at slow and flexible rates," wrote researchers in 2009. This is suggestive of ectothermy, but it is a long way short of proof... It is an intriguing idea. However, we could not find a follow-up to the 2009 study, so for now it is not clear if M. balearicus was truly ectothermic.
http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20160609-time-to-bust-a-myth-not-all-mammals-are-warm-blooded
Respect also to those who gave a shout out to the naked mole rat. "Naked mole rats are interesting from a thermoregulatory standpoint, because they don't control their body temperature very well," says Boyles. This does not mean they are failed mammals. Rather, it is simply that they spend all their lives in underground tunnels where the temperature is fairly predictable, usually somewhere between 29 and 32C."They don't have to spend the energy on thermoregulation," says Boyles. "It's the perfect example of an evolutionary adaptation, not a physiological limitation."
Finally, Jennifer Jones highlighted an extinct species of goat called Myotragus balearicus. It has been claimed that this goat was properly ectothermic: that is, entirely dependent on heat from its environment. The evidence is indirect. "The bone microstructure indicates that Myotragus grew unlike any other mammal but similar to crocodiles at slow and flexible rates," wrote researchers in 2009. This is suggestive of ectothermy, but it is a long way short of proof... It is an intriguing idea. However, we could not find a follow-up to the 2009 study, so for now it is not clear if M. balearicus was truly ectothermic.
http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20160609-time-to-bust-a-myth-not-all-mammals-are-warm-blooded
Kangroo + pig = ?
What do you get if you cross a kangaroo with a pig ? A non-viable embryo, hopefully.
A pig and kangaroo kept in a captivity in northern Australia appear to have formed a rather close physical bond. Animal behaviour scientists say the conduct of the pair, kept at the Aileron Roadhouse in the Northern Territory, is rare and surprising.
The owner of the roadhouse, Greg Dick, told the BBC that the animals spent a lot of time together and had "been in love for a while". Experts say the "aberrant" behaviour developed due to years in captivity. Mr Dick said he had seen the kangaroo sleeping with, cuddling and "carrying on too busy" with the female pig, named Apples.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-36486468
A pig and kangaroo kept in a captivity in northern Australia appear to have formed a rather close physical bond. Animal behaviour scientists say the conduct of the pair, kept at the Aileron Roadhouse in the Northern Territory, is rare and surprising.
The owner of the roadhouse, Greg Dick, told the BBC that the animals spent a lot of time together and had "been in love for a while". Experts say the "aberrant" behaviour developed due to years in captivity. Mr Dick said he had seen the kangaroo sleeping with, cuddling and "carrying on too busy" with the female pig, named Apples.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-36486468
The Armenian Arecibo
The Armenian Arecibo
The last time I went image hunting for this I could only find a few blurry postage-stamp images. The ROT-54/2.6 probably needs a better name for social media appeal (though it does also answer to Herouni Mirror Radio telescope, which is something of an improvement). Still, at least if you search for ROT-54/2.6 you'll now get a few good pictures, like this one. There's also a nice YouTube video here : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hq37U4jH8Ls
I can't easily find much more information on it, though from the same link as the picture below :
The first in the World Radio-Optical Telescope ROT-54/2.6 was designed and built during 1975-1985 by Radiophysics Research Institute (RRI, Yerevan, Armenia) on territory of RRI Aragats Scientific Centre (ASC, 100 ha) on Mount Aragats (Armenia) at altitude 1700m. The ROT-54/2.6 includes the Radiotelescope with Large Antenna of 54m in diameter and the Optical Telescope with diameter of mirror 2.6m and focus distance of 10m. The Large Antenna of ROT is the new type. Its Main mirror (54m) is fixed in ground and has hemispheric shape. Using aperture is 32m in diameter (surface using factor 0,6). The spherical aberrations of Main mirror are recompensed by special shape of Secondary (Small) mirror of 5m in diameter, which can rotate around the centre point of Main mirror.
So like Arecibo it's a spherical reflector which uses 32m of its 54m dish to collect photons. Hence it's similar to Arecibo, though smaller. But that's where the similarities end. First, it's a lot smaller, but the frequency range is much greater than Arecibo (1-300 GHz according to Wikipedia, compared to Arecibo's maximum of 10 GHz). It also covers pretty much the entire full hemisphere, unlike Arecibo's dish which is only the bottom tenth of so of the sphere. And the design of the mount for the receivers is completely different - Arecibo uses a platform suspended on high-tension cables; Herouni has a tripod structure which intersects the dish and uses an optical telescope (itself 2.6m in diameter, which is not so small !) as a counterweight.
As to how good it is, I've absolutely no idea. I've never heard of a single publication from it so I'm inclined to guess "not very".
EDIT : The original image I used is now offline, so I replaced it with this one (which has been uploaded to this blog for safe keeping). I also found this PDF detailing the structural and technical parameters of the telescope, and also briefly describes how it was used to search for the Cosmic Microwave Background. The search was unsuccessful, leading to a brusque dismissal of the standard cosmology :
The last time I went image hunting for this I could only find a few blurry postage-stamp images. The ROT-54/2.6 probably needs a better name for social media appeal (though it does also answer to Herouni Mirror Radio telescope, which is something of an improvement). Still, at least if you search for ROT-54/2.6 you'll now get a few good pictures, like this one. There's also a nice YouTube video here : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hq37U4jH8Ls
I can't easily find much more information on it, though from the same link as the picture below :
The first in the World Radio-Optical Telescope ROT-54/2.6 was designed and built during 1975-1985 by Radiophysics Research Institute (RRI, Yerevan, Armenia) on territory of RRI Aragats Scientific Centre (ASC, 100 ha) on Mount Aragats (Armenia) at altitude 1700m. The ROT-54/2.6 includes the Radiotelescope with Large Antenna of 54m in diameter and the Optical Telescope with diameter of mirror 2.6m and focus distance of 10m. The Large Antenna of ROT is the new type. Its Main mirror (54m) is fixed in ground and has hemispheric shape. Using aperture is 32m in diameter (surface using factor 0,6). The spherical aberrations of Main mirror are recompensed by special shape of Secondary (Small) mirror of 5m in diameter, which can rotate around the centre point of Main mirror.
So like Arecibo it's a spherical reflector which uses 32m of its 54m dish to collect photons. Hence it's similar to Arecibo, though smaller. But that's where the similarities end. First, it's a lot smaller, but the frequency range is much greater than Arecibo (1-300 GHz according to Wikipedia, compared to Arecibo's maximum of 10 GHz). It also covers pretty much the entire full hemisphere, unlike Arecibo's dish which is only the bottom tenth of so of the sphere. And the design of the mount for the receivers is completely different - Arecibo uses a platform suspended on high-tension cables; Herouni has a tripod structure which intersects the dish and uses an optical telescope (itself 2.6m in diameter, which is not so small !) as a counterweight.
As to how good it is, I've absolutely no idea. I've never heard of a single publication from it so I'm inclined to guess "not very".
EDIT : The original image I used is now offline, so I replaced it with this one (which has been uploaded to this blog for safe keeping). I also found this PDF detailing the structural and technical parameters of the telescope, and also briefly describes how it was used to search for the Cosmic Microwave Background. The search was unsuccessful, leading to a brusque dismissal of the standard cosmology :
So there is only one explanation, that Relict radiation is absent in Universe, and it is that there never was any Big Bang [3, 4, 5] in Universe.Nice telescope, shame about the science.
Thursday, 9 June 2016
A human-carrying drone
Yet another annoying article where the content is fine but the author hasn't grasped the difference between sentences and paragraphs.
It's like reading a series of soundbites, except not really because they're all closely related.
Here is my edited version which has a proper paragraph structure and the content re-arranged to give it a more coherent narrative :
A human-carrying drone has been given approval for test flights in Nevada, the first of its kind in the United States. The autonomous drone - dubbed 184 - can carry one passenger and was developed by Chinese company EHang. A prototype was shown off at this year's Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas, with the company hoping to sell the drones later this year.
Officials from the Nevada Institute for Autonomous Systems granted permission for the drone to be tested and offered to help EHang submit the results to the Federal Aviation Administration in a bid to win further approval. It is not clear whether the drone will carry a passenger during tests.
The prototype drone is over 4ft (1.2m) tall, weighs 440lb (200kg) and has eight propellers. It can carry a single passenger for 23 minutes at 60mph (96km/h). Passengers enter their destination on a 12in (30cm) touchscreen in front of their seat, and the drone's on-board computer works out the best route. There is no passenger over-ride function, meaning the user cannot take control in an emergency. In the event of a malfunction, the drone would land in the nearest available area. It is likely to sell for between £140,000 ($200,000) and £200,000.
Experts were divided over whether such a system would have mass appeal. "I personally look forward to the day when drone taxis are part of Nevada's transportation system," the institute's business development director, Mark Barker, told local the Las Vegas Review Journal.
Dr Mirko Kovac, director of the Aerial Robotics Lab at Imperial College London, said: "Passenger drones have huge potential. "They can decrease congestion, offer flights in challenging environments and in developing countries where the road infrastructure is not as developed. We don't even think about large aircraft flying over large cities on autopilot. Yet people are afraid of drones, some of which may use similar robotic technology. I think society will overcome this once the technology is more proven."
Big leap Regulation of commercial drones has proved tricky in both the US and Europe, and some doubt passenger drones will ever get off the ground. "It feels like it is a long way off," said Douglas McNeill, a senior analyst at consultancy Macquarie. "Drones will first have to prove their worth in less people-facing roles such as deliveries of small cargo. The other question is whether people will be willing to fly in a pilotless aircraft, and that seems like a big leap. People are sensitive to reduced journey times, and if drones could do that it would be a big plus - but I'm not sure that they can. Consumers are led by what regulators say are safe. And if they say these drones are safe, people might be more willing."
http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-36478614
It's like reading a series of soundbites, except not really because they're all closely related.
Here is my edited version which has a proper paragraph structure and the content re-arranged to give it a more coherent narrative :
A human-carrying drone has been given approval for test flights in Nevada, the first of its kind in the United States. The autonomous drone - dubbed 184 - can carry one passenger and was developed by Chinese company EHang. A prototype was shown off at this year's Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas, with the company hoping to sell the drones later this year.
Officials from the Nevada Institute for Autonomous Systems granted permission for the drone to be tested and offered to help EHang submit the results to the Federal Aviation Administration in a bid to win further approval. It is not clear whether the drone will carry a passenger during tests.
The prototype drone is over 4ft (1.2m) tall, weighs 440lb (200kg) and has eight propellers. It can carry a single passenger for 23 minutes at 60mph (96km/h). Passengers enter their destination on a 12in (30cm) touchscreen in front of their seat, and the drone's on-board computer works out the best route. There is no passenger over-ride function, meaning the user cannot take control in an emergency. In the event of a malfunction, the drone would land in the nearest available area. It is likely to sell for between £140,000 ($200,000) and £200,000.
Experts were divided over whether such a system would have mass appeal. "I personally look forward to the day when drone taxis are part of Nevada's transportation system," the institute's business development director, Mark Barker, told local the Las Vegas Review Journal.
Dr Mirko Kovac, director of the Aerial Robotics Lab at Imperial College London, said: "Passenger drones have huge potential. "They can decrease congestion, offer flights in challenging environments and in developing countries where the road infrastructure is not as developed. We don't even think about large aircraft flying over large cities on autopilot. Yet people are afraid of drones, some of which may use similar robotic technology. I think society will overcome this once the technology is more proven."
Big leap Regulation of commercial drones has proved tricky in both the US and Europe, and some doubt passenger drones will ever get off the ground. "It feels like it is a long way off," said Douglas McNeill, a senior analyst at consultancy Macquarie. "Drones will first have to prove their worth in less people-facing roles such as deliveries of small cargo. The other question is whether people will be willing to fly in a pilotless aircraft, and that seems like a big leap. People are sensitive to reduced journey times, and if drones could do that it would be a big plus - but I'm not sure that they can. Consumers are led by what regulators say are safe. And if they say these drones are safe, people might be more willing."
http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-36478614
Monday, 6 June 2016
The myth of the medieval belief in the Flat Earth
The medieval Flat Earth myth is just one aspect of the whole, "the Dark Ages were entirely due to the Church suppressing science" idea, but it's a particularly pernicious one. The best that can really be said for that notion is that it's not totally bollocks. The medieval thinkers did have some really weird beliefs that came from religious textbooks, and there were indeed, on occasion, some pretty damn brutal atrocities committed in the name of religion. But the idea that all rational thinking was seen as heresy or that all scientific discoveries were seen as the work of the devil... that is pure nonsense.
Of course, the fact that the average person still gets their idea of medieval cosmology from a 1951 Bugs Bunny cartoon is not really the issue here. The problem is that the Flat Earth Myth keeps popping up in New Atheist critiques of religion, despite it being patent nonsense. If it were just people like Tyson's Twitter defenders whose grasp of history was so inadequate that they believe this stupid myth this would not be an issue. But when a man like Tyson, who is regarded as some kind of authority on all things (not just science), and who has 5.21 MILLION Twitter followers, peddles this pseudo historical crap it's small wonder New Atheists have a warped view of history. Donald Prothero is nowhere near as influential, but as an educator, it's deeply concerning that he takes it upon himself to lecture others on this subject, despite the fact he doesn't have the faintest idea what he's talking about.
What we see here, in short, is everything that is wrong with New Atheist Bad History - outdated myths backed by garbled evidence peddled by non-historians who have irrelevant authority by merit of being scientists and who are motivated by an emotionally-driven ideological bias against religion. The result is, yet again, total garbage presented uncritically by people who are meant to be rationalists and sceptics. And that's the problem.
I would add to the article that it wasn't modern antitheists who first came up with the idea of painting the Catholic Church as some sort of thought policing system. That was started by humanists and Protestants who had their own reasons to vilify the medieval Church (http://astrorhysy.blogspot.cz/2014/07/review-gods-philosophers.html). Modern antitheists are simply happy to run with this to suit their own purposes.
http://historyforatheists.blogspot.cz/2016/05/the-new-atheist-bad-history-great-myths.html
Of course, the fact that the average person still gets their idea of medieval cosmology from a 1951 Bugs Bunny cartoon is not really the issue here. The problem is that the Flat Earth Myth keeps popping up in New Atheist critiques of religion, despite it being patent nonsense. If it were just people like Tyson's Twitter defenders whose grasp of history was so inadequate that they believe this stupid myth this would not be an issue. But when a man like Tyson, who is regarded as some kind of authority on all things (not just science), and who has 5.21 MILLION Twitter followers, peddles this pseudo historical crap it's small wonder New Atheists have a warped view of history. Donald Prothero is nowhere near as influential, but as an educator, it's deeply concerning that he takes it upon himself to lecture others on this subject, despite the fact he doesn't have the faintest idea what he's talking about.
What we see here, in short, is everything that is wrong with New Atheist Bad History - outdated myths backed by garbled evidence peddled by non-historians who have irrelevant authority by merit of being scientists and who are motivated by an emotionally-driven ideological bias against religion. The result is, yet again, total garbage presented uncritically by people who are meant to be rationalists and sceptics. And that's the problem.
I would add to the article that it wasn't modern antitheists who first came up with the idea of painting the Catholic Church as some sort of thought policing system. That was started by humanists and Protestants who had their own reasons to vilify the medieval Church (http://astrorhysy.blogspot.cz/2014/07/review-gods-philosophers.html). Modern antitheists are simply happy to run with this to suit their own purposes.
http://historyforatheists.blogspot.cz/2016/05/the-new-atheist-bad-history-great-myths.html
Saturday, 4 June 2016
Preparing to vote
I've registered to vote by proxy. This issue matters to me a lot more than previous recent referendums. But then, as an expat scientist, I'm heavily biased.
About six million residents have yet to register to vote on 23 June, more than a million of them are under the age of 25. Lord Kinnock said the outcome of the referendum was "vital to the future of British people of all ages" but "the longest and strongest effects will be felt by you - the young generations". "The risk is, if we get a low turnout, regardless of what people's background politics is, that by default Leave could win."
(Non-British readers should be advised than in general, the only people in Britain who care about Europe are the ones who hate it. That's why most of our MEPs are UKIP; not necessarily because most Brits are anti-Europe, but because they are totally apathetic about it.)
But was there no condition imposed on voter turnout ? For referendums I feel there should be some lower limit below which they become void. Then again I'm becoming disillusioned with the idea of direct democracy. It might work if a large proportion of people were actively interested and rational, but they are neither. Which may be the fault of the media or entirely natural, I don't know.
Party leader Jeremy Corbyn - who has previously expressed Eurosceptic views - has been accused of being "half-hearted" in his backing for Labour's position to campaign to stay in the EU. This week he said there was an "overwhelming case" to remain in, citing issues ranging from mobile phone charges to clean beaches and protecting bees - but also called for sweeping reforms.
Right, yes, because these are a) tremendously important and b) really matter to voters. Aaaargh. I'm also pretty much done with Corbyn. I like the guy, but he has the leadership skills of a bag of hedgehogs. He'd be a fantastic deputy Prime Minister though.
The major advance of the E.U. is freedom of movement. This should be praised to the stars at every opportunity. It is a wonderful, fantastic advance compared to the xenophobic, isolationist, imperial policies of pre-war Europe, and I simply do not understand those who see that horrible era as "the good old days". For this reason alone we should stay in, not that there aren't many others also. And while like any other bureaucratic political institution the E.U. is not without major flaws, I see nothing that couldn't be better fixed by us staying in to help fix it.
http://astrorhysy.blogspot.cz/2016/05/i-quite-like-eu-lets-keep-it.html
(Disclaimer : these sorts of posts have the tendency to attract racists and occasionally mysterious hordes of UKIP supporters with whom I've never interacted; if that happens I will simply delete comments because I've utterly lost patience with bigoted idiots)
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36447926
About six million residents have yet to register to vote on 23 June, more than a million of them are under the age of 25. Lord Kinnock said the outcome of the referendum was "vital to the future of British people of all ages" but "the longest and strongest effects will be felt by you - the young generations". "The risk is, if we get a low turnout, regardless of what people's background politics is, that by default Leave could win."
(Non-British readers should be advised than in general, the only people in Britain who care about Europe are the ones who hate it. That's why most of our MEPs are UKIP; not necessarily because most Brits are anti-Europe, but because they are totally apathetic about it.)
But was there no condition imposed on voter turnout ? For referendums I feel there should be some lower limit below which they become void. Then again I'm becoming disillusioned with the idea of direct democracy. It might work if a large proportion of people were actively interested and rational, but they are neither. Which may be the fault of the media or entirely natural, I don't know.
Party leader Jeremy Corbyn - who has previously expressed Eurosceptic views - has been accused of being "half-hearted" in his backing for Labour's position to campaign to stay in the EU. This week he said there was an "overwhelming case" to remain in, citing issues ranging from mobile phone charges to clean beaches and protecting bees - but also called for sweeping reforms.
Right, yes, because these are a) tremendously important and b) really matter to voters. Aaaargh. I'm also pretty much done with Corbyn. I like the guy, but he has the leadership skills of a bag of hedgehogs. He'd be a fantastic deputy Prime Minister though.
The major advance of the E.U. is freedom of movement. This should be praised to the stars at every opportunity. It is a wonderful, fantastic advance compared to the xenophobic, isolationist, imperial policies of pre-war Europe, and I simply do not understand those who see that horrible era as "the good old days". For this reason alone we should stay in, not that there aren't many others also. And while like any other bureaucratic political institution the E.U. is not without major flaws, I see nothing that couldn't be better fixed by us staying in to help fix it.
http://astrorhysy.blogspot.cz/2016/05/i-quite-like-eu-lets-keep-it.html
(Disclaimer : these sorts of posts have the tendency to attract racists and occasionally mysterious hordes of UKIP supporters with whom I've never interacted; if that happens I will simply delete comments because I've utterly lost patience with bigoted idiots)
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36447926
Thursday, 2 June 2016
Science versus religion is not a chronic condition
The historical relations between science and religion have been the focus of considerable study over the past thirty years and the verdict is now in: there has been no enduring warfare between science and religion. The present consensus among historians is that there is no consistent pattern of historical relations between science and religion. If there is a single word that might characterize past relationships it is 'complexity'.
One reason for this complexity is that the disciplines were arranged very differently in the past and up until the nineteenth century there were no clear cut boundaries between what we would now call ‘science’ and religion. Medieval thinkers, for example, tended to classify theology as one of the sciences. From their perspective, speaking of a conflict between science and theology could only result from some kind of conceptual confusion, since theology was a science. Subsequently, in the seventeenth century, Isaac Newton (1642-1726/7) would declare that discussion of God was an integral part of the business of scientific investigation.
The very idea of a 'law of nature', when first proposed in the seventeenth century, was not a mere metaphor, but was regarded as a divinely authored rule that natural objects were compelled to obey... virtually all the key figures of the scientific revolution were devout Christians. Most would have found any talk of an inevitable science-religion conflict deeply puzzling
http://www.theologie-naturwissenschaften.de/startseite/leitartikelarchiv/conflict-myth.html
One reason for this complexity is that the disciplines were arranged very differently in the past and up until the nineteenth century there were no clear cut boundaries between what we would now call ‘science’ and religion. Medieval thinkers, for example, tended to classify theology as one of the sciences. From their perspective, speaking of a conflict between science and theology could only result from some kind of conceptual confusion, since theology was a science. Subsequently, in the seventeenth century, Isaac Newton (1642-1726/7) would declare that discussion of God was an integral part of the business of scientific investigation.
The very idea of a 'law of nature', when first proposed in the seventeenth century, was not a mere metaphor, but was regarded as a divinely authored rule that natural objects were compelled to obey... virtually all the key figures of the scientific revolution were devout Christians. Most would have found any talk of an inevitable science-religion conflict deeply puzzling
http://www.theologie-naturwissenschaften.de/startseite/leitartikelarchiv/conflict-myth.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)