A spokesperson for DND told the BBC the department had conferred with its American counterparts, and that the object the diver found could very well be the bomb. The American military do not believe the bomb is active or a threat to anyone, he said, but Canada is sending military ships to the site to make sure.
But while the military and the diver believe they may have found the lost nuke of Bomber 075, Septer says the diver's location is totally wrong, given what we know about the plane crash. "It could be anything," Septer said. "Whatever he found, it's not the nuke."
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-37875697
Monday, 7 November 2016
Review : Sacred History
Going out of my comfort zone and reviewing a very strange book indeed.
I think it's entirely rational to speculate as to the nature of the mind. Certainly, it could be that the mind is nothing more than the actions of particles within the brain by some ferociously complicated process. But why is is considered so ridiculous to propose that our sense of self is actually just some shard of a much greater "cosmic mind", a "spark of the divine" with reality an "objective illusion" as Black calls it ?
Answer : it isn't. But it is unequivocally *un*scientific. Yes, everything could be an illusion or a simulation, but it isn't possible to test this scientifically. One could use this hypothesis to explain any otherwise tricky phenomena, thus getting us nowhere. In terms of analysing the world around us though, it's useless.
And the "we're all living in a simulation" idea, which seems to be an increasingly reoccurring theme on the internet these days, is just a modern manifestation of old mystical notions. It's simply been redrafted in a way that militant materialists are marginally more comfortable with. Even the very term consciousness has mystical overtones. But computers ? Mere machines. We know about computers, we understand computers, with think we can build artificial intelligence => someone else has probably built an AI => we're all living in a simulation. It's exactly the same idea as that of a cosmic mind, just with a crude and ineffective attempt to strip it of the supernatural elements. It lets the materialists off the hook of having to concede that minds are all-important while simultaneously but stealthily acknowledging that minds are all-important. It's just replacing one god with another.
This isn't anti-science at all, unless you think that Elon Musk is anti-science - at least, so long as you don't go resorting to using simulation/cosmic mind as your explanation for everything. But it is most definitely un-science.
While Black claims that sometimes visions of mystical beings and whatnot happen in a spiritual realm which is normally inaccessible, which I could accept as merely unscientific, he also claims that sometimes these events happen entirely in the physical world.
And lo and behold... just like every single other book on the paranormal I've ever read (and there have been many over the years), his descriptions of these are unconvincing and his citations are frankly appalling. If you want to say, "I'm being irrational but here's what I believe - I don't think these things can be analysed rationally" (which he does on many occasions), then fine. But if you want to say, "here's the rational, measurable evidence for what I believe", then you've got to do better than a bunch of anecdotes.
Yet I find it as preposterous to consider the Universe and conclude that it definitely has no absolute, intrinsic meaning - as scientisim assumes - as I do to conclude that it's all about a big beardy dude in the sky who is inordinately concerned with whether I eat bacon or what I do with my genitals. The assumption that there's no great cosmic mind is just that - an assumption. A leap of non-faith. Ordinary science doesn't concern itself with this in the least, it simply looks at the world and tries to explain the observations according to rational processes. Whether there's some higher power at work causing those processes and imbuing them with meaning is irrelevant. Only scientism explicitly believes against the existence of such a divinity - ordinary science doesn't give a crap about it. Science is apatheistic, scientism is antitheist.
For me neither materialism nor idealism provide satisfactory solutions. But while I'm happy to consider these radically unscientific ideas at a very abstract level, when it comes to specific details I find Black's concepts to be utterly lousy. He simply states, bluntly, that angels are doing this that and the other without the slightest bit of justification.
So, unsurprisingly, a book that looks at some of the deepest questions fails to provide any satisfactory answers. It managed to provoke some very interesting lines of thought... but the effort to find a harmony between idealism and materialism ultimately completely failed, leaving me in the unusual position of declaring that I rather liked this crappy book. I can't give it more than 3/10, but it was worth reading.
I think it's entirely rational to speculate as to the nature of the mind. Certainly, it could be that the mind is nothing more than the actions of particles within the brain by some ferociously complicated process. But why is is considered so ridiculous to propose that our sense of self is actually just some shard of a much greater "cosmic mind", a "spark of the divine" with reality an "objective illusion" as Black calls it ?
Answer : it isn't. But it is unequivocally *un*scientific. Yes, everything could be an illusion or a simulation, but it isn't possible to test this scientifically. One could use this hypothesis to explain any otherwise tricky phenomena, thus getting us nowhere. In terms of analysing the world around us though, it's useless.
And the "we're all living in a simulation" idea, which seems to be an increasingly reoccurring theme on the internet these days, is just a modern manifestation of old mystical notions. It's simply been redrafted in a way that militant materialists are marginally more comfortable with. Even the very term consciousness has mystical overtones. But computers ? Mere machines. We know about computers, we understand computers, with think we can build artificial intelligence => someone else has probably built an AI => we're all living in a simulation. It's exactly the same idea as that of a cosmic mind, just with a crude and ineffective attempt to strip it of the supernatural elements. It lets the materialists off the hook of having to concede that minds are all-important while simultaneously but stealthily acknowledging that minds are all-important. It's just replacing one god with another.
This isn't anti-science at all, unless you think that Elon Musk is anti-science - at least, so long as you don't go resorting to using simulation/cosmic mind as your explanation for everything. But it is most definitely un-science.
While Black claims that sometimes visions of mystical beings and whatnot happen in a spiritual realm which is normally inaccessible, which I could accept as merely unscientific, he also claims that sometimes these events happen entirely in the physical world.
And lo and behold... just like every single other book on the paranormal I've ever read (and there have been many over the years), his descriptions of these are unconvincing and his citations are frankly appalling. If you want to say, "I'm being irrational but here's what I believe - I don't think these things can be analysed rationally" (which he does on many occasions), then fine. But if you want to say, "here's the rational, measurable evidence for what I believe", then you've got to do better than a bunch of anecdotes.
Yet I find it as preposterous to consider the Universe and conclude that it definitely has no absolute, intrinsic meaning - as scientisim assumes - as I do to conclude that it's all about a big beardy dude in the sky who is inordinately concerned with whether I eat bacon or what I do with my genitals. The assumption that there's no great cosmic mind is just that - an assumption. A leap of non-faith. Ordinary science doesn't concern itself with this in the least, it simply looks at the world and tries to explain the observations according to rational processes. Whether there's some higher power at work causing those processes and imbuing them with meaning is irrelevant. Only scientism explicitly believes against the existence of such a divinity - ordinary science doesn't give a crap about it. Science is apatheistic, scientism is antitheist.
For me neither materialism nor idealism provide satisfactory solutions. But while I'm happy to consider these radically unscientific ideas at a very abstract level, when it comes to specific details I find Black's concepts to be utterly lousy. He simply states, bluntly, that angels are doing this that and the other without the slightest bit of justification.
So, unsurprisingly, a book that looks at some of the deepest questions fails to provide any satisfactory answers. It managed to provoke some very interesting lines of thought... but the effort to find a harmony between idealism and materialism ultimately completely failed, leaving me in the unusual position of declaring that I rather liked this crappy book. I can't give it more than 3/10, but it was worth reading.
Letter to America
Please don't end the world, America. It's "competent politician" (yes, with all the usual corruption and self-serving agendas that implies) versus a latter-day Nero, only more orange and with nuclear weapons.
Originally shared by Edward Morbius (everything that follows is not mine !)
A brief note to my American friends
1. Please don't fuck this up.
You've got the choice at the top of your ballot for a highly competent and exceptionally tested leader, and a nightmare from a dystopian fantasy late-night B-movie. Clinton is very clearly the only possibly sane choice, and if your vote is in a state in which the outcome is even possibly in doubt, do whatever it takes to vote for her. No abstaining, no third parties.
Leaning Clinton now are New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Colorado, Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, New Mexico, and Virgina. Keep them blue.
Leaning Trump now are Nevada, Florida, Ohio, Iowa, North Carolina, and Arizona. Possibly in play: Texas. Turn them blue.
2. Down-ballot matters. A whole fucking lot.
Much of the current state of American politics has come about through an exceptionally skillful manipulation of both Congressional and statehouse politics. Things have reached a point where I find zero justification for a Republican vote on any race, no matter how small. The GOP is a cancer. It must be stopped.
3. I'm preaching to the choir.
Mostly. I'm aware of that. I've spent the past few days wondering what I could possibly say to turn the mind of someone who doesn't agree with me, or perhaps is even sitting on the fence. I've come up with little.
Part of that is directly related to a massive problem, not only of this election, but of American political and media discourse of the past two, or three, or five, decades: we're living in a post-fact age.
This ends badly.
The best I've got are:
a) Ask yourself, what would it take to change my mind. And reflect on whether or not, in the light of changing your mind the evidence supports that.
b) Step back, look at yourself and the general situation, and ask yourself if you could really live with voting for either Trump, and all the foulness and stench he is, and the party and movement which have created him.
c) Yes, shit's fucked up, yo. But I have a hell of a time seeing how fucking it up yet further gets us anywhere better. We've seen this movie and it ends poorly. Italy and Germany in the 1930s. Ireland in the 1970s. Much of the Middle East and North Africa in the past decade.
4. Shit's Fucked Up, Yo.
I stand with the Black Lives Matter movement, against the systematic and endemic racism, oppression, violence, and denial of opportunity that's the legacy of 300+ years of an extremely ugly history. The US has made several attemtps to change this -- in 1784 as the Constitution was being hammered out, in 1861 as the nation was literally torn in two, in the post-Civil War reconstruction era, in the 1950s and 1960s with the civil rights movement. That effort is nowhere near finished.
I also stand with the white working class high-school educated man who's finding that the dream he'd been sold was smoke and mirrors, a mythology, a big white lie (in more ways than one). And who is seething in rage watching both what he'd dreamed for and what he'd actually managed to accomplish slip from his grasp. That pain is very real.
The leap, though, is to realise that those are both the same fight and battle, and that their enemy is the same: a game of systemic oppression and deprivation which works against all but a few, and turns the losers against one another. This is why though I am for the rights of blacks and browns and yellows and gays and muslims and hindus and jews and athiests, I am not about them. That is: the goal is to raise up all, especially the least among us as the great socialist philosopher Adam Smith wrote, but not divide ourselves in the process.
Let's work together.
The real problems run deep. Some are complicated. Some are distressingly simple, but not easy. Wishful thinking won't solve these problems or make them disappear. All of us have some very unpleasent truths we're going to have to face.
5. This is bigger than the United States of America.
The United States is the biggest, most powerful, most dangerous, and most promising empire the world has ever seen. Its influence extends vastly beyond its own borders. Its neighbours, Mexico and Canada, will be profoundly affected by what happens this week, as will distant parts of the world: the Middle East, North Africa, Europe, India, Iran, Pakistan, China, Africa. Whether or not we have a future at all, thanks to the endogenous human threats of global climate change, pandemics, financial collapse, nuclear war, overpopulation, hunger, and more. Clinton is well aware of these threats, and I suspect hopes to resolve them to maximum benefit. Trump denies them publicly, though if he does actually believe in them, seeks a resolution that benefits principally himself.
6. Media are a huge part of the problem.
Several authors have declared losers of this election. Email. America's respect in the world. Bigger than any of these is the fourth estate, the essential nervous system of a democracy: its media. As with other countries (notably the UK, or what's left of it, and Australia), a mix of deliberate deception and manipulation, a systemic rot, a shattering economic foundation, the cancer of advertising and a crass commercial "marketplace of ideas" philosophy, and yes, the outrage-and-eyeballs dynamic fed by Google, Facebook, and online media, the capacity for the US to be sufficiently, accurately, and meaningfully informed has been lost. Much of the current political state devolves directly from this.
8. The election isn't the end of the fight but the beginning.
No, my preferred candidate isn't in the running. The ideals of that candidate still are, and can and will continue to be championed. Hillary Clinton's most compelling qualification is that she is a consumate political creature with decades of experience in many of the most challenging fights. As such, the real pressure is on you, as Americans, to hold her feet to the fire, and to apply those talents to the change that will help turn this ship around, raise up the oppressed and the abandoned, and just maybe thread through the multiple perils between the present and a hopeful future.
I've been asking for several years, "What are the Big Problems?" You might want to consider that question, and what the points of influence on those problems are for effecting a positive outcome.
So get off your damned ass, vote, and do everything you can to help those who think likewise to do so as well.
Measuring animal intelligence is tricky
“It’s not really appropriate to pit one species against another, as each has evolved different skills or ways of thinking that provide them with an advantage in one test, but a disadvantage in another. There isn’t an IQ test for animals to rank their intelligence.”
For example, lab tests have shown that rooks and crows are better than eight-year-old children at reaching a treat by making a wire hook, but of course there are many things eight-year-old humans can do that rooks and crows can’t.
For a long time birds had only one known tool-maker: the New Caledonian crow. But just this year, scientists discovered that the ‘alalā, or Hawaiian crow, is also capable of making and using tools. The ‘alalā is actually extinct in the wild, but 109 individuals survive in captivity today.
Worryingly, only a handful of bird species (out of 10,000-plus) have actually been systematically tested on their intelligence. Even whole bird families have never been tested, including most of the world’s raptors.
All this means we need to rethink how we treat birds, according to Emery.
“The domestic chicken is the most populous bird in the world, which we consume in massive numbers. But, if I told you that day old chicks can count or they can tell if two objects are the same or different, a so-called abstract concept, would you think twice about eating chicken?”
I would have assumed they could tell if two objects are different or not anyway - that's not intelligence. Being aware that more is different to less isn't intelligence either. But still... hurry up with that lab-grown chicken, eh ?
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/radical-conservation/2016/nov/05/birds-intelligence-tools-crows-parrots-conservation-ethics-chickens
For example, lab tests have shown that rooks and crows are better than eight-year-old children at reaching a treat by making a wire hook, but of course there are many things eight-year-old humans can do that rooks and crows can’t.
For a long time birds had only one known tool-maker: the New Caledonian crow. But just this year, scientists discovered that the ‘alalā, or Hawaiian crow, is also capable of making and using tools. The ‘alalā is actually extinct in the wild, but 109 individuals survive in captivity today.
Worryingly, only a handful of bird species (out of 10,000-plus) have actually been systematically tested on their intelligence. Even whole bird families have never been tested, including most of the world’s raptors.
All this means we need to rethink how we treat birds, according to Emery.
“The domestic chicken is the most populous bird in the world, which we consume in massive numbers. But, if I told you that day old chicks can count or they can tell if two objects are the same or different, a so-called abstract concept, would you think twice about eating chicken?”
I would have assumed they could tell if two objects are different or not anyway - that's not intelligence. Being aware that more is different to less isn't intelligence either. But still... hurry up with that lab-grown chicken, eh ?
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/radical-conservation/2016/nov/05/birds-intelligence-tools-crows-parrots-conservation-ethics-chickens
Sunday, 6 November 2016
Giant snowballs on a Russian beach
A strange and beautiful sight greeted locals in the Gulf of Ob, in northwest Siberia, after thousands of natural snowballs formed on the beach. An 11-mile (18km) stretch of coast was covered in the icy spheres. The sculptural shapes range from the size of a tennis ball to almost 1m (3ft) across. They result from a rare environmental process where small pieces of ice form, are rolled by wind and water, and end up as giant snowballs.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-37883003
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-37883003
Friday, 4 November 2016
Thursday, 3 November 2016
Learning from Albania
Over the course of the regime, Albania became a complete isolationist state with virtually no ties to the outside world. In 1967, Hoxha tightened his grip on the country even further by banning all religion, declaring Albania the world’s first atheist state. During this time, churches and mosques were seized by the military and either destroyed or turned into cinemas or dance halls. Clergy members were stripped of their titles, shamed and in some cases incarcerated.
Some speculate that this violent ousting of organized religion resulted in Albanians adopting a secular mindset, and that the country is void of any religious tension because faith is not an important element of life for many today. Buba begs to differ, though, dismissing this as cynical.
“I hear all this talk of people wanting to build walls and ban believers of certain faiths from entering countries,” Buba said. “This is only going to breed hate and misunderstanding. The reason harmony exists in Albania is because we engage with one another. We debate, we discuss and we educate ourselves about those around us.”
There are numerous Muslim and Christian religious events in which practitioners of both are in attendance. The Day of the Blessed Water, for instance, is a Christian holiday celebrated by participants diving into a river in search of a cross, but it is open to all and has had many Muslim winners over the years. Likewise, Buba explained that it is not uncommon for Christians to participate in feasting during the Muslim holiday of Eid, which breaks the fast of Ramadan. By engaging with one another so frequently and in such meaningful ways, Albanian Muslims and Christians have created a strong community founded upon understanding and respect.
http://www.bbc.com/travel/story/20161024-the-worlds-most-tolerant-country
Some speculate that this violent ousting of organized religion resulted in Albanians adopting a secular mindset, and that the country is void of any religious tension because faith is not an important element of life for many today. Buba begs to differ, though, dismissing this as cynical.
“I hear all this talk of people wanting to build walls and ban believers of certain faiths from entering countries,” Buba said. “This is only going to breed hate and misunderstanding. The reason harmony exists in Albania is because we engage with one another. We debate, we discuss and we educate ourselves about those around us.”
There are numerous Muslim and Christian religious events in which practitioners of both are in attendance. The Day of the Blessed Water, for instance, is a Christian holiday celebrated by participants diving into a river in search of a cross, but it is open to all and has had many Muslim winners over the years. Likewise, Buba explained that it is not uncommon for Christians to participate in feasting during the Muslim holiday of Eid, which breaks the fast of Ramadan. By engaging with one another so frequently and in such meaningful ways, Albanian Muslims and Christians have created a strong community founded upon understanding and respect.
http://www.bbc.com/travel/story/20161024-the-worlds-most-tolerant-country
Article 50 can be revoked, says its author
The Scottish cross-bench peer who wrote Article 50 - the procedure by which the UK would leave the EU - believed it was "not irrevocable". In a BBC interview, Lord Kerr of Kinlochard said the UK could choose to stay in the EU even after exit negotiations had begun. He has also renewed calls for either parliament or the public to be given a chance to stop Brexit.
He explained: "It is not irrevocable. "You can change your mind while the process is going on. During that period, if a country were to decide actually we don't want to leave after all, everybody would be very cross about it being a waste of time. They might try to extract a political price but legally they couldn't insist that you leave."
Lord Kerr said he had never imagined the UK would make use of Article 50. He explained: "I thought the circumstances in which it would be used, if ever, would be when there was a coup in a member state and the EU suspended that country's membership. I thought that at that point the dictator in question might be so cross that he'd say 'right, I'm off' and it would be good to have a procedure under which he could leave."
A Department for Exiting the European Union spokesman said: "The UK voted to leave the European Union. The people have spoken and it is now the duty of the government to make sure that happens."
- What utter tosh. Slightly more people voted to Leave than Remain in one advisory opinion poll on one day, many have now changed their minds, so we must now commit ourselves to doing irreparable harm to the economy ? We must concede to the racists and xenophobes ? I think not.
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-37852628
He explained: "It is not irrevocable. "You can change your mind while the process is going on. During that period, if a country were to decide actually we don't want to leave after all, everybody would be very cross about it being a waste of time. They might try to extract a political price but legally they couldn't insist that you leave."
Lord Kerr said he had never imagined the UK would make use of Article 50. He explained: "I thought the circumstances in which it would be used, if ever, would be when there was a coup in a member state and the EU suspended that country's membership. I thought that at that point the dictator in question might be so cross that he'd say 'right, I'm off' and it would be good to have a procedure under which he could leave."
A Department for Exiting the European Union spokesman said: "The UK voted to leave the European Union. The people have spoken and it is now the duty of the government to make sure that happens."
- What utter tosh. Slightly more people voted to Leave than Remain in one advisory opinion poll on one day, many have now changed their minds, so we must now commit ourselves to doing irreparable harm to the economy ? We must concede to the racists and xenophobes ? I think not.
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-37852628
Armoured spiders - yes, these are a thing
If scaled up, these beasts would have armour thicker than a World War Two Panzer Tiger tank.
Of course, the spiders do not need to deflect shells or bullets. Instead, they face a smaller but no less formidable foe. The tropical and subtropical forests of South East Asia, where most living tetrablemmids are found, are prowled by aggressive predatory wasps that specifically hunt spiders. Spider-hunting wasps will tackle prey several times their own size. Some species are capable of taking on tarantulas.
This is where tetrablemmids' armour may come into its own, according to Kropf. "These wasps always sting spiders in the soft [region] between the plates covering the top and bottom of the front section of the body," he says. However, with their hardened plates fused together, the tetrablemmids do not have such a weak spot. The wasps probably find them very hard to attack.
If the tetrablemmids' armour is so beneficial, why has it only evolved in one small group of spiders?
The muscle structure inside the armoured spiders appears completely different... rather than slowing the spiders down, the extra armour may actually help them to save energy and move more efficiently. In other words, it is still a mystery exactly why so few spiders have extra armour.
Essentially, the abdomen, with its thick plates on the top and bottom along with the strips of hard cuticle along the sides, acts like a bellows that the spiders can squeeze and expand at will to pump fluid around their bodies. "It is a fundamental change of the whole body construction," explains Kropf.
So it seems, to accommodate their armour and the protection it provides, tetrablemmids have had to radically redesign their own body plan and even their development.
http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20161102-there-are-spiders-that-encase-their-bodies-in-thick-armour
Of course, the spiders do not need to deflect shells or bullets. Instead, they face a smaller but no less formidable foe. The tropical and subtropical forests of South East Asia, where most living tetrablemmids are found, are prowled by aggressive predatory wasps that specifically hunt spiders. Spider-hunting wasps will tackle prey several times their own size. Some species are capable of taking on tarantulas.
This is where tetrablemmids' armour may come into its own, according to Kropf. "These wasps always sting spiders in the soft [region] between the plates covering the top and bottom of the front section of the body," he says. However, with their hardened plates fused together, the tetrablemmids do not have such a weak spot. The wasps probably find them very hard to attack.
If the tetrablemmids' armour is so beneficial, why has it only evolved in one small group of spiders?
The muscle structure inside the armoured spiders appears completely different... rather than slowing the spiders down, the extra armour may actually help them to save energy and move more efficiently. In other words, it is still a mystery exactly why so few spiders have extra armour.
Essentially, the abdomen, with its thick plates on the top and bottom along with the strips of hard cuticle along the sides, acts like a bellows that the spiders can squeeze and expand at will to pump fluid around their bodies. "It is a fundamental change of the whole body construction," explains Kropf.
So it seems, to accommodate their armour and the protection it provides, tetrablemmids have had to radically redesign their own body plan and even their development.
http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20161102-there-are-spiders-that-encase-their-bodies-in-thick-armour
Parliament is sovereign
Parliament is sovereign, and that's what we voted for.
Parliament must vote on whether the UK can start the process of leaving the EU, the High Court has ruled. This means the government cannot trigger Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty - beginning formal exit negotiations with the EU - on its own. Theresa May says the referendum - and existing ministerial powers - mean MPs do not need to vote, but campaigners called this unconstitutional. The government is appealing, with a further hearing expected next month.
It is a fundamental principle of the UK constitution that Kings' or Queens' powers cannot be used by the government via the Royal Prerogative to change or do away with rights under British law unless Parliament gives it authority to do so. The court looked at examples ranging from the 1600s to the 1970s Laker Airways legal battle.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37857785
Parliament must vote on whether the UK can start the process of leaving the EU, the High Court has ruled. This means the government cannot trigger Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty - beginning formal exit negotiations with the EU - on its own. Theresa May says the referendum - and existing ministerial powers - mean MPs do not need to vote, but campaigners called this unconstitutional. The government is appealing, with a further hearing expected next month.
It is a fundamental principle of the UK constitution that Kings' or Queens' powers cannot be used by the government via the Royal Prerogative to change or do away with rights under British law unless Parliament gives it authority to do so. The court looked at examples ranging from the 1600s to the 1970s Laker Airways legal battle.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37857785
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)