Discussion > Hall of Fame, Bishop Hill (comments)
.. that climate sceptics can play the " uncertainty" card OR the "the past was warmer" card. Since they contradict each other you cannot play both. [Entropic man]Why not? If it is not certain which one is correct, both can be put on the table as two alternative (even if exclusive) hypotheses.
Mar 28, 2016 at 9:40 AM Martin A
Alan Kendall put my observation on a firm footing as follows: (which I think warrants being preserved for future use)
Martin A
I offer support for your last point. Geological evidence commonly is insufficient to reach definitive answers (hence this entire thread). Not all the critical evidence required to make determinative conclusions may be preseved. Accordingly geologists may hold to several hypotheses simultaneously to explain the same set of facts. This methodology was first formulated by T.C.. Chamberlin in 1889 (published in 1890) as "The Method of Multiple Working Hypotheses". Knowledge of this seems largely confined to geology, but clearly reflection suggests it is in operation in the cutting edge of most sciences. Clearly not practiced by computer modellers, however.
Chamberlin's methodology ought to be force fed to all climate scientists.
Mar 28, 2016 at 10:13 AM Alan Kendall
Martin A
I think the above by @Martin A might have been a mispost cos he just posted it in the other thread called : I'll bet not a lot of people know this
stewgreen
Since Skiphil started this thread saying it was "purely for fun", then I'll post this. Completely OT
From the BBC commentary on the winner of the US Masters golf tournament:
Manager Andrew 'Chubby' Chandler credited Willett's parents for his character: "He's a confident lad, he has been brought up unbelievably well. His dad is a vicar and his mum is Swedish, it's a nice mixture of the two."
Swedish vicars? I probably shouldn't go looking for those on the internet.
michael hart
stewgreen - I posted it here thinking that Alan Kendall's comment was worth making more easily accessible for future use because of the frequency which we are told (for example) that CAGW scepticism must be invalid because sceptics do not have just one alternative theory.
Then I read the other thread and it seemed very relevant to what a commenter there had said so I reposted it there.
Martin A
I'm sorry but I don't think my piece belongs here. It was meant to be serious. Unless you find hilarity in the idea of force-feeding climate scientists (aka modellers) extracts of 19th century science theory.
Please leave this thread for the numerous gems and glories that have graced this site.
I am honoured by you Martin A, but am unworthy (speak with Rabid Rat who has views on my past efforts).
Alan Kendall
Mr K – please do not give us the impression that you can be offended by a compliment! The gems posted on this thread do not have to be witty; they can be erudite and pithy; Martin A’s selection of yours is because it is certainly one of those.
BTW, I can be flattered by an insult; I find it a far healthier outlook on life.
Radical Rodent
RR. Please do not give the impression that I was offended. Far from it, I was (and am) immensely flattered.
Alan Kendall
Not a BH comment but one well worthy of an airing:-
" It’s the liberal way. Let’s not hurt the models’ feelings so let’s have a “handicap” race so they all finish equal."
Green Sand
Green Sand: Point of Order!
"they all finish equally wrong" ^.^
Dung
From the EU Must be Joking thread:
SandyS was suggesting that a UK Brexit might lead to many small regions seeking independence from their parent group:
"I am all for taking ideas to extremes, but I am not sure the Shetlands are large enough to cope with the repatriation of all of their ponies."
May 25, 2016 at 10:37 AM | Unregistered Commentergolf charlie
Bwahaha!
Dung
The 1980s also saw the rise in popularity of Aussie outback style bullbars and roobars fitted to Chelsea tractors, designed to protect them from migrating herds of traffic bollards, known to gallop unpredictably all over the roads of Knightsbridge, late on a Friday night.
From Unthreaded Aug 25, 2016 at 12:16 PM | Unregistered Commenter golf charlie
Dung
"can't bring myself listen to R4 while operating machinery"
Nov 9, 2016 at 5:07 PM | Registered Commentertomo
michael hart
Gwendolyn. Your entreaty - "Malthusians should demonstrate their commitment to their beliefs by performing self castration" would appear to be highly sexist! I'm sure the absence of the word "self-oophorectomy" was pure oversight.Jan 11, 2017 at 1:28 PM | Unregistered CommenterSupertroll
Ms Supertroll, somethings are just unmentionable in polite intercourse.Jan 11, 2017 at 1:32 PM | Unregistered Commentergwendolyn caroline
I'm not sure why, but I'm persuaded.
michael hart
Mar 16, 2017 at 6:09 PM | Unregistered Commentergolf charlie
I don't think the Climate has ever shown any sensitivity towards consenting Climate Scientists, and what they have decided by excluding common sense.
About time somebody resurected this great thread and who better than it greatest contributor Mr Golf Charlie. I salute you sir ^.^
Dung
This isn't supposed to be witty, but it is:
Miguel Árias Cañete, the EU’s climate action commissioner, said: “We regret the US is rolling back the main pillar of its climate policy, the clean power plan. Now, it remains to be seen by which other means the United States intends to meet its commitments under the Paris agreement.”
TheGuardian: EU leads attacks on Trump's rollback of Obama climate policy
Robert Christopher
From Simon Heffer in Sunday Telegraph 02/04/17, just too good not to post in here ^.^
/the absurd Tim Farron, who leads what is left of the Liberal Democrats, and his bleating, arrogant, fatuous predecessor Nick Clegg/
Dung
From the 2017 Election Discussion (by golfus charlius)
An intelligent driverless battery car, would leave the Tesla showroom, and drive itself direct to a recycling centre, alerting Fire and Rescue Services to its presence en route.
Dung
From JoNova commenter on the disappearance of wind
clipe
"May I contribute TinyCO2's definition of wind turbines:
huge white elephants standing guard over cavernous money pits"
You may be looking at the wrong end of the elephant:
https://vvattsupwiththat.blogspot.com/2017/07/new-press-office-head-to-lead-recycling.html
Russell
Letter to Times about grants for '.. not raising pigs ..'
Secretary of State,
Dept. for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA),
Nobel House,
17, Smith Square,
London SW1P 3JR.16 May 2007.
Dear Secretary of State,
A friend, who is in farming at the moment, has recently received a cheque for £3,000 from the Rural Payments Agency for not rearing pigs and I would like to join the ‘not rearing pigs’ business.
In your opinion, what is the best kind of farm not to rear pigs on, and which is the best breed of pig not to rear? I want to be sure I approach this endeavour in keeping with all government policies, as dictated by the EU under the Common Agricultural Policy. I would prefer not to rear bacon pigs, but if this not the type you want not rearing, I will just as gladly not rear porkers. Are there any advantages in not rearing rare breeds such as Saddlebacks or Gloucester Old Spots, or are there too many farmers not rearing these already?
As I see it, the hardest part of this programme will be keeping an accurate record of just how many pigs I haven’t reared. Are there any Government or Local Authority courses on this?
My friend is very satisfied with this business. He has been rearing pigs for forty years or so, and the best annual return he ever made on them was £1,422 in 1978; that is, until this year, when he received your cheque for £3,000 for not rearing any.
If I were to get £3,000 for not rearing fifty pigs, will I be entitled to £6,000 for not rearing a hundred? I plan to operate on a small scale at first, holding myself down to about 4,000 pigs not raised, which will mean about £240,000 for the first year. However, as I become more expert in not rearing pigs, I plan to be more ambitious, perhaps increasing to, say, 40,000 pigs not reared in my second year, for which I should expect about £2.4 million from your department. Incidentally, I wonder if I would be eligible to receive tradable carbon credits for all these pigs not producing harmful and polluting methane gases?
Another point: these pigs that I plan not to rear will not eat 2,000 tonnes of cereals. I understand that you also pay farmers not to grow crops, so will I qualify for payments for not growing cereals in order not to feed the pigs I don’t rear?
In order to diversify, I am also considering the ‘not milking cows’ business, so please send any information leaflets you have on that too, please. Would you also include the current DEFRA advice on set-aside fields? Can this be done on an e-commerce basis of ‘virtual’ fields of which I seem to have several thousand hectares?
In view of the above, you will realise that I shall be totally unemployed and will, therefore, qualify for unemployment benefits over and above the monies that I shall receive from DEFRA’s Rural Payments Agency.
I shall, of course, be voting for your party at the next General Election.
Yours Faithfully
Nigel Johnson-Hill.
H/T Phillip bratby
Russel's Wally World.
clipe
Bratby
Russell's
clipe
Russell's Wotty (asrtro-proctology) World.
clipe
1. I believe this thread should always be at the top of the Discussion ensemble
2. I cannot believe that we have not found anything of value that we wish to exhibit in this thread since 2017
3. I believe this thread should not be confined to the witty or posts that make us smile, it should contain what we consider posts that we believe are well written, succinct, and make us think.
To those ends I submit a short post from tinyCO2
I'm not sure it's useful to distinguish between ideologies. Few people follow any dogma, dogmatically. They bend the rules or interpret them as they choose. Look at warmists. They never practice what they preach. The anti racists are often racist, they just hate different races. The Christians are regularly un Christian.
Society needs both socialism (eg religion, health services, us) and individualism (eg capitalism, consumerism, me). The former stifles progress, the latter causes inequality. Greed and kindness float free of these two positions. Thus we can have evil priests and bankers or kind nurses and business owners. Good and bad can come, regardless of intentions - thus consumerism has improved the lives of most people but those who fall through the cracks need a social network to catch them. Socialism infantalises populations but a truly capitalistic society would let people fail utterly.
People disagree over where the sweet point is.
Jun 9, 2020 at 10:15 AM | Unregistered CommenterTinyCO2
AK
Jonathan
Thank you for that. I was on the point of suggesting it should be added but I got dragged away to do something more "important" and then it slipped my mind.
One of the classics. As, of course, was the original!