Wednesday, February 07, 2007

Quality of Debate

It's not just what you say, or how you say it. It's also between whom: Talk about Newsnight

I just watched the piece on my PC, and sit amazed at the docile and polite Mr. Paxman I saw.

What troubles me slightly is that I am still not clear as to whether what was written was as presented in English as stated. Mr. P said it was; and the headteacher said it was not, albeit in a less than coherent or convincing manner. Mind you, that seems to have served our current crop of politicians pretty well lately. Deny, deny deny. And eventually they'll give up asking and move on.
If it is the case that this text was/is as claimed, I can only wonder if such things remain permitted by selective access to and teaching from 'certain chapters' to be acceptable, as, grudgingly, claimed. I can see our more liberal leadership finding that one may be a slight dilemma. Imagine George G or our Ken popping over a copy of 'John & Jim Go Down On The Farm' from our primary kids' sexual equality indoctrination courses, to the British Councils in the Middle East.

I'm also curious as to the choice of 'balancing guest' to such an issue. Sure she seems to be some kind of Govt. foot-in-mouthpiece, but might I suspect her faith may have made her attractive to spice things up?

Surely a less contentious representative could have been located, especially to answer key


I'm angry all right

Are you an angry motorist?

I this an attempt to help, or capitalise? My mind is clear:

'Oh, lor, is this what it's coming to?

Ignoring all the pros and cons of car-related issues, and the feelings they may or may not inspire, the sheer illogicality of 'expressing' anything relevant to those who make policy via the suffering of a poor sod just getting through their day a million floors below beggars belief.

Such an outrage can only backfire on any efforts to question some of these issues, so as all you conspiracy theorists and media vultures circle and feed, have a play with the notion that everything can be manipulated these days to suit the agenda.

I hope we can see calm, dedicated policing being done, allowed to be done and seen to be done in getting the culprit.

So I simply now await the truth no one can know, no matter how good for ratings is the discussion.

And once it is discovered, justice being done.'


Well, I should have know my point would be missed/ignored. And what will this media do with all this feedback?

I tried this, too:

I don't know whether they are motorists who are angry, or just people pushed too far, too fast by too many rules that are not well thought out and seem to have other agnendas than those stated, but I just went to that link above and it looks like it's gone past the 3/4 million mark. Now what?

No Answers.

One thing is for sure, there is very little trust or patience left around.

Chip & Pain

New e-passport may not travel well

Devilish detail, indeed. I watched this on TV this morning.
And I think I have identified the latest fudge word du jour: 'likely'.
Or in this case, 'not likely', as in the non-answer to the question as to
whether these things will last more than two years, what the US
immigration will do by way of a knock-back if it gets bust en route with
the friendly skies (if not destination), and if not who pays for the fix.
Now, when I buy something, it's good for a year. 3-5 on extended
warranty (surely this is not what they're planni... no, couldn't be). This
is because actuaries have assessed the viable lifespan of the product.
So... for this item I am forced to get, why the 8 year discrepancy? And
why the fudge? Trust is in short supply guys. If you really want to be
sure of that index-linked, gold-plated pension, I'd suggest you make
things work, and have real answers ready if not. Otherwise, what are
you for?

But will it fly?


This is indeed an interesting concept, and good luck to them.
It certainly addresses the 'charge time' negative that applies to such vehicle options. And, standing ready for electrical engineers to correct me, there may also be some benefits with the energy loss in charging by not requiring a myriad, not-so-efficient domestic points both for charging and transfer of electrical energy. However....
I wish people would not label electric cars as no-polluting, as the exhaust pipe is just in another place, unless we are talking nuclear, which has its on set of issues.
Plus, on the day the EU fudge on vehicle emissions due to 'lobbying' (what is that? We know where your kids go to school, or what?) by major manufacturers, I'd have to say we'd need to wait a while before they can be made to agree, with the cooperation of governments and utility/station providers, on what battery, where it goes, how it comes in and out in a standard way, how safe, who pays.....
But we can dream:)

It's a con

This from Dave at Solarventi.

With my recently reminded nudge on attribution I would point out he was sent it, and sent it to me. I don't know when I'll get the time to discover its attribution (other than Dave tends to know about such stuff, and cares about science) and hence accuracy, so view it in this light.

All I can say is, for now, in the great climatic prof and con scheme of things, it's a striking example of a very bad con. And I don't mean that in a good way. See how words can be played with?

Mixed Messages?

In light of the BBC's avowed commitment to the need for solutions to mitigate and/or address climate change, what do you think?:

South African Tourism teams up with BBC World for marketing drive

Meanwhile, on a piece in the same slot about passports, the commentator excused his travelling by air constantly, because 'that's my job'. A notion, I suspect, all business travellers could apply.

Business is business, I guess.