David Mitchell's Soapbox
-
digital man wrote:
Whoa there: I thought you were supposed to be intelligent? This is childish and wrong and you know it.
Sorry, I was being facetious but often I don't realise how it appears to onlookers. I knew Eric wouldn't take it seriously.
-
ict558 wrote:
No, he's quick witted, good at repartee.
You miss the point: I know he is reasonably quick witted. However, what neither of us know is if that video was scripted and he was just parroting. There are many nimble comedians; however, they all rely on a basic script that allows for the odd ad-lib: no one can simply stand and ad-lib without some preparation for any length of time.
"If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur." Red Adair. nils illegitimus carborundum me, me, me
digital man wrote:
You miss the point
Yup, that sounds like me.
digital man wrote:
what neither of us know is if that video was scripted and he was just parroting
I may be wrong ( :) ), but I believe likely the videos would be scripted and rehearsed.
digital man wrote:
no one can simply stand and ad-lib without some preparation for any length of time.
Of course, and all stand ups have memorised apt 'ad-libs' to, mostly un-original, heckling. But split-second, apposite, repartee to an unpredictable turn of conversation, is a sign of quick-wittedness. Damn, I wish I had memorized it, but it was too quick. I just remember being very impressed. (Still don't watch his shows, though.)
Be dogmatic, not thoughtful. It's easier, and you get bumper stickers.- Anon.
-
David Mitchell's Soapbox: climate change doubters - video[^] Clearly, he is also an idiot. :)
============================== Nothing to say.
Here you go, some balance: Armstrong & Miller: Global Warming - video[^]
Sort of a cross between Lawrence of Arabia and Dilbert.[^]
-Or-
A Dead ringer for Kate Winslett[^] -
Here you go, some balance: Armstrong & Miller: Global Warming - video[^]
Sort of a cross between Lawrence of Arabia and Dilbert.[^]
-Or-
A Dead ringer for Kate Winslett[^] -
ict558 wrote:
Umm, what twaddle like
Straight bananas? Banning hedgehog flavoured crisps? Making fishermen wear hairnets? Need I go on? :)
ict558 wrote:
2008/9-ish all new LP Gas vehicles were equipped with a standard "Euro nozzle
You mean they finally caught up with reality! Holy crap, at least that holds out some hope for the ECB to finally act, even if it is well behind the curve! :)
============================== Nothing to say.
Erudite__Eric wrote:
Straight bananas?
Banning hedgehog flavoured crisps?
Making fishermen wear hairnets?
Need I go on? :)No, that's quite enough twaddle. Thanks for proving my point. Worse, are the stories with the potential to upset those affected. Patients forced to live in agony after NHS refuses to pay for painkilling injections Tens of thousands with chronic back pain will be forced to live in agony after a decision to slash the number of painkilling injections issued on the NHS, doctors have warned. This story caused distress to many receiving regular injections for chronic back pain, and was completely fallacious. The NICE directive related to those who had suffered back pain for 6 weeks from an undiagnosed cause. Rather than starting on a course of injections immediately, patients were to be offered the choice of a course of physiotherapy, exercise, or acupuncture. Should the first choice fail, an alternative choice would be tried. Only when both had failed would injections be given. This treatment had proved very successful in Australia, and in UK trials. Far from saving the NHS money, the treatment was marginally more expensive, but reduced the use of potentially harmful drugs. (BTW: The Daily Mail journalist, working from the same Press Release, got the story right, and even researched the courses offered.)
Erudite__Eric wrote:
finally caught up with reality
Yeah. Negotiating Emissions, Test Methods, Standards and Technology with the Governments of Europe, Russian Federation, USA, Australia, Japan, ... plus the Manufacturers and Trade Associations of these countries, and getting an agreement - a doddle.
Be dogmatic, not thoughtful. It's easier, and you get bumper stickers.- Anon.
-
Erudite__Eric wrote:
Straight bananas?
Banning hedgehog flavoured crisps?
Making fishermen wear hairnets?
Need I go on? :)No, that's quite enough twaddle. Thanks for proving my point. Worse, are the stories with the potential to upset those affected. Patients forced to live in agony after NHS refuses to pay for painkilling injections Tens of thousands with chronic back pain will be forced to live in agony after a decision to slash the number of painkilling injections issued on the NHS, doctors have warned. This story caused distress to many receiving regular injections for chronic back pain, and was completely fallacious. The NICE directive related to those who had suffered back pain for 6 weeks from an undiagnosed cause. Rather than starting on a course of injections immediately, patients were to be offered the choice of a course of physiotherapy, exercise, or acupuncture. Should the first choice fail, an alternative choice would be tried. Only when both had failed would injections be given. This treatment had proved very successful in Australia, and in UK trials. Far from saving the NHS money, the treatment was marginally more expensive, but reduced the use of potentially harmful drugs. (BTW: The Daily Mail journalist, working from the same Press Release, got the story right, and even researched the courses offered.)
Erudite__Eric wrote:
finally caught up with reality
Yeah. Negotiating Emissions, Test Methods, Standards and Technology with the Governments of Europe, Russian Federation, USA, Australia, Japan, ... plus the Manufacturers and Trade Associations of these countries, and getting an agreement - a doddle.
Be dogmatic, not thoughtful. It's easier, and you get bumper stickers.- Anon.
-
I fear this thread is straying of course here. Of course the media likes a story and will talk one up. One should always be cautious when reading anything.
============================== Nothing to say.
Erudite__Eric wrote:
I fear this thread is straying of course here.
True, but ...
Oakman hath written:
Sorry. Thread drift happens, you know. You probably should get used to it. Or just ignore it.
There is no higher authority.
Erudite__Eric wrote:
One should always be cautious when reading anything.
Especially media publishers who confirm your own bias.
Be dogmatic, not thoughtful. It's easier, and you get bumper stickers.- Anon.
-
Erudite__Eric wrote:
I fear this thread is straying of course here.
True, but ...
Oakman hath written:
Sorry. Thread drift happens, you know. You probably should get used to it. Or just ignore it.
There is no higher authority.
Erudite__Eric wrote:
One should always be cautious when reading anything.
Especially media publishers who confirm your own bias.
Be dogmatic, not thoughtful. It's easier, and you get bumper stickers.- Anon.
-
Erudite__Eric wrote:
Has it been resolved yet if there is > 50% consensus of scientists that agree that a particle went faster than the speed of light at CERN? [>c denier].
kmg365 wrote:
Has it been resolved yet if there is > 50% consensus of scientists that agree that a particle went faster than the speed of light at CERN? [>c denier].
Yes, from my understanding approx. 0.1% believed that anyway - even the originators of the rumour seemed to regard it as unlikely, but looked for outside help demonstrating that. Turns out there was a calculation error where, ironically, they didn't allow for relativistic effects on time measurements. The error this caused was pretty well exactly equal to the discrepancy in measurements.
-
kmg365 wrote:
Has it been resolved yet if there is > 50% consensus of scientists that agree that a particle went faster than the speed of light at CERN? [>c denier].
Yes, from my understanding approx. 0.1% believed that anyway - even the originators of the rumour seemed to regard it as unlikely, but looked for outside help demonstrating that. Turns out there was a calculation error where, ironically, they didn't allow for relativistic effects on time measurements. The error this caused was pretty well exactly equal to the discrepancy in measurements.
Rob Grainger wrote:
Turns out there was a calculation error where, ironically, they didn't allow for relativistic effects on time measurements. The error this caused was pretty well exactly equal to the discrepancy in measurements.
Any chance of a reference for that? It is a subject that fascinates me, and although I have been following the story, I hadn't picked up the final analysis.
-
kmg365 wrote:
Has it been resolved yet if there is > 50% consensus of scientists that agree that a particle went faster than the speed of light at CERN? [>c denier].
Yes, from my understanding approx. 0.1% believed that anyway - even the originators of the rumour seemed to regard it as unlikely, but looked for outside help demonstrating that. Turns out there was a calculation error where, ironically, they didn't allow for relativistic effects on time measurements. The error this caused was pretty well exactly equal to the discrepancy in measurements.
-
So, do you have irrefutable evidence that there is no problem or are you just an arse?
Panic, Chaos, Destruction. My work here is done. Drink. Get drunk. Fall over - P O'H OK, I will win to day or my name isn't Ethel Crudacre! - DD Ethel Crudacre I cannot live by bread alone. Bacon and ketchup are needed as well. - Trollslayer Have a bit more patience with newbies. Of course some of them act dumb - they're often *students*, for heaven's sake - Terry Pratchett
Nagy Vilmos wrote:
So, do you have irrefutable evidence that there is no problem or are you just an arse?
I now have irrefutable evidence that you are a big mouthed coward who hasnt the conviction of his foul mouthed insults. Wimp. :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
============================== Nothing to say.