Date Started: 18/5/14 Date Completed: 19/5/14 Date First Published: 19/5/14
Foreword:
Most of this mini-essay will be familiar to anyone who read the weekly 'Entertainment' article for the week 12-18/5/14. There are differences, though, with both amendments and additions, so you might wish to read it even if you read the original iteration.
If you don't live in the UK, or even in Europe, then this mini-essay might be interesting/amusing to you, anyway ;-)
How farcical can Ukippers really be?
Well, let’s take a look at the evidence, shall we...
[storms are divine retribution for the gays]
[UKIP votes "no" on tackling ivory trade]
[UKIP gladly gains votes from the BNP]
[Lenny Henry should go where Black people come from... not Dudley!]
[bongo bongo land should not be getting aid from Britain]
[70% of laws 'do' originate in Europe]
[OK, they don't... but they 'do' originate in Europe]
[the gays should thank straights for persecuting them all the time]
[censorship of opinion is perfectly fine, unless it's ours]
[the gays should be killed, and if you expose us we'll shut you down]
[the EU is to blame for UKIP not getting votes from their moronic voters]
[arrest people who call us fascists, even though they're basically right]
[rape within marriage is perfectly fine, as is slavery]
[UKIP has three of the top five laziest MEPs]
[the public should be stripped of the right to vote]
[we're not corrupt Nazis, we just snort crack off naked girls, while proudly showing off our Nazi tattoos]
Given the extensive preposterousnesses of their verified behaviour, even the content of this article seems to be brought into contention:
'Inside the UKIP Zoo'
http://www.hopenothate.org.uk/news/home/article/3140/inside-the-ukip-zoo
"One employee said: 'They are utterly chaotic. I was horrified by them. There's an element of the 70s golf club.'
Another added: 'You see the most extraordinary things. Everybody has been out with everybody else. There are animals in the office, people taking their clothes off... there are no sanctions. People are used to doing their own thing.'
At one point, workers wrote a list of 'people we want to shag' on the office whiteboard - including the name of Mr Farage, the party leader who is UKIP's only household name.
His wife Kirsten reportedly has to send emails on Mr Farage's behalf, because he does not know how to use a computer and prefers to receive faxes.
She has admitted that the office 'takes some getting used to' and privately described the atmosphere as a 'freakshow', according to The Times."
I’d just write that lot down as propaganda, if it didn’t come in the context of everything else they’ve done! Farage being unable to use a computer seems absolutely believable.
But as ramshackle as these people are; and as bigoted as these people are; and as incompetent as these people are; and as unrelentingly deceitful as these people are; surely they’re a bunch of well-meaning alternatives to the ‘main’ Parties? Right? Right??
If they’re not that, then they’re nothing.
We know they hate the EU. We know they resent any of the UK having anything to do with Europe at all. We know they’re willing to completely fabricate pseudo-statistics in their efforts to persuade us to vote in favour of them, and therefore against the EU. So surely they can at least remember that fact, huh?
'Ukip asks MEPs for £10,000 ‘from your generous payments’'
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/politics/article4028266.ece
Hmm... it seems not. Instead of treating the money they get from the EU as dirty money, and eagerly returning it to the taxpayers from whence they came, they have decided that they shall keep all their ill-gotten gains.
But Mr. Farage is not content for the members of his –cult- Party to keep their money for themselves - oh no - they must keep that money for his self!
{The correct way to pronounce 'Nigel Farage' by the way, is 'niggle farridge' because that's exactly the way he likes it. Trust me. He does} :-P
He refers to them as ‘generous payments’ so i presume he is attempting to present the EU as a gaggle of snouts-in-the-trough bureaucrats.
But this completely falls down, when you consider that instead of rejecting the payments, proudly and boastfully, as anyone who really wanted to resist the EU would do (the way socialists reject peerages) they gleefully accept the money!
This isn’t the behaviour of an anti-EU anti-snouts-in-the-trough politician. This isn’t the behaviour of a rebel – someone fighting the establishment – someone standing up for the little man, against the Brussels bureaucracy. This is the behaviour of someone who immediately drops their principles, the moment self-serving reward appears in front of their eyes.
But what does he really want with the money? His wealthy donors have funded him to the hilt – his propaganda is everywhere – he doesn’t need it. He just wants it. But what for?
Well, presumably, those tweeds he wears, loafing while watching dogs tear foxes apart, are immensely expensive. Blood sports have always been so damn costly, haven't they... not least to the wildlife!
I'm trying to hold back, too, at my seething resentment of the way the BBC's fawned over Nigel Farage and the Unbearable Kunts Isolationist Party, during the last year’s coverage.
Farage has been invited to, and featured on, Question Time, nineteen times! That's an order of magnitude more than all of the world's scientists, put together, throughout the current goverment's time in power!
And he’s received extensive coverage on the BBC News, too. You would have thought it difficult to provide him with glowing coverage... and it is. They don’t manage it. But they do, at least, present him with sympathy. All those nasty anti-UKIP protesters, you know. Poor man. Everybody say “awwwww”. Horrendous!
But then, would you expect better of the BBC? Historically, they have always presented favouritism to the reigning regime of the day. If Labour are in, then they fawn over them; if the Tories are in, then they fawn over them instead.
We should expect the BBC to fawn over UKIP, i suppose, because Ukippers are Tories.
This subject is a highly embarrassing one to true-blue Conservative voters, because the UKIP funding base, and voting base, is of Conservative Party extraction.
When Tory donors shifted allegiance to UKIP, a few years back, a huge number of Tory votes suddenly swung UKIP's way.
Neil Hamilton might be glad that UKIP are gaining votes from the British Nazi Party, but it's the votes gained from the Tories that have made a much bigger difference to Nigel Farage's bank balance!
But why did donors to the Conservative Party shift to UKIP in the first place?
Well, because they were businessmen, working through businesses that 'suffer' the restrictions of the EU's regulations.
Those might be regulations that the UK Parties of red, blue and yellow, have recently been very unwilling to match in UK legislation, but that’s not good enough, for these people.
By funding a Party that were likely to pull the UK out of the EU, they would be free from said legislation, and then their profit-margins would instantly surge. With pounds sterling signs bouncing in front of their eyes, they've managed to persuade themselves to skim relatively tiny amounts from their huge coffers, to fund UKIP's propaganda.
When they realised UKIP might have more success than the Tories, they shifted allegiance; so the posters followed; and then the voters. All because of some entrepreneurial capitalists' avarice!
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ukip/10833644/Ukip-enjoys-donation-surge-after-Tory-donors-defect.html
http://www.channel4.com/news/the-publishers-and-lords-bankrolling-ukip-factcheck
"Any publicity's good publicity" so they say. I'm not so sure about this car crash of an interview, on LBC Radio, though:
'Nigel Farage v James O'Brien: Live On LBC'
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-pyYoL9ngtE&feature=share
BTW, if the UK pulled out of the EU, it would make international police collaboration to prosecute people-traffickers and rescue kidnapped people more difficult. They'd have to go just 26 miles, over the English Channel, instead of 26 countries, without getting caught. Just remember that, when he mentions 'revolving doors'.
It’s made quite clear, that Nigel Farage is not a rebel at all, despite his protestations. He is a Toryite, Thatcherite, anti-regulations, anti-accountability solipsist, for whom the EU’s ‘free trade’ agreements are just not enough.
That was on the LBC radio station, but the BBC, certainly, should be doing better than promoting sympathy for stunted fascists.
And by 'stunted' i mean 'not quite' - fascists openly exhort more than one moronically demented policy:
'The Flaw Part 2 - The Tommy Tankers (BNP Youth)'
http://youtu.be/RzQmpp5rEcU
That one policy being: "foreigners are harming this country, so let's condemn them as much as possible!"
But how are they harming this country? Through crime? Well, that's factually inaccurate!
'EU migration has little impact on crime rates in England'
"minorities from the European Union are only responsible for approximately 1% of all crimes committed in England."
http://phys.org/news/2014-05-eu-migration-impact-crime-england.html
That research was funded by the EU, by the way, who have a vested interest in suppressing international crime, mitigating climatic change, combating disease, facilitating continent-wide scientific collaboration, and redistributing wealth to the poorest people as part of a recognition of universal Human Rights.
We’ve had some evidence of what UKIP’s like. Let’s have some evidence of what the EU’s like...
[the EU has reduced alcohol caused deaths, while the UK's have skyrocketed]
[the EU passed strong net neutrality laws, to protect consumers]
[the EU has banned pesticides, to help protect bees from colony collapse]
[the EU has been assertive about extending human rights to women]
[the EU has funded research into how to best protect children from Web-based threats]
[the EU quashed the online piracy act, to preserve people's freedoms]
[the EU condemns violence against lesbians in Africa, and Queers everywhere]
[the EU imposes standards on food and drugs, to protect people from harm by quacks]
[the EU imposes noise pollution regulations to protect marine wildlife]
[the EU imposes air pollution regulations, to protect people from cardiovascular disease]
Well, they sound absolutely terrible, don’t they. I’m so glad we have someone fighting the good fight, valiantly defending our shores from such things as health standards, equality, and justice.
At first, i thought they were just a bunch of stereotypically Toryite, White, male, greying, fox-hating bell-ends, and now it turns out they’re stereotypically Toryite, White, male, greying, fox-hating bell-ends who are fighting to protect us from all of those horrible things. <s>
Puh-lease!!!
It's no concession to say that the EU’s not perfect – no organisation in the world is - everyone's corruptible, but that's nothing new - and it hardly warrants lying about them. Especially if you think they have done genuine harm. (nudge nudge, Greenpeace)
UKIP has shown an incredible disregard for honesty in their campaigning tactics. Lying’s something we all expect of pollies, but Ukippers really take the cake.
That cake being a Victoria Sponge, by the way. The most British of all cakes. Even though, like Victoria, Farage married a German, and both of them possess foreign, Latin first names.
Let’s take a look at some of their campaigning claims...
"Britain doesn't get anything back from the EU"
Well of course it does, but in the ways i’ve already mentioned. They, as you might expect, are not ways that any Ukipper cares about.
"75% of UK laws originate in the EU"
No. None of them do. UK laws are UK laws, and EU laws are not. Think of it this way: local by-laws do not originate in national government. They originate in much smaller, local/regional organisations. But does that mean national laws don’t apply in Rickmansworth, because they have bylaws? Of course not – they coexist, with separate origins. Bylaws do not originate in Westminster. UK laws do not originate in the EU. The number in this pseudo-statistic, in fact, came from a speech that didn't even mention the UK!
"No other Party wants a referendum on EU membership"
This is easily checked - there are about a dozen Parties offering a referendum on membership, not including any independent candidates - most of them are of the demented, fascist right-winger variety that Ukippers have so much in common with; the rest are goggle-eyed, paranoiic left-wing conspiracy theorists.
"26 million people will come to the UK if the borders are opened"
This claim has been roundly mocked, by every comedian in the country. It’s the sum total of all unemployed people, across the EU. But they do not want to come to the UK, for one very good reason... they want to stay at home. They have an emotional attachment to it, just like Ukippers do to their own... and just like the 2.5 million in that 26 million figure, who already live in the UK, because they are the UK’s unemployed!
"You're only criticising us because you're scared of us"
Well, no, we’re not. You're being criticised because people thing you're woefully wrong. But whether people are scared of you or not, why are you so willing to accept that you intimidate people?
Then there are the obvious comparisons with the BNP's posters; that UKIP don't like. Not for any rationale (they agree with each other, largely) but through emotional interests. They don't want association with a competitor faction, no matter how similar, to undermine their chances!
'Ukip anti-immigration posters - what do they actually say? - Channel 4 News'
http://www.channel4.com/news/ukip-anti-immigration-posters-what-they-say-comparisons
I shall also point out that UKIP shares some extent of its xenophobia with the three 'main' Parties, who’ve shamefully exploited nationalist sentiment, in the hope of winning extra votes. Even Labour and the Lib-Dems have expressed support for ‘border control’ when it comes to migration across arbitrary geographical boundaries.
{They have done the same with drugs policy and nationalisations - even though polls show majority disapproval of their policies, no one of them is brave enough to step out of line!}
If they’re fine with people commuting 80 miles from the Midlands, into central London, to have lunch with a City of London corporat, and then vote conveniently in corporate interests in the afternoon; then why are they so upset about people who commute 30 miles across the English Channel, to look for work?
Residents of the UK, like those of any island, suffer from the fact that marine regions seem a far more real boundary than a line on the ground, or a map, and so they find themselves far more protective of it than anyone on the mainland might. Is this why the British are so much more nationalistically conservative than mainlanders? I shan’t go into hypothesisations on that now, though...
Frankly, i find it outrageous that any people think the UK must enjoy a net financial benefit from the EU, when it clearly has far more money than any other member State! ...well, if you count all the trillions of dirty money perfectly-legally squirreled away in the Channel Islands, Turks & Caicos, etc, under the UK's decidedly dodgy tax regime.
We should be proud that we have the corrupt billionaires to tax money from and give to poor continental Europeans, and yet the 'public discourse' (Media's chosen narrative) completely ignores this. Instead, our minds are led down the garden path, with shit about Brussels bureaucrats making the 'honest working man' poorer! (Through having to pay for straightened cucumbers, presumably... which they don't - all of those stories are completely fictional!)
But our 'mainstream' pollies do that well enough on their own, thank you very much. All of that 'missing' tax revenue is piled up on the metaphorical shores of tiny Caribbean islands, because our own politicians have decided that it shall! And it is from their pressure that the EU has made dodgy financial decisions, in recent years.
Instead of encouraging redistribution of wealth, and a cultural benevolence, both to UK citizens, and those of the EU, the Media has been perfectly happy to pander to the anti-EU propaganda, and encourage everyone to think that their own ignominy is a direct consequence of greedy Europeans.
Whom, ironically, we have far more in common with than the people who sell us this bullshit! So the public pressure mounts up on MEPs (even though nobody bothers to even find out what they look like) rather than the MPs who should be raising tax revenue from the greedy bastards who make it their living to suck money out of society and not put it back!
Notice, too, that anti-EU xenophobes are not described as "anti-EU" or "xenophobes" or even "Europhobes". They are given the seemingly respectable title of "Eurosceptics" which makes it seem like they've had the human decency to doubt their wildly hysterical opinions! Skepticism doesn't come into it - Europe's there, whether they like it or not. Any argument that what they're doing is skepticism, would be totally facile.
By dressing their images up in these absurdist titles, and giving them air-time all over the place, they are presenting, to the electorate, the premise that people, through their ideologies, are valid candidates for their vote! They shouldn't even be in contention. Like the BNP. Nick Griffin must be seething his way through all of the wonderful coverage Farage has been getting. "That could be me" he's probably thinking; "his party's received £7 million in donations" he mumbles; "i could be rich by now" he hisses through gritted teeth.
The BNP has been almost entirely censored by the British Press, and yet they are just as deserving of people's votes. The British Media has been feckless and irresponsible, and all i can think to do, in the face of them, is sigh and say two words: "Leveson Inquiry"
It’s not as if Nigel Farage, or any of the Ukippers, have really put in any great amount of effort to establishing their Party as a serious threat.
Nigel Farage has, himself, claimed that UKIP's previous manifesto for the last EP election was "drivel".
Their current manifesto is 12 pages of pictures, unsubstantiated claims, and the mountebank's classic list of delusional "I defected to UKIP because..." testimonials!
Once again, i shall point out that this is not entirely peculiar. In fact, all governmental factions - political Parties - do this. They all make dodgy claims; they all like to have pictures of themselves taken, often with food or babies, in an attempt to convince the electorate they're human; and they all employ testimonials. This is the typical tactic of someone whose agenda is not evidence-based. They, instead of making a valid case, argue that because someone (who might or might not even exist) agrees with them, then they must be right!
It really says something about the intellectual calibre of the UKIP Party's membership, though, that they have sought to defend their previous, shit manifesto, by saying it wasn't the intended one to use... and in fact, that the current one doesn't exist yet!
I would have thought a serious politician would have the formulation of a manifesto - the very book that outlines your policies for potential voters to see - as chief priority! I would have thought that even someone pretending to be a serious politician would have a manifesto. I would have thought that even someone pretending to be a serious politician would at least pretend to have a manifesto.
But no – Ukippers gleefully claim that there can’t be anything wrong with their manifesto, because it doesn’t exist!
What's the point of going 'into politics' if you're not going to bother with the political bit? Why don't Ukippers care about this? I'm not joking when i say that there are Ukippers who will outright deny that UKIP has ever had a manifesto.
But hang on – their campaign gets better!
The 'Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership' (TTIP) is being pushed (currently just proposed – not passed) by big business, solely for the purposes of exacting revenge against States that try to keep them accountable. It's a potential arrangement, between the USA and EU member States, to enable corporations to fine countries for regulations that impinge upon their profit margins.
It's been described as a 'grave threat' to national sovereignty, and i'm not surprised!
If the Ukippers are seriously in favour of UK sovereignty, then why the hell don't they state a policy against the TTIP, which does so much to threaten it!?
Why hasn’t “Stop the TTIP” been one of their campaign slogans? Surely it can’t be because no-one’s heard of it, can it!? Maybe if UKIP cared about it, and implicitly ‘their country’s sovereignty’ then they would have told everyone.
...or maybe, they don’t know about it, themselves. Ah, yes – that wouldn’t surprise me. I keep trying to take these imbeciles seriously. What a fool am i.
As a further demonstration of the lunatic nature of the paranoid factionalistic mind of a Ukipper, we have... conspiracy 'theories'.
If you dare criticise UKIP, its members, its policies, its funding, or anything about it, then you are part of a conspiracy to undermine them, in league with the 'political classes', or an 'enemy of this country'.
Nigel Farage himself has claimed thusly, in the LBC interview, but showed no willingness to answer whether Patrick O'Flynn - UKIP communications director and former Daily Express Political Editor - was part of this ruling elite of the 'political class' or not. I'm not surprised.
Such people are often blind to their own statements. In just 40 seconds, people like Farage can completely forget what they've just said, and contradict it dramatically. It's bee my personal misfortune to experience this, first hand. Pay close attention, and you'll notice it happening, all the way through. Here’s the link, again.
When you see people like this, it's easy to imagine how the Bible got written with so many direct contradictions in it, isn’t it. Here are 360 of that particular document’s to be going on with.
If you oppose UKIP, then you are part of 'the establishment' whether in the ruling elite or not. And, therefore, your opinion is irrelevant to them. This is the trick of self-deception they use to con themselves into thinking they don't have to doubt their moronic policies.
And because you're just trying to undermine them, for personal gain, it therefore makes it OK for them to slander you, in an attempt to stop you from slandering them.
For example, when you correctly point out their dodgy financial relationships, and... oh, i don't know, their political relationships with people who supported Anders Breivik's Christian Nationalist bid to 'fight back' against liberal secularism... by murdering 77 'heathens' (mostly children) in cold blood.
Point this kind of fact out, and they'll distance themselves from their friends, quicker than you can select a deliberately provocative four-letter word to shout at them.
Another symptom of nutbag conspiracy 'theory' ideation, is paranoid delusions of persecution. For example, the notion that 'fringe' (as the populists say) groups are being derided, not because their opinions are unfamiliar or unpopular, but because the people who hold them must be persecuted.
One Ukipper has compared criticism of UKIP to the Nazi Holocaust against the Jewish people. But that's not peculiar, in itself - religionists (Christians and Muslims alike) of all kinds have done the same. Strangely, the Jews do not see disproportionately likely to join them.
They worship their abusers, when they can feel like they're on the same side as them; but when they feel estranged from a faction, then that faction's 'leaders' mysteriously transform into brutal ogres. To a Ukipper, a Toryite Thatcherite antisocialist and member of UKIP, is whiter than white can be. But an identical Toryite Thatcherite antisocialist and member of a different Party, is the devil incarnate – evil scourge of all that is holy – the callous establishment that feeds only itself. In £10,000 chunks, requested from servile underlings, presumably.
There is nothing profoundly rebellious about condemning the ruling elite, Brussels bureaucracy, and totalitarian overlords, when you behave so similarly to the overlords that you condemn!
If you wish to raise your intellectual sights beyond these idiosyncrasies, then we can go to the subject of one of my recent mini-essays: tolerance. What, exactly, is being tolerated, and what hated, when a Ukipper leaves a comment like this in a blogger's comment section:
"Get the Muslims and foreign scum out of England is all this country needs"?
These are exactly the same people who condemn such bloggers for being 'haters'. Really!? How can they be so profoundly blind to themselves? Because they equivocate intolerance of their bigotry, with intolerance of people. So in their perception, hating their opinions is hating them. But their own hatred is something that is justified by the circular logic of self-delusion... well, of course.
"I've seen countless examples of openly expressed fascism from Ukippers on my page, with the main target groups being Muslims, homosexuals, immigrants and "lefties" says ‘Another Angry Voice’
"Can we start a mass culling of all left wing commie twats?" he presents, exemplarily.
“This foul mouthed call for the systematic killing of political opponents really doesn't need any further analysis at all, does it?”
No. It doesn’t.
“All I need say is that the mindset of anyone that imagines themself a victim of fascist persecution, whilst supporting the same political party as so many people that spout openly fascist nonsense like this, is fascinatingly warped.”
And all i need to say is... “yup”.
How farcical can Ukippers be?
Far more farcical than you can possible imagine.
The stern advice part:
The people of the UK (and other European countries too, of course) should have a long hard think about the way they vote, in the coming European Elections. And any elections, in fact. 90 years ago, Europeans made exactly the same mistakes that Britons are making today.
They are confusing countries with people, and collaboration with exploitation. They are gullibly falling for conspiracy theories, and anti-social propaganda, because they are happy to settle for what the Media tells them, and they are ignoring the fact that with elections, they have to choose between the options available to them.
By voting for politics that's even worse than that exhibited by the currently powerful parties, they will make their lives and 'their country' even worse.
By not voting at all, they censor their role in democracy entirely - politicians need not worry about people who disagree with them, if there is no threat that their vote will go against them!
A vote for one-policy xenophobes, like UKIP, is not a protest vote - it's a self-flagellation vote! Don't be a masochist - vote for people/parties that are at least benign.
'Why voting Green is a good protest vote'
http://anotherangryvoice.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/green-party-protest-vote-eu.html
Here's how to vote, by the way:
1) If you haven't registered to vote, do so - find the website of your local council and register promptly.
2) Research the policies of all the candidates, using the only available resource - Wikipedia.
Unlike with national politics in the UK, where we have the wonderful theyworkforyou.com there is no such penetrable resource for MEPs. (Both sites are independently run)
This means we must guess what they might be like, according to affiliation. Just look up their EP parties on Wiki and see what happens.
3) Go to the voting station on Thursday 22nd May 2014, having already made your decision, and put an 'X' next to at least three boxes.
You will have the options of Parties, and independent candidates. You don't get to choose individuals within Parties, though - the Party decides who they want to allocate your vote to!
4) Put the piece of paper in the big bin, and then go home and hope you got your choice right!
P.S. If you were considering voting for UKIP... they don't want you to, anyway. May i remind you of this:
'Strip public of the vote says UKIP candidate'
http://www.politics.co.uk/news/2014/05/13/strip-public-of-the-vote-says-ukip-candidate
"I sometimes think the people who fought for the vote in 1832 and 1888 and so forth, trying to extend the franchise were probably doing the wrong thing," he told an election hustings in West Hampstead. "I think perhaps we should start reducing the franchise."
("Franchise" in this case means the possession of a vote, to cast)
https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=738645972822880&id=119416361412514
That's UKIP's Press Advisor, by the way :-D
Can we have some sense of sanity back in the house, please?
'UKIP’s ‘Days Since Last Embarrassing Revelation’ chart steadfastly remaining at zero'
http://newsthump.com/2014/05/16/ukips-days-since-last-embarrassing-revelation-chart-steadfastly-remaining-at-zero/
Thank you, Newsthump :-D
Frankly, i have no intention of suffering the Thatcherite intellectual delinquency that facilitated the corruption Ukippers enjoy. I will certainly not be voting for UKIP.
You kipper if you want to -- this tapejara's not for kippering!
..
.
Hello again, all you not-necessarily-voting-in-the-forthcoming-European-Parliament-electioners
This week has been a week of poor health. Not personally. I mean other people's...
The 12th-18th has been Mental Health Week:
'Mental health'
"If you're having mental health problems, you're not alone. One in four of us will have problems with our mental health at some time in our lives."
http://www.nhs.uk/livewell/mentalhealth/pages/mentalhealthhome.aspx?
Mental health problems can be a lot more mundane than people think.
Then there's another kind of health...
The Torygraph has has advised people WITH A HEADLINE not to drink fruit juice. (Paper versions are always different) How irresponsible is that!
{Update: here's a scan of the original, terrible advice}
They've been claiming that 'the latest' medical advice is to not drink fruit juice, because it rots teeth. And they've also been claiming that the 7-a-day idea is a demonstration that they can't make up their minds!
As part of the research for my second-to-last mini-essay - 'Eating For £1 A Day' - I was refreshed as to the actual medical advice on this subject.
The NHS's advice is (and it still is - it hasn't changed) that people should strive to eat at least five portions of fruit and veg per day (which includes 7!); and that the best drink to have on its own is water.
They say that fruit juice is a good source of vitamins and should be drunk in order to get them, but should be consumed at mealtimes, to avoid dental harm.
They also say to preferentially consume fruit in solid, fruity form, because solids satiate hunger, but fluids don't.
So, overall, the advice regarding fruit juice consumption is this: it's good for the vitamins, but drink it at mealtimes to spare your teeth, and preferentially consume solid stuff to spare your waistline.
Does that seem like medical advice to not drink fruit juice, to you?
And then on to cultural health...
'UKIP’s ‘Days Since Last Embarrassing Revelation’ chart steadfastly remaining at zero'
http://newsthump.com/2014/05/16/ukips-days-since-last-embarrassing-revelation-chart-steadfastly-remaining-at-zero/
Thank you, Newsthump :-D
But in the real world, UKIP hardly seems much less farcical!
'Ukip asks MEPs for £10,000 ‘from your generous payments’'
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/politics/article4028266.ece
Instead of treating the money they get from the EU as dirty money, and eagerly returning it to taxpayers, they have decided that they shall keep all their ill-gotten gains.
But Mr. Farage is not content for the members of his cult Party to keep their money for themselves - oh no - they must keep that money for his self!
Presumably, those tweeds he wears, loafing while watching dogs tear foxes apart, are immensely expensive. Blood sports have always been so damn costly, haven't they... not least to the wildlife!
Given the extensive preposterousnesses of their verified behaviour, the content of this article seems to be brought into contention:
'Inside the UKIP Zoo'
http://www.hopenothate.org.uk/news/home/article/3140/inside-the-ukip-zoo
"One employee said: 'They are utterly chaotic. I was horrified by them. There's an element of the 70s golf club.'
Another added: 'You see the most extraordinary things. Everybody has been out with everybody else. There are animals in the office, people taking their clothes off... there are no sanctions. People are used to doing their own thing.'
At one point, workers wrote a list of 'people we want to shag' on the office whiteboard - including the name of Mr Farage, the party leader who is UKIP's only household name.
His wife Kirsten reportedly has to send emails on Mr Farage's behalf, because he does not know how to use a computer and prefers to receive faxes.
She has admitted that the office 'takes some getting used to' and privately described the atmosphere as a 'freakshow', according to The Times."
I'm not saying i necessarily believe these claims. But they seem highly plausible, given everything else they've done:
[storms are divine retribution for the gays]
[UKIP votes "no" on tackling ivory trade]
[UKIP gladly gains votes from the BNP]
[Lenny Henry should go where Black people come from... not Dudley!]
[70% of laws 'do' originate in Europe]
[OK, they don't... but they 'do' originate in Europe]
[the gays should thank straights for persecuting them all the time]
[censorship of opinion is perfectly fine, unless it's ours]
[the EU is to blame for UKIP not getting votes from their moronic voters]
[arrest people who call us fascists, even though they're basically right]
[the public should be stripped of the right to vote]
[we're not corrupt Nazis, we just snort crack off naked girls, while proudly showing off our Nazi tattoos]
And i'm trying to hold back, too, at my seething resentment of the way the BBC's fawned over Nigel Farage and the Unbearable Kunts Isolationist Party.
Farage has been invited to, and featured on, Question Time, nineteen times! That's an order of magnitude more than all of the world's scientists, put together, throughout the current goverment's time in power!
The BBC should be doing better than promoting sympathy for stunted fascists.
And by 'stunted' i mean 'not quite' - fascists openly exhort more than one moronically demented policy:
'The Flaw Part 2 - The Tommy Tankers (BNP Youth)'
http://youtu.be/RzQmpp5rEcU
That one policy being: "foreigners are harming this country, so let's condemn them as much as possible!"
But how are they harming this country? Through crime? Well, that's factually inaccurate!
'EU migration has little impact on crime rates in England'
"minorities from the European Union are only responsible for approximately 1% of all crimes committed in England."
http://phys.org/news/2014-05-eu-migration-impact-crime-england.html
That research was funded by the EU, by the way, who have a vested interest in suppressing international crime, mitigating climatic change, combating disease, facilitating continent-wide scientific collaboration, and redistributing wealth to the poorest people as part of a recognition of universal Human Rights.
[the EU has reduced alcohol caused deaths, while the UK's have skyrocketed]
[the EU passed strong net neutrality laws, to protect consumers]
[the EU has banned pesticides, to help protect bees from colony collapse]
[the EU has been assertive about extending human rights to women]
[the EU has funded research into how to best protect children from Web-based threats]
[the EU quashed the online piracy act, to preserve people's freedoms]
[the EU condemns violence against lesbians in Africa, and Queers everywhere]
[the EU imposes standards on food and drugs, to protect people from harm by quacks]
[the EU imposes noise pollution regulations to protect marine wildlife]
[the EU imposes air pollution regulations, to protect people from cardiovascular disease]
It's no concession to say they're not perfect - everyone's corruptible, but that's nothing new - and it hardly warrants lying about them. Especially if you think they have done genuine harm. (nudge nudge, Greenpeace)
Frankly, i find it outrageous that any people think the UK must enjoy a net financial benefit from the EU, when it clearly has far more money than any other member State! ...well, if you count all the trillions of dirty money perfectly-legally squirreled away in the Channel Islands, Turks & Caicos, etc, under the UK's decidedly dodgy tax regime.
We should be proud that we have the corrupt billionaires to tax money from and give to poor continental Europeans, and yet the 'public discourse' (Media's chosen narrative) completely ignores this. Instead, our minds are led down the garden path, with shit about Brussels bureaucrats making the 'honest working man' poorer! (Through having to pay for straightened cucumbers, presumably... which they don't - all of those stories are completely fictional!)
But our own pollies do that well enough on their own, thank you very much. All of that 'missing' tax revenue is piled up on the metaphorical shores of tiny Caribbean islands, because our own politicians have decided that it shall! And it is from their pressure that the EU has made dodgy financial decisions, in recent years.
Instead of encouraging redistribution of wealth, and a cultural benevolence, both to UK citizens, and those of the EU, the Media has been perfectly happy to pander to the anti-EU propaganda, and encourage everyone to think that their own ignominy is a direct consequence of greedy Europeans.
Whom, ironically, we have far more in common with than the people who sell us this bullshit! So the public pressure mounts up on MEPs (even though nobody bothers to even find out what they look like) rather than the MPs who should be raising tax revenue from the greedy bastards who make it their living to suck money out of society and not put it back!
The people of the UK, and other European countries too, of course, should have a long hard think about the way they vote, in the coming European Elections. 90 years ago, Europeans made exactly the same mistakes that Britons are making today.
They are confusing countries with people, and collaboration with exploitation. They are gullibly falling for conspiracy theories, and anti-social propaganda, because they are happy to settle for what the Media tells them, and they are ignoring the fact that with elections, they have to choose between the options available to them.
By voting for politics that's even worse than that exhibited by the currently powerful parties, they will make their lives and 'their country' even worse.
By not voting at all, they censor their role in democracy entirely - politicians need not worry about people who disagree with them, if there is no threat that their vote will go against them!
A vote for one-policy xenophobes, like UKIP, is not a protest vote - it's a self-flagellation vote! Don't be a masochist - vote for people/parties that are at least benign.
'Why voting Green is a good protest vote'
http://anotherangryvoice.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/green-party-protest-vote-eu.html
Here's how to vote, by the way:
1) If you haven't registered to vote, do so - find the website of your local council and register promptly.
2) Research the policies of all the candidates, using the only available resource - Wikipedia.
Unlike with national politics in the UK, where we have the wonderful theyworkforyou.com there is no such penetrable resource for MEPs.
This means we must guess what they might be like, according to affiliation. Just look up their EP parties on Wiki and see what happens.
3) Go to the voting station on Thursday 22nd May 2014, having already made your decision, and put an 'X' next to at least three boxes.
You will have the options of Parties, and independent candidates. You don't get to choose individuals within Parties, though - the Party decides who they want to allocate your vote to!
4) Put the piece of paper in the big bin, and then go home and hope you got your choice right!
P.S. If you were considering voting for UKIP... they don't want you to, anyway:
'Strip public of the vote says UKIP candidate'
http://www.politics.co.uk/news/2014/05/13/strip-public-of-the-vote-says-ukip-candidate
"I sometimes think the people who fought for the vote in 1832 and 1888 and so forth, trying to extend the franchise were probably doing the wrong thing," he told an election hustings in West Hampstead. "I think perhaps we should start reducing the franchise."
("Franchise" in this case means the possession of a vote, to cast)
https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=738645972822880&id=119416361412514
That's UKIP's Press Advisor, by the way :-D
In other news:
It's pet cancer awareness month! Did you know, that 50% of dogs over 10 years old are diagnosed with cancer? And that 50% of them are cured with surgery, radiotherapy, and chemotherapy; 25% have controllable cancers, and the other 25% can only be given palliative care? Compare that 50% diagnosis rate in elderly dogs, to the 41% in humans of any age. As you might expect, knowing that 'cancer' is a myriad of different conditions matching the number of types of cells they can be exhibited in, dogs don't have cancers quite like humans do. For more information, follow the link:
http://phys.org/news/2014-05-cancer-common-pets-pet-awareness.html
Pope Frank has declared that he would be willing to indoctrinate aliens, if he got the chance. First communications with aliens reveals that they won't come here, in case their children are abused by nonces in frocks <s> "While [one of the Vatican's astronomers] accepted that the chances of ever getting such an opportunity were slim, Guy Consolmagno said [in 2010]: “Any entity – no matter how many tentacles it has – has a soul”." Bullshit! All the evidence in the world says souls are nothing other than fictional constructs within religious mythology. Sorry, guys, but you look no less bonkers after this :-P
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/pope-francis-says-he-would-baptise-aliens-9360632.html
Solar panels have found their way back on top of the White House! Jimmy Carter actually had some put on in 1979, during an oil price spike, but Reagan removed them in 1987. Weirdly, it was George W Bush who had some put back, but not on the White House itself - on the cabana, to heat the White House swimming pool! Bluff Cold War climate obsrutionist fossil-fuel industry shills have been condemning it of course - using all the arguments that are actually diametrically opposed to their position: pollution in making the panels (nowhere comparative to the FF industry's) making jobs (though apparently those in the renewables industry don't count) etc, etc, etc.
http://phys.org/news/2014-05-solar-panels-atop-white-house.html
The results of a study into the genetics of a girl, found in a cave in Mexico, have been published. The girl was found in Hoyo Negro, a deeply submerged cave in the Yucatan Peninsula, and has been found to be 12,000-13,000 years old. She was probably one of the first American humans ever, and has been named 'Naia'. There's a video of the location, in 'contemporary stuff'.
http://phys.org/news/2014-05-genetic-prehistoric-girl-dating-dna.html
Yet another superstitionist charlatan has been prosecuted for fraud - this time, a 'psychic' in Fife, Scotland. She's been sentenced to 225 hours of unpaid work, but only for the £8000 she extorted as undeserved housing maintenance payments - not for the other £8000 she extorted from people through 'psychic' nonsense and 'hypnotherapy'. I wonder how many of the welfare abusers we hear about, on TV, are actually 'criminally flexible' fraudsters, like this?! Isn't it frustrating that their pseudoscientific frauds aren't recognised as such!? [sighs]
http://www.thecourier.co.uk/news/local/fife/fife-psychic-sentenced-for-8-000-benefit-fraud-1.372258
Try this for 'big boned'! Paleontologists have discovered the bones of a specimen of one of the largest ever land animals. The picture shows just its femur, which is much larger than the man lying next to it. Estimates are that these dinosaurs would have weighed ~100 tonnes, at this size!
http://phys.org/news/2014-05-fossils-largest-dinosaur-argentina.html
HAARP - the High-frequency Active Auroral Research Program that conspiracy 'theorists' love to make shit up about, has finished its atmospheric research, and will be shut down this summer. The site will be taken over by the University of Alaska, but they have no interest in continuing the research, so there's going to be $300 million of cool equipment to to dispose of! Amusingly, the anti-State ideologies that conspiracy 'theorists' anchor around HAARP, were largely originated by the Pentagon, who invented militaristic applications as reasons to fund the project, that has basically been really cool.... but largely useless... research into the upper atmosphere. Suckers, haha :-D
http://doubtfulnews.com/2014/05/haarp-terminated/
Resveratrol? Not the wonder chemical that food companies want you to believe! "...few studies have looked at whether resveratrol has benefits at the levels typically found in the human diet. "The thinking was that certain foods are good for you because they contain resveratrol," study researcher Dr. Richard Semba, of the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, said in a statement. "We didn't find that at all." But red wine, dark chocolate and grapes may still be good for the heart and have other benefits, Semba said. However, the benefits may not be due to resveratrol, he added."
http://www.richarddawkins.net/news_articles/2014/5/13/debunked-red-wine-antioxidant-won-t-help-you-live-longer?
Essen, in Germany, has approved a charity's scheme to motivate unemployed drug addicts by paying them in beers, lunch, and some money, akin to a successful scheme in Amsterdam. In return, the work they do is simply to clean the streets - this gives them a feeling of responsibility, self-worth, and everyone else a difficult-to-ignore value to the people's lives. If it works in other places, and not just in Amsterdam, this could work to help addicts all around the world, by mobilising them, and correcting prejudicial social attitudes about addiction.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/05/14/german-alcoholic-street-clean-paid-in-beer_n_5317443.html
Due to recent news about the MERS (Middle Eastern Respiratory Syndrome) virus originating in camels, some morons in Saudi Arabia have decided to show excess affection to their camels, in defiance of the WHO's advice. To them, presumably, they see it as rebelling against the State, rather than foolish antiscientific self-harm. Saudis see their camels like pets, so i imagine there are many people who would deny that their dog's fur carries lethal strains of staphylococcus aureus, too. Never take your pet near a sick person, and certainly don't take them into hospitals! (I am aware that some ignorant people are fond of the idea of deliberately doing so)
http://www.scmp.com/news/world/article/1514381/us-centres-disease-control-scientists-study-infectiousness-mild-mers
------------------------------------------------------ contemporary stuff
'What happens when WHITE HOT METAL hits Water!'
http://youtu.be/wwr6EgxeevE
'Adult Problems'
http://youtu.be/Zv5upD-50cY
'LOADED SPICY BAKED POTATO AND CHICKEN'
This is Greg's Kitchen, where the food is finger lickin'...
http://youtu.be/yh4JQX_zDps
'BLOOPERS and OUT TAKES 2 - GregsKitchen'
http://youtu.be/6-0DK3lMnrA
'Finding Naia'
"In a submerged cave in Yucatan, divers found the near-intact skeleton of a delicately built teenage girl, who died more than 12,000 years ago probably after falling into a natural sinkhole from which there was no way to get out."
http://youtu.be/R2i3I8MxmU4
'A Live View from the International Space Station'
"Watch white clouds, tan land, and blue oceans drift by. The above video will appear black when it is nighttime on the Earth below, but the space station's rapid 90-minute orbit compresses this dark time into only 45 minutes."
http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap140514.html
'Room for Tennis in Rome'
These four points, haha - ridiculously good tennis, in Rome :-D
[Nadal]
[Dimitrov]
[Murray]
[Murray2]
'HORSE'
http://youtu.be/L46iCN6MBFM
'Aussie presenter almost shoots herself in the face'
http://youtu.be/ClL86IwN6o8
'Which names do merged businesses discard?'
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-magazine-monitor-27421888
'Disney CEO Figures They’ve Built Up Enough Goodwill To Do A Real Sexist One'
http://www.theonion.com/articles/disney-ceo-figures-theyve-built-up-enough-goodwill,35874/
------------------------------------------------------ of the weeks
Word Of The Week: ornery -- bad-tempered, belligerent, cantankerous
Etymology Of The Week: game (meaning 'birds for eating') -- from 'gamebird' meaning a bird hunted for sport; but the obvious derivation from 'game' meaning an activity performed for pleasure is false. 'Game' meaning a pleasureful activity comes from the 18th century. The meaning of 'an activity performed according to rules' comes from the 13th century, as does the idea of a 'wild animal caught for sport'. This is why modern blood sports enthusiasts equivocate their immoral pastimes with civilised behaviour!
Expression Of The Week: Boko Haram -- an abbreviation, in Hausa, from 'haram' for 'sin', and 'ilimin boko' meaning 'education that's fake' - a term used to refer to 'western' education. That is how the nickname for the 'Jama'atu Ahlis Sunna Lidda'awati wal-Jihad' - 'boko haram' roughly means 'western education is a sin'.
Fact Of The Week: There is no significant evidence that flossing reduces incidence of caries (cavities) or gingivitis, and thereby subsequent cases of infection. But there is good evidence that brushing time is beneficial, so don't waste it with flossing - spend that extra time and effort doing a little more brushing. Dentistry is a profession that suffers a lack of academic rigour, when it comes to medical advice, because dentists are largely private sector individuals. If you'd like to keep up with dentistry-related research yourself, however, then follow the Dental Elf and the CEBD - Centre for Evidence Based Dentistry.
------------------------------------------------------ non-contemporary stuff
'The European Union Explained*'
http://youtu.be/O37yJBFRrfg
'Starsuckers'
A great doco about the Media, their insidious training of people and especially children, and their incredible gullibility to bullshit stories. It's 1h 41m long, but it's definitely worth watching.
http://vimeo.com/49021336
'Townswoman Replaces Past Residents with Dolls'
http://www.ripleys.com/weird/daily-dose-of-weird-wtf-blog/strange-places-and-customs/townswoman-replaces-past-residents-with-dolls/
'6 Crazy Constructions Featured in ‘Dare to Look’'
http://www.ripleys.com/weird/inside-ripleys-world/inside-ripleys-books/6-crazy-constructions-featured-in-dare-to-look/
'Penn & Teller's Nail Gun Trick - Penn & Teller Fool Us'
http://youtu.be/4_rS08u3Fjs
'Will Hay - The Goose Steps Out - the part cut from the movie'
What position are the panzers in? A pincer position. So a pincer movement with panzers? Yes - a positioned panzer pincer.
http://youtu.be/MsEaZvzwl_8
And Kryten on twitter:
A robot that shits bricks
https://twitter.com/KrytenK/status/459777360423038977
Wear a suspiciously long groinal attachment to work Wednesday
https://twitter.com/KrytenK/status/459711221558960128
"I’m not very good at innuendo..."
http://tapejarascience.tumblr.com/post/86098184770/im-not-very-good-at-innuendo-for-example-is
'saving the world, one laundry load at a time'
https://twitter.com/KrytenK/status/467397323472265216
There are all kinds of twitters and tumblrs like that one. And i have to say, i think they're a good thing. Decades old shows will never be forgotten, while they're being followed obsessively by a tiny number of people on social media :-D
.
.
Date Started: 3/5/14 Date Completed: 14/5/14 Date First Published: 14/5/14
The word 'tolerate' is one of those words that has such a sufficiently vague meaning, that it can be used in different contexts, to mean very different things.
This can be advantageous, but it can also be disadvantageous.
It can be a good thing, when it means writing a law that all are happy with; and it can be a good thing when you want to draw people from one politic to another, by desensitising them to certain notions.
{As long as you're right, of course}
But it can be a bad thing when it means equivocation, duplicity, and giving metaphorical rope to those who would use the term for deceptive purposes, to hang other people in society.
When genuinely well-meaning and well-doing people use the word 'tolerance' they're thinking of everyone getting along fine, and not seeing each other as divided by the quasi-social discontintuities of, for example: nations, religions, races, maybe even sexes, cities, and hair colours.
But when well-meaning but unwell-doing* people use the word, it is as an excuse to be foul, evil-doing people. It is used to excuse bigotry and to compartmentalise it - to dig it into their minds, so that it can never be brought into contention and, heaven forfend, be seen as morally wrong!
{* I elaborate the distinction between 'well-meaning' and 'well-doing', down at the bottom of this mini-essay. Look for the third '*'}
Also, tolerance and respect are two very different things.
Tolerating what someone is or does, is very different to thinking that behaviour or feature a respectable thing. And it is far from approving of it.
The word 'tolerance' is used when factionalism and/or disagreement are problems, whether accepted by the speaker or not - if accepted, they will be using the formerly-alluded-to definition meaning tolerance of people despite beliefs; and if not, they will be using the latterly-alluded-to definition meaning tolerance of beliefs despite people.
Let's temporarily consider society as a school. And this as the school bullying policy:
- Tolerate the ginger kids
- Tolerate the skinny kids
- Tolerate the fat kids
- Tolerate the speccy kids
- Tolerate the spotty kids
- Tolerate the queer kids
- Tolerate the gypsy kids
- Tolerate the heretical kids
- Tolerate the bullies
ABSOLUTE TOLERANCE IS THE SCHOOL POLICY
Does this sound happy and egalitarian and fun and frolicky and free to you? And why? Or why not?
There certainly seems to be something wrong, here. For the well-meaning well-doing people, the intent of these tolerance rules, is to protect people from being made into victims, by the people who wish to bully them.
But the premise is set, intrinsic to the policy, that for the bullies, all these people are fair game. Tolerating their potential victims, is not the same as acknowledging that those victims are undeserving of spite - that there is good reason to not make them their victim.
Dogmatised tolerance does not change the premise of whether someone might be deserving of tolerance.
I'm sure many of us will have seen some kind of crime committed before our eyes - more likely a moral one, than a legal one - stealing, littering, queue-jumping, using faked ID cards, drinking underage, bonking underage, etc.
If we've seen one/some of these things as genuinely wrong, which we probably have, for at least one of them, we won't (always) have actually intervened. Well, that was tolerant of us, wasn't it.
But it doesn't mean we approved of the behaviour. For whatever reason, we baulked at confrontation - we tolerated the behaviour that we disapproved of.
When factionalists - nationalists, religionists, etc - preach "TOLERAAAANCE!!!" they are saying they should not be attacked... or maybe merely criticised.
Oh yes - they do love to equivocate between an offense (as in an attack/assault) and 'offense' a spoilt-brat kind of whine, intended to cast the victim of their emotional blackmail as some kind of horrid oppressor.
-- When 'minority' factions preach tolerance, they do so because they think they can't win the battle - the people within them just want to quell criticism of their faction.
-- When mid-size factions preach tolerance, they do so because they want to carry on feeling superior to the minor factions, and to execute their plans of usurping power from the major factions.
-- When 'majority' factions preach tolerance, they do so because they want to exploit their power, to gain more diverts and converts, from free people and the smaller factions. But when they outnumber even the free people, they usually see tolerance as a threat to their dominance. [0]
All of them use the "TOLERAAAANCE!!!" battlecry to deflect valid criticism of their often-supersitious and thereby often-destructive movements.
Ideally, it should make no difference to the world, whether this battlecry exists or not.
The supersitionists will indoctrinate people, and convert them to their own factions; the other superstitious factions will do the same; and the free people will try to avert people from the movements that they see as socially harmful.
And whether those movements genuinely are socially harmful, should be down to evidence, to be determined. Claiming something to be harmful, or not, or helpful, is an objective and coherent claim that can be right or wrong.
But in practice, that's not the way it works. Human contemporary culture is not so committedly rationalistic.
And humans within contemporary culture are easily fooled by these cries for tolerance. They make the error that humans have made for thousands of years - confusing people with their beliefs.
Beliefs come and beliefs go, but the people can be exactly the same ones.
Superstitionists strive to maintain the equivocation between 'people' and 'beliefs' because their 'beliefs' (whether they actually believe them or just propagate them as pseudo-social doctrine) are horrid lies.
{You might consider them to be benign lies, but there is little i find more egregious than active deceit}
Ironically, many of the religions of the world explicitly condemn lying; but hypocrisy has never been beyond religion!
In a rational debate, superstitions, of which religion is only an example, can not win. The claims are frequently objectively false - contradicted by currently-possessed knowledge - and the rest of the time, completely baseless.
This is the nature of superstition - ideas that are believed without/despite evidence.
It is emminently possible to tolerate a person, and to treat them kindly, without thinking that you must necessarily molly-coddle all of their incorrect beliefs, all of the time!
Indeed, when it comes to subjective beliefs, we will do this more often than not - if someone is a Belieber, or labours under the perception that Twilight is a tetralogy worth watching, then we do not feel compelled to strangle them, on the spot. We might joke that we do, but we do not. And if we did, then that would be an example of the irrationality that this mini-essay is soon to condemn.
With objective beliefs, it is always rationally feasible to persuade, through reasoned argument, of a valid case; and it is this that rational people attempt. For superstitionists, however, who claim objectively false things to be true, they can do no such thing. All attempts will fail.
Advocates of superstitions can only manufacture agreement through indoctrinating the claim as a dogma, through bullying people into submission through blasphemy laws, or... through killing those who insist on disagreement.
It is the superstitionists who have the logical endpoint for epistemic dominance as genocide. The 'final solution' was so-named for a reason! And as such, is a very good example.
The Christian movement of Nazism had all the same enemies as Roman Catholicism - the Jews, the Queers, the Atheists, and to a smaller extent, the mentally and physically ill/deformed - and all of these were murdered in huge numbers, in the Nazis' death camps.
All the 'final solution' was about, was a bid to 'purify' society - to make it the 'best' it could be - to make it reflect the Christian ideals of the Nazi Party members - blondeness, physical strength, Christian Faith, going forth and multiplying - all of these and more were rewarded traits.
Slaughtering all of the ideology's opponents was only the last-straw action - Christianity had made do with brutal subjugation and oppression, for millennia, but genocides like the Holocaust were absolutely not incoherent with the movement's fundamental mal-logic.
It is not in the interests of a rational person to go around murdering people they disagree with. In their mind, there is a clear distinction between the beliefs someone possesses and the person themselves.
They know, all too well, from their own experiences, that opinions change. They remember that they once believed things that were later found, by them, to be wrong. And so they changed them.
All of us have moments when we look back on our past beliefs, and think "Did i really think that? God i was sad! But i thought that [hairdo] was really cool, at the time..."
Here, i have deliberately chosen a mundane example, because i wish to engage you, the reader, with the realisation that this happens to all of us.
People lose interest in beehive hairdoes, and ugg boots, and they can lose interest in much more important things, too. Like ritual mutilation of children's genitals. It says something about modern Jews, that they still haven't grown out of this bronze-age-psychotic-maniac-inspired practice.
I, personally, recovered from Christianity (and yes, i do say "recovered", much to the chagrin of current adherents) and am glad to have done so. But that happened because i learned. Not because i was bullied. And i was not bullied by atheists.
I learned that Christianity was fundamentally flawed, both logically and morally; and from there i learned that all of the world's other religions were essentially the same. Which, of course, just made Christianity appear even less worthwhile - if it's just as valid as all of the other baseless and mutually contradictory dogmas in the world, then what's the point of it?
And as i developed, further, i came to realise that there were more ideologies in the world that manifested in similar ways to religion, and appearing to cause similar sociological machinations. Rejection of criticism (in religion, it's called blasphemy) is the one that is common to all pseudosciences. And when they've been around a while, there's also the divergence of thought by the 'experts'.
Real science converges on right answers. Pseudosciences do not find a right answer... because they can't - it isn't there! Their only option is to try more and more baseless ideas, and so the superstitions become more and more diverse.
This is true of religion (Christianity alone has thousands of sub-sects to it) and medical pseudoscience, too. Just look at the plethora of bullshit that quacks sell to people - acupuncture, homeopathy, chiropractic, the definitely-completely-different osteopathy, reflexology, reiki, therapeutic touch, chiropody, ayurvedic poisons, all the other herbal poisons... the list goes on and on and on. And they are all purported panaceically. In real medicine, there are definite boundaries, beyond which anti-biotics, for example, are impotent. You wouldn't use them against glaucoma, because they wouldn't work. But there are homeopaths who have and continue to claim that they can treat domestic abuse, homosexuality (and homophobia!), and even international conflict, with shaken water!
All of these purported panaceas have their own superstitious belief systems that are mutually contradictory with each other. Either the world works one way, or another - in stark contrast to the plethora of 'alternatives', there is only one Science, matching with the one reality. Quacks, however, don't care about this - they'll 'believe' in Qi and Chakras, and Pressure Points, Subluxations, Laws of Similars, and everything else going, as long as it gets money out of people!
Religion and quackery both wish to extort huge amounts of money out of people, because they think that if they can do so, then they must have validity. They Smaug-esquelly hoard money, in an attempt to give their destructive business models a sheen of respectability; and in the process, provide one more reason for a rational person to oppose them - they extort money from the people who are most vulnerable to their ideologies!
Is this fraudulent industry something you're willing to tolerate?
There is no integrity to a worldview that can incorporate awareness of these things, and yet think them all valid!
But there is no motive for someone who knows that advancement comes through learning, to murder the people that disagree with them. It's not even an emotionalistic baulking at immediate causes of harm - something the quacks don't manage when they try to shut bloggers down with legal suits (SLAPPs) - it's just that there is no motive to do so.
When rational scientific movements and irrational superstitious movements declare that tolerance must be had, they are thinking of very different things.
The same is true of 'open-mindedness' - rationalists want minds to be open to evidence; superstitionists want minds to be open to hollow claims that are not supported by evidence.
And guess who has the battlecry of "BE MORE OPEN-MINDED!!!"
Yes, that's right - it's the superstitionists. And i think the same is true of the "TOLERAAAANCE!!!" battlecry. It tends to be the people who have unjustifiable, undefendable, bigoted beliefs who call for tolerance, in equivocation between tolerating beliefs, and tolerating people.
The web-site whatstheharm.net is a huge catalogue of the harm done when people have superstitious beliefs. This is why there is a difference between well-meaning well-doers, and well-meaning unwell-doers.*
To actually help people, you have to be right. You have to be right that whatever you want to do, is really going to help. If you are wrong, you might unwittingly be committing harm. Whatstheharm.net catalogues some, but nowhere near all, of these cases.
Well-meaning well-doers are people who are, essentially, well-meaning and right; and well-meaning unwell-doers are well-meaning but wrong. For pedantry's sake, i shall point out that it is possible to be wrong, and still make the world a better place, but this consequence is, and should be seen as, accidental. Accidental morality is therefore not something that can be aspired to, and so it is a necessary part of striving to be a better person, that we also strive to learn how we can be so.
So it isn't just quaint philosophy, to see people and beliefs as distinct concepts. To make important moral decisions, in the real world, it is necessary to make such a distinction.
Tolerance of people and tolerance of beliefs/ideas are two very different things.
And that is why the school bullying policy, posited above, is flawed. Not just because it mistakes tolerance for knowledgeable kindness - for being well-meaning and well-doing - but also because its defence of bullies completely misses the point.
That point being that it is the behaviour caused by the belief that, for example, "fags are fair game for scape-goating" that is the problem. It's not the people - it's the behaviour.
Defending bullies is not a moral action, unless they're being defended from a vengeful mob. Such a mob's actions would be worthy of condemnation, on the same grounds as the original miscreant's - the willful causation of suffering. By wishing to commit such vengeance, they make themselves, by definition, also bullies!
In order to run your life, or school, or club, or company, or country, you must know the difference between people and beliefs, and tolerance and respect. It is also important to know that people often deliberately equivocate between the words of each of these pairs, and that tolerating and respecting people often necessarily involves being intolerant and disrespectful of their claims, rituals and dogmas.
To protect a child from their parents' superstitious beliefs, means acting with the acceptance that those beliefs are objectively wrong. Doing otherwise can cost lives. Sometimes, the Law steps in, to prevent them, as regularly happens with the children of Jehovah's Witnesses.
To condemn genuinely harmful behaviours, though, you must be right about which they are. And to be right, you must become right. It might not be easy, but sometimes, a lot hangs on it, and you won't want to be culpable for a terrible mistake, when it's already happened.
This is the profound importance of rationality, to everyday life - the will, and ability, to distinguish helpful ideas from harmful ones.
So when someone says you should be tolerant of something, what you need to know is.... of what, exactly?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[0] Notice that in Christianity and Islam-dominant countries, members of these factions do not call for tolerance, the way members of those same religious factions do in other countries - in other contexts, where they have less power. For example, Islamists are persecuted in Buddhist Burma; and advocates call for tolerance from the Buddhists. In the Islamic Middle-East, minority Christian groups call for tolerance; and Islamists call for tolerance on the border between Jewish Israel and the Gaza Strip.
In the UK and Australia, where Atheists are the majority, Christian groups, who find themselves middle of the range, call for tolerance from the Atheist majority, to tolerate their proselytism and bigoted persecution of smaller groups such as Islamists, Hindus, etc.
In the Christianity-dominated USA, pretty much everyone wants tolerance from the Christians. And yet because the Constitution of the USA is secular, the overwhelming Christian majority tries, extensively, to con people into thinking they're an oppressed minority, so that they can plea for tolerance. "I want my country back", etc.
All around the world, the safest religious groups are the smallest, least powerful ones, whose tiny voice is merely a plea for their perceivedly weird and exotic ways to be preserved, and shielded from criticism, for absolutely no reason whatsoever. The larger the group, the more power they have to bully other people into tolerating (pretending to respect) their practices, to the extent that dominant groups get their way, with their perceivedly normal ways preserved, and shielded from criticism, for absolutely no reason whatsoever.
The solution, for constructing a peacable, de-factionalised society, is to forbid segregation - to prevent the cultural in-breeding that happens when people of one faction are allowed to congregate exclusively with each other. Many past and present governments have absolutely failed to do this, because they credulously accepted the notion that people are happiest when they're with their 'kin'... even though factionalistic dogmas are not necessary for emotional bonds to form (and thereby be kin)... and even when they have had no prior awareness of their supposed kin's existence! Such segregation is known to engender factionalistic prejudice, in religion, and sexism too - the only 'utility' in sex-segregated schools, is to make the pupils more sexist.
The tolerance files:
This list could, of course, be hundreds, or thousands, long, but these will have to suffice.
Irrational tolerance:
'Sam Harris on Jihad and Islamic tolerance'
http://youtu.be/xEV7jKUKJLg
'New Testament: Intolerance'
http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/int/nt_list.html
'On Tolerance'
http://youtu.be/Xx_gQTIuX-o
'Why Tolerance Isn't Possible'
http://youtu.be/RQi6_-P-zww
'Beaverton church sues family after they criticize it online'
http://www.katu.com/news/local/Beaveton-Grace-Bible-Church-lawsuit-charles-oneal-julie-anne-smith-151227055.html?
'Tolerating the intolerant'
http://youtu.be/iMdODS7caaE
'BBC News - Anti-Islam film: Thousands protest around Muslim world'
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-19625167
'Anti-Pope protesters urged to show tolerance'
http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2010/07/06/anti-pope-protesters-urged-to-show-tolerance/
Rational tolerance:
'UK is a state aiming for equality, liberalism and tolerance'
https://humanism.org.uk/2010/09/17/news-649/
'Atheist intolerance'
http://youtu.be/XbjIYvXpvLM
''Tolerance' and the 'Ground Zero Mosque''
http://youtu.be/yQE4orNMDAw
.
.
.
Hi voters,
Here's a much more erudite explanation of the problem of net neutrality (or rather, the lack of it) than what i said last week.
'Internet Citizens: Defend Net Neutrality'
http://youtu.be/wtt2aSV8wdw
I was late to the anti-party, btw. And CCP Grey's a week later, but still plugging an important problem.
Fortunately, for those of us in the EU, we have the good-fortune to be shafted by those know-nothing, pin-headed, snouts-in-the-trough bureaucrats, who voted last month, to defend net neutrality in a billion people's interests, but not their own:
'European Parliament passes strong net neutrality law, along with major roaming reforms'
https://gigaom.com/2014/04/03/european-parliament-passes-strong-net-neutrality-law-along-with-major-roaming-reforms/
Curse those selfish, fascist totalitarians! Arrrggh :-P
Meanwhile, in America, the struggle is still being bitterly fought:
'150 tech companies press government for net neutrality'
"Internet service providers with virtual strangleholds on some US cities would be able to charge tolls for data to get priority in "fast lanes" under regulations recommended by FCC chief Tom Wheeler last month."
http://phys.org/news/2014-05-tech-companies-net-neutrality.html
In Europe, there's a big election coming up: the European Elections, 2014
Last time around, 56% of people didn't vote. If you have one to cast, please, please, please do - or the moronic xenophobes of UKIP will.
'Nick Doody - Euro Election Fever is here! (The Now Show 9th May 2014)'
http://youtu.be/5go66NkT1M4
"I vote for the same reason that i'd punch a bear that was eating me: i don't think it'll make a big difference to the outcome, but at least, that way, it doesn't look like i want to be eaten by a bear"
But if you think UKIP are an alternative to the Conservatives, then you've been sorely misled:
https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=733398596680951&id=119416361412514
I received a copy of this horrendous propaganda from the Tories, last week. I did not make such good use of it as this, however:
'Conservative Campaign Circular Collage'
http://tbotgojctsodtsoaabiaibjajbjbahba.tumblr.com/post/84559683599/so-we-got-these-leaflets-for-the-south-east-of
Oh, and don't forget that the current Minister for Health, in the Tory cabinet is Jeremy Hunt - a man who believes that shaken water is a form of medicine!
'U.K. Health Secretary Hunt: Needs to buy a clue'
http://doubtfulnews.com/2014/05/u-k-health-secretary-hunt-needs-to-buy-a-clue/
This is the standard of intellect, in the Conservative Party of the UK.
I should point out, that he was deliberately put there, by Dave Cameron, despite having a qualified GP as a member of his Party! And yet it's Hunt who climbs the greasy pole to the top!? Those people are demented....
...speaking of demented:
'If Your Veterinarian Offers Acupuncture, Find a Different Vet'
http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2014/05/alternative_medicine_for_pets_veterinarians_should_not_perform_acupuncture.html
What i find most fascinating, is the basic mechanisms behind the way everything works.
As a Physics-centred sciencey person (yes, Tapejaras are persons) this is what i have always strived to do. When you've identified a natural law, you can understand huge amounts of the world around you.
In the modern world, there is a well-developed thing called Science. Yes, there is, please keep up :-P
And part of that thing, is another thing, called The Scientific Method. That other thing, is the best method we've ever had, for identifying truths and falsehoods. Essentially, it's the bit of Science by which Science grows.
In stark contrast to the way Science grows, there is a thing called superstition. Sometimes, it's formed when people make shit up, just because they can, but often it grows because people just got the wrong end of a metaphorical stick, and refused to let it go.
But there are basic laws, in people's behaviour, that bear out the nature of their beliefs - whether they're scientific or superstitious.
It's not just the nature of the evidence that can be used to work out who's telling the truth - it's the behaviour of truers and liers, in the face of that evidence.
Acupuncturists, for example, do not respond as scientists do, when presented with evidence. When being scientific, a person will accept criticism, because they want to acknowledge falsehoods so that they can reject them.
When being superstitious, they will reject criticism, because it makes them feel uncomfortable. And even when subject to it, they will plough on regardless. Take away all of the Xtianity from modern Xtians, and they still 'believe in Jesus Xt'. This is superstition.
In this specific example, we have the application of quackupuncturist 'health by a thousand cuts' superstition to other species.
Even though it makes no sense to apply acupuncture to horses' gall bladder meridians (they do not even have gall bladders) the acupuncturists blunder on with it anyway.
When presented with the fact that 'real' acupuncture works just as well as 'sham' acupuncture, which is deliberately designed to not work, they claim that acupuncture's even better than previously realised, because it works even when it's not there!
The question remains: how batshit crazy can superstition get? Well, because it exists despite evidence, it can "become more [crazy] than you can possibly imagine" to quote Obi-Wan Kenobi.
I would argue that it already has.
If people can believe, or claim to believe, that gods exist, perforating skin heals illness, twisting arms resolves fictional subluxations, and shaken water drizzled on sugar is therapeutic too; but not be met with whails of laughter such that women's bladders empty all over the place, then we live in a culture that is sufficiently deranged that any charlatan could legally extort money out of innocently unsuspecting people, with the active support of the law.
Oh yeah, we do...
'#023 - Simon Singh and Libel Law'
http://youtu.be/CQZfuppkQRc
In other news:
The American Samoa national soccer team had never won a match, until late 2011. And on that team, was a transexual player - Johnny “Jayieh” Saelua - who is recognised as a 'fa’afafine', which is Samoan for 'to be a woman'. In Samoa, male-to-female transexuals are accepted as a third sex, but FIFA recognises only two; hence a woman playing in a men's soccer match! Their achievement has been featured in a recently-released film: 'Next Goal Wins'
http://thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/transgender-soccer-player-leads-american-samoa-team-to-first-ever-win/news/2011/12/01/30936
The Eurovision Song Contest has been won by a male transvestite with a beard. Personally, i've never understood the look - either they intend to look feminine, and the beard's a dreadful mistake, or they intend to look beardy, and are cheating their way into a Miss Hairy Competition. I'm sure humour can't be the answer! <s> I didn't watch the full competition, btw, so i don't have much to say about it. But let's suffice with: the Russian entry got booed during voting, for political reasons, and the french came last, with the song 'Moustache'. That's probably because it wasn't golden. Amirite? :-D
http://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/eurovision-2014-full-results-table-3525022
An interesting catch has been made, in the Gulf of Mexico - a rarely-found Goblin Shark, and several isopods - which suggests the fishermen were located above a 'whalefell' - the decaying carcass of a dead whale, on the ocean floor. Animals centre on them, to take advantage of the peculiar abundance of nutrients. To see pictures, click the links:
http://www.ripleys.com/weird/daily-dose-of-weird-wtf-blog/crazy-animals/goblinshark/
http://doubtfulnews.com/2014/05/some-bizarre-looking-animals-appeared-in-this-lucky-catch/
Here's video footage of it: http://youtu.be/eh_HUIJkRzU
Notorious, frivolous-lawsuit-obsessed pervert, Chris Sevier, has taken religionists' worst argument against equal access to marriage, to court. He has said that if two men can be allowed to marry each other, then he should be allowed to marry his porn-filled Apple laptop. He has previously tried to sue Apple for producing a laptop, with which it was possible to download and store porn! And yes, he has always been laughed out of court :-D
http://abovethelaw.com/tag/chris-sevier/
For the less perverted amongst you, but still interested in sex, maybe Kunda Park, Queensland, Australia's worth a trip. A brothel there is trialling a period of 'Pie, Coke and a poke' offers, which is intended to encourage new custom. Well, i suppose many foody places also do forms of entertainment - restaurants with cabaret acts; bars with bands; etc. There are cinemas in the USA, that go the other way - serve you dinner while you watch a film. It's not so odd. It's just that sexual recreation is treated wildly different to other forms of fun. I won't be engaging in any of it myself, of course. That would be bestiality! Ew.... :-P
http://arbroath.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/enterprising-australian-brothel-offers.html
Jewish supremacists in the USA and UK fund the Elad Foundation, which has excavated an archeological site that they claim is the location of legendary King David's Citadel. Once again, the whole basis for this place's supposed existence, is Biblical myth. Archeologists contend that there is no evidence for such a claim. More worrying, is that this kind of propaganda has been used to motivate the displacement of Arabic families from 'Jewish' lands. The reason that Jews have historically only been subject to this kind of factionalism, is that they never had a State to engineer it with. Well, they do now - Israel - and they're behaving just as an antitheist would expect - disgracefully.
http://doubtfulnews.com/2014/05/has-the-citadel-captured-by-king-david-been-found/
Qianzhousaurus Sinensis is a newly-discovered tyrannosaur, which has been nicknamed 'Pinocchio Rex' by paleontologists, because its skull is ~1/3 longer than expected of its size, compared to other tyrannosaurs. It was adult at 9 metres long, so would not have rivalled T-Rex for status. Its long snout might have been used for catcing prey out of the air, or fishing, or maybe for poking into the carcasses of prey. At the moment, that's all speculation.
http://www.sci-news.com/paleontology/science-qianzhousaurus-sinensis-pinocchio-rex-china-01907.html
Even more exciting than a species of rhinally extrapolated tyrannosaurs, is this... a fossil tube - Plexus ricei. Yeah! It would have looked like a tapeworm, grown up to about 80 centimetres in length, and rummaged through the seafloors of the Ediacaran ~570 million years ago, looking for food. It's not as exciting, but it is one of Earth's earliest complex organisms!
http://phys.org/news/2014-05-paleontologists-fossil.html
Researchers have found the RNA-based mechanism that involves the Pax6 gene in the development of squids' camera eyes, further establishing that Pax6 must have been one of the first genes involved in eye-development, more than 500 million years ago. It is a gene that also features in our own, reptilian and human genomes. Pax6 does not encode for a particular structure - the retina or lens, for example - but for the order and timing in which developmental steps occur. Even though humans and cephalopods have vastly different lineages, and very different eyes and eye-related genomes, they have commonalities in these 0.5 billion-year-old process-related genes. Amazing! "We are all connected" :-)
http://phys.org/news/2014-05-humans-squids-evolved-eyes-genes.html
Researchers in Scotland and the USA have developed an acoustic tractor beam. That's a device that uses sound waves to push stuff about. Crucially, it can be used to 'pull' things toward it. You'll have to look at the diagram to understand how. Previously, an optical tractor beam has been developed, which uses light to move tiny, microscale particles. This one uses sound to move centimetre-sized particles. It's probably not useful, but what the heck - it's a tractor beam!! :-D
http://phys.org/news/2014-05-acoustic-tractor.html
------------------------------------------------------ contemporary stuff
'Mitch Benn - Jamaica Inn Review Review (The Now Show 25th April 2014)' (my upload)
http://youtu.be/AoWrU2rok5w
'John and Kevin's Sunday Papers - 4th May 2014'
http://youtu.be/DYP41fMt9WI
'Now Show - John Finnemore on the Frog and the Scorpions'
http://youtu.be/HetLxhI1txY
'Under study: The frogs of Calaveras County'
http://youtu.be/BjfUAg8vzkY
'Bird-brained pigeons perform like primates'
http://youtu.be/IDuWqjQGth4
'Blooming Science A Week in Science'
http://youtu.be/hvUDXi55Xqg
'Steam Hammer: Slow Motion'
http://youtu.be/bDItSUeykrA
'Holey Experiment - Periodic Table of Videos'
http://youtu.be/RfeaffoWajc
'Aluminium Powder Ignites in Slow Motion - Periodic Table of Videos'
http://youtu.be/FhG2e6mpdEY
'Major New Cosmic Simulation: Why it's Significant'
"The project, called Illustris, encompasses over 12 billion data points to track the rise and evolution of some 50,000 galaxies. The simulation used a total of 8,000 processors, the equivalent of 2,000 years of processing time on a standard desktop computer. The run created half-petabyte of information."
http://youtu.be/32qqEzBG9OI
'Purity Balls: Daddy Is My Boyfriend!'
Creepy stuff :-/
http://youtu.be/dA-hF0yr3wg
'Jay Foreman - Day After Tube Strike Song'
"This is my topical song written especially for 'Not The One Show', on Thursday 1st May 2014. (Written about 20 minutes before we went on air!)"
http://youtu.be/okOPZDmfxk8
'CrossFit by Jesus (CrossFit parody) {The Kloons}'
http://youtu.be/1q31CCDVdas
'Scariest Words I Ever Heard'
A heart-warming story :-D
http://youtu.be/bzBo22eLLxM
'Parent vs Child - Feeding Your Child'
http://youtu.be/KrShSL9O6EM
'SCIENTIFICALLY ACCURATE ™: SPONGEBOB SQUAREPANTS'
http://youtu.be/NFy3gHWF5oo
------------------------------------------------------ of the weeks
Word Of The Week: preposterous -- contrary to nature, reason, or sense; absurd; ridiculous
Etymology Of The Week: 'blah' -- a generic term for meaningless phonemics; thought to be derived from 'blasé' (french for indifference) or 'blab' meaning 'to reveal' or 'bar' from ancient greek. Basically, nobody really knows. It could easily be one of many neogeneses to have the same meaning.
Quote Of The Week: "Nothing makes a young man feel more alive, and on an adventure, than speeding down the M6 at 2 am, [sitting] next to a man wearing a big fake head" - Jon Ronson, on RHLSTP, 'this' week.
Suzie Calman's one was hilarious too. If you hear that, you'll want to hear the one with Harry Shearer, as well. I don't know - maybe hear them (backwards) in consecutive order - it's up to you :-P
Fact Of The Week: New Mexico, USA, was the first to officially recognise a State Question. It was, and still is, "Red or green?" The official State Answer, is "Red and Green or Christmas"
------------------------------------------------------ non-contemporary stuff
'Dolly Parton's "Jolene" played at 33 RPM has an unexpected sound'
http://www.wimp.com/unexpectedsound/
'Helen Arney sings "Animals" at the Funny Women Final 2010'
http://youtu.be/At8L94aAoc0
'Blues singing bird'
It might not be an animal singing Helen Arney, but it's good enough for me :-D
http://youtu.be/xGJaz64lrJ4
In case you didn't know, Purcell wrote some very 'funky' songs, back in the 17th century. This first one is not the most explicit of them...
'Henry Purcell -- Once, twice, thrice I Julia tried -- Deller Consort'
http://youtu.be/6JTcrYnwIOo
'Henry Purcell - Pox on You'
http://youtu.be/A5n1tWLFCEw
'When Celia was Learning on the Spinnet'
http://youtu.be/CrFiXBq-HSE
Lyrics:
http://www.theroutiers.org/culture/Celia.htm
'My Man John'
http://youtu.be/T_D6gUmAUIM
Lyrics (it's actually about mending a broom):
http://www.horntip.com/mp3/1700s/1720ca--1993-02-11_the_art_of_the_bawdy_song__the_baltimore_consort_%28CD%29/28_my_man_john.htm
'Andreas Scholl - Purcell - "Man is for the woman made"'
Lyrics are in the description box
"...As the spur is for the jade, As the scabbard for the blade, As for digging is the spade, As for liquor is the can..." :-D
http://youtu.be/YmaRYRuZNI0?t=1m29s
'Henry Purcell -- The Miller's daughter -- Deller Consort'
This one's about a Miller's daughter, noticing that she's quite hairy... and so's her mother :-D
http://youtu.be/HgoriBL-P9g
'Henry Purcell -- Sir Walter enjoying his damsel -- Deller Consort'
In the 17th century, 'enjoying' meant giving pleasure, as well as receiving it. Literally, causing joy. Like 'enlivening' still means 'giving life'.
http://youtu.be/yVUHn8_ZWN8
'Henry Purcell -- I gave her cakes and I gave her ale -- Alfred Deller'
It sounds like he gave her something, and kissed her something :-P
http://youtu.be/f2WW9PtF4Do
'Henry Purcell -- 'Tis women makes us love -- Deller Consort'
This is a bit of a melancholic one to finish on, but it is musically beautiful :-)
http://youtu.be/nXm7tUse03E
'Never fear B.I.T.C.H. team is here!'
http://a-beautiful-little-fool16.tumblr.com/post/85386632730/doctor-korra-holmes-in-hogwarts-shawarmababy
'We all scream for ice cream!'
http://richardwiseman.wordpress.com/2014/04/29/we-all-scream-for-ice-cream/
'Historic Grayscale Pictures With Amazing False Colour'
http://goldspandexleggings.tumblr.com/post/84418401121
'You won’t believe your eyes!'
This is an amazing illusion. Brilliant :-)
http://richardwiseman.wordpress.com/2014/05/07/you-wont-believe-your-eyes-3/
'How do you want your hair done?'
http://goldspandexleggings.tumblr.com/post/84005498941
'i just went from aw to wtf'
http://goldspandexleggings.tumblr.com/post/84005465107
'Dancing Woodcock'
http://youtu.be/5ywsQG4kFVA
Factfile on the Woodock Dance, most of which is not seen in the video:
http://mrines.com/Birds/woodcock/
'These 50 Photos From The Past Are Shocking And Hilarious. I Can't Believe How Things Have Changed...'
http://news.distractify.com/people/scenes-from-the-past-you-never-expected-never-seen-before/?v=1
'The Italian Job Missing Scene'
I agree - beautiful waltzey, skatey stuff - but it would have made a mockery of the film.
http://youtu.be/qNs4MIs9Who
'Chipotle'
That face is haunting me, it's so cute! ...ah, well [munch, munch, munch]
http://goldspandexleggings.tumblr.com/post/85142333461
'What’s the Most Shocking Thing Your Kids Don’t Know About'
The last one is fantastic. Another haunting face, from that little girl :-D
http://goldspandexleggings.tumblr.com/post/85109320651
'Cool Teachers'
http://goldspandexleggings.tumblr.com/post/84904821171
'Only for terriers?'
https://twitter.com/RichardWiseman/status/464763160688623616
.
.
That's it for this week, folks. Don't forget to vote! ...and to read my latest mini-essay: 'Eating For £1 A Day' ;-)
.
.
