Early Risers.

[Ozexpatriate]

1 minute ago, Tony_S said:

But “Bodger and Badger” had over a hundred.

I've not seen it. Did I miss anything? 😉

 

124 episodes according to Wikipedia.

 

It never crossed the pond. Looking it up, it aired after I left Australia, so I don't know if it aired there either.

[PhilJ W]

Evening all from Estuary-Land. Had a long chat with my niece this evening. About sorting out my brothers bungalow. Apparently his late wife who died last year was an avid collector of jewellery but her relations are not interested in it. I'm not sure if its worth very much but I suggested sending it to auction. There's a lot of personal stuff such as family photographs as well to go to her family.

[Ozexpatriate]

9 hours ago, Gwiwer said:

I once found myself asking for directions - in Bradford and between the two railway stations - of a gentleman of Indian appearance and accent.  "Please to go this way for a furlong and then be turning right.  After another two chains please to be turning left."  And you know what?  He was right!  

There are a number of curious idioms in Indian, English vernacular. One of them is "thrice". Rarely used by most native English speakers in the west, it is exceptionally common in India.

 

A numeric measurement that is common in India is the 'crore' (or ten million). It is equivalent to 100 lakhs - the lakh being one hundred thousand.

[Hroth]

6 hours ago, iL Dottore said:

 

Dr Lucy Worsley is pleasant enough (my dog Lucy is named after her), but a bit lightweight compared with Dr David Starkey or (especially) Prof Dame Mary Beard

 

 

6 hours ago, woodenhead said:

I know who I'd rather be watching of the three 😁

 

TBH I'd watch a programme by Mary Beard over one by Lucy Worsley (esp once she starts getting into "character") and David Starkey is sometimes a bit dry...

 

[monkeysarefun]

1 hour ago, Ozexpatriate said:

n contrast there were 69 episodes of Are You Being Served?. (See what I did there? 😉 But it is factually accurate if Wikipedia can be trusted.)

DOes that include the series where John Inman came here and did a version set in an Australian department store (fun fact - we actually do have a Grace Bros chain here, so they changed  the name of the Shop to "Bone Brothers" nyuk nyuk nyuk. ) 

 

 Never watched it  because I'm sure it would be even worse than the original if thats possible but  I'm sure the chance to use the word "root" in double entendre-y ways rather than being limited to just "pussy" would have blown the writers tiny minds..

 

 

 

Edited February 11, 2023 by monkeysarefun

[Ozexpatriate]

12 minutes ago, monkeysarefun said:

Does that include the series where John Inman came here and did a series set in an Australian department store (fun fact - we actually do have a Grace Bros chain here, so they changed  the name of the Shop to "Bone Brothers" nyuk nyuk nyuk

No, though I do remember the Aussie, John Inman spin-off, also Are You Being Served?, vaguely. I guess imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. It only ran to sixteen episodes. If I remember anything about it, it was awful.

 

That original attached video* is certainly not one of Gary Marshall's best, though (video quality aside) it's a great time capsule of late 1970s advertising.

 

* I see you changed it from the CBS Beanes of Boston. 

 

Edited February 11, 2023 by Ozexpatriate

[Dave Hunt]

1 hour ago, polybear said:

 

Buddy ex-next door also used to get suitably p1ssed off at such behaviour outside his house; he filled a bucket with concrete then, once hardened he tipped out the resulting lump, painted it white and parked it in the appropriate place.  Worked wonders.

 

We tried something similar with large stones placed along the edge of the grass to deter drivers from churning it up but received a letter from the local highways authority stating that what we had done was illegal and if we didn't remove the stones within twenty eight days we would be prosecuted.

 

Dave

[PhilJ W]

9 minutes ago, Dave Hunt said:

 

We tried something similar with large stones placed along the edge of the grass to deter drivers from churning it up but received a letter from the local highways authority stating that what we had done was illegal and if we didn't remove the stones within twenty eight days we would be prosecuted.

 

Dave

Dig a trench instead?🥰

[polybear]

18 minutes ago, PhilJ W said:

Dig a trench instead?🥰

 

Bear was thinking of a very discreet spike only just above the level of the grass....

[pH]

14 hours ago, TheQ said:

I see great Yarmouth has been testing the big bang theory, the residents will be glad to go home , those nearby have been excluded for 4 days.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-norfolk-64604115

 

12 hours ago, pH said:

… from the BBC report …

 

“The device - about 1m (3.2ft) long and weighing about 250kg (39st 5lbs) …”

 

A thought - would these units have been appropriate if the report had been discussing “Fat Man”?

[pH]

1 hour ago, Dave Hunt said:

 

We tried something similar with large stones placed along the edge of the grass to deter drivers from churning it up but received a letter from the local highways authority stating that what we had done was illegal and if we didn't remove the stones within twenty eight days we would be prosecuted.

 

Dave

We are the first house on our street. Drivers who realize they’ve made a wrong turn will often use our driveway to turn round. Sometimes they’ll clip the landscaping timbers at the side of the drive - I’ve had to replace several over time. 
 

I’ve thought about putting something more substantial and taller in their place. The problem is that we have to reverse down the steep drive into the street and due to combinations of frost, snow, inattention etc. I, my wife and visitors have also clipped timbers on the odd occasion.

[Ozexpatriate]

21 minutes ago, pH said:

would these units have been appropriate if the report had been discussing “Fat Man”?

Google suggests 10,300 pounds (4,670 kg) for the Mark III (from Wikipedia). I wonder what Sydney Greenstreet thought of it all?

 

Interestingly the Wikipedia page for the Pumpkin bomb (the aerodynamic test for the Mark III) specifies 5.26 long tons (5.34 t).

 

Edited February 11, 2023 by Ozexpatriate

[BSW01]

Good evening everyone 

 

Its been quite a productive day here one way or another. Ava and I made a large batch (tray) of rocky road this morning. Once that was done I took her outside to have a look at the back garden. I was able to show her where some of the 250 bulbs that I planted last year are starting to grow, among these are some snow drops under the large apple tree. There are also quite a few narcissus growing as well as some early rhubarb. 
 

After dinner she watched a couple of films, whilst I once again did some work on the kitchen plan and I’ve now come up with a plan that both Sheila and I are happy with. I’m not sure when work will start on the actual refurbishment, I’m guessing late spring or early summer. 
 

Once I’d taken Ava home, we then opened a nice bottle of Rioja and sat down to watch a film we recorded earlier in the week about the early career of Ruth Bader Ginsberg, it was very good. 

[PhilJ W]

Goodnight all.

[BSW01]

Goodnight all 

[jjb1970]

9 hours ago, iL Dottore said:

I’ve noticed that too, Tony. How anti-science so many on the political fringes are. Could it be because science is very, very complex and with very few exceptions (such as the speed of light [perhaps?]) - has no definitive answers or fixed points. And the one thing that unites the extremes of both politics and religion is that they love definitive answers because They Have The Truth.
 

Which is probably why they either dismiss, dislike or outright ban science - it’s a bit hard to convince your fellow-travellers and followers that the human body is made out of teeny, tiny, oven fries when those d**n heretical scientists say “err, we checked using powerful microscopes and other tools and it’s not….”

 

I find the current weaponization of science quite worrying. Those who demand that we listen to the science seem to be genuinely oblivious to the irony, science isn't about just believing what we're told, the scientific method relies on challenging knowledge, testing hypotheses and independence of thought. Telling people to listen to the science in the context of doing as they're told and to stop thinking about things isn't demonstrating faith in science, it is quasi-religious faith.

 

I am a tree hugger and genuinely believe we need to get to zero GHG emissions (among other things). However, I'd much rather that people feel empowered to challenge my views, for three reasons. The first is that if people don't feel comfortable about challenging things it indicates something rotten about society. The second is that it is quite a good exercise to rebut counter views and highlights areas I need to study more if I am unable to really develop a comprehensible case (and even as an ardent tree hugging environmentalist, if anyone can't tell you anything beyond 'listen to the science' it tells you they have no knowledge of the subject, so why would we attach any weight to their views?). And finally, if we really want to bring people with us it is better to explain and support rather than to 'play the person instead of the ball', convince someone and they become a friend, suppress discussion and you end up with all the dark web stuff people complain about.

 

Throughout the pandemic my compass was a good friend who works as a doctor for the native american health service, part of a federal program. Throughout it he displayed great patience with people and offered nuanced explanations. He was quite honest - no we don't know everything, things may change but at the moment my best advice is.......'. On vaccines he was very clear, yes there will be some negative effects and some injuries, but you need to balance benefit against risk and if you run the numbers everything points to getting vaccinated being the safest option. He treated people with respect by treating them as intelligent individuals and appears to have gotten excellent results. He is really rather worried about the legacy of some of the push tactics we saw to get people to co-operate.  

[Ozexpatriate]

27 minutes ago, jjb1970 said:

He is really rather worried about the legacy of some of the push tactics we saw to get people to co-operate.  

Much goes back to education. The "push" you talk about is a function of both the "pushers" and/or "pushees" not having a sufficiently thorough understanding of science and the scientific method of hypothesis and repeatable experimental outcomes.

 

It is also a reminder that organically we are not rational beings. The amygdala works on pure emotion and is the source of almost all human decision making. It takes effort to objectively use critical thinking. Sometimes we can overrule the amygdala with logic but it takes effort, practice and trust in critical thinking - the last of these I would express as an abstract sort of emotion.

[AndyID]

5 hours ago, Dave Hunt said:

 

We tried something similar with large stones placed along the edge of the grass to deter drivers from churning it up but received a letter from the local highways authority stating that what we had done was illegal and if we didn't remove the stones within twenty eight days we would be prosecuted.

 

Dave

 

Did you find out which one of your neighbors shopped you? 😀

[Ozexpatriate]

On units of measure:

 

This is a weirdly triggering topic for me. I my earliest days I learned basic Imperial units. In 1974, while I was in school, Australia went metric cold turkey, giving me an understanding of both systems. When I studied engineering, it was completely in SI units. 

 

Then I emigrated to the US, where, for the most part, professionally I used SI units (with occasional references to fractions of an inch which are common in semiconductor packaging). In everyday life however, everything is a reduced set of Imperial units with some quantities (like fluids*) that are different amounts from the Imperial 'standards'. 

 

* US Fl oz, pint, gallon.

 

I understand the arguments for Imperial units being more "human scaled". 5'8" is easier to comprehend for height than 173 cm. Apart from the absurd (meteorologically speaking) use of 32°F as the freezing point of water, Fahrenheit offers more precision for weather forecasts.

 

I also understand the arguments for multiples other than ten - like twelve or sixteen. 12 can be divided by both 3 and 4. 16 is a power of 2.

 

I could stipulate that a system using (the same) multiple like 12 or 16 has material advantages over 10. We only use decimal notation in arithmetic as a biological accident of having 10 digits on our hands and feet.

 

But a system with a hodgepodge set of multiples including (but not limited to): 3, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 20, 22, 80 and 112 is utterly farcical. It is quite fascinating as an academic pursuit, but not rational. 

 

If we limit ourselves to distance we have:

12 inches to the foot

 3 feet to the yard

22 yards to the chain

10 chains per furlong

 8 furlongs per mile

 

Then there's the oddball rod (a quarter of a chain) or 16'6" (198"). The chain was designed as a literal chain having 100 links - each (derived, not defined, as) 7.92" long!

 

It's bananas.

 

SI units aren't perfect either. The kg as the base unit of mass is inconsistent. And then there's metric (but not SI units) like the (small) calorie versus (large) Calorie / kcal / 4.184 kJ

 

Edited February 12, 2023 by Ozexpatriate

[AndyID]

4 minutes ago, Ozexpatriate said:

The kg as the base unit of mass is inconsistent.

 

 

Always drives me nuts! There must have been some exceptionally convoluted thinking going on to justify that one. Perhaps large sums of money were involved?

[Ozexpatriate]

16 minutes ago, AndyID said:

There must have been some exceptionally convoluted thinking going on to justify that one. Perhaps large sums of money were involved?

Lots of Francophone arguments between physicists and chemists I suspect. Imagine the drama and gesticulations. "C'est merde!" etc.

 

Blame the Comité International des Poids et Mesures in 1875. Potted history here.

 

Edited February 12, 2023 by Ozexpatriate

[AndyID]

1 hour ago, jjb1970 said:

 

I find the current weaponization of science quite worrying. Those who demand that we listen to the science seem to be genuinely oblivious to the irony, science isn't about just believing what we're told, the scientific method relies on challenging knowledge, testing hypotheses and independence of thought. Telling people to listen to the science in the context of doing as they're told and to stop thinking about things isn't demonstrating faith in science, it is quasi-religious faith.

 

I am a tree hugger and genuinely believe we need to get to zero GHG emissions (among other things). However, I'd much rather that people feel empowered to challenge my views, for three reasons. The first is that if people don't feel comfortable about challenging things it indicates something rotten about society. The second is that it is quite a good exercise to rebut counter views and highlights areas I need to study more if I am unable to really develop a comprehensible case (and even as an ardent tree hugging environmentalist, if anyone can't tell you anything beyond 'listen to the science' it tells you they have no knowledge of the subject, so why would we attach any weight to their views?). And finally, if we really want to bring people with us it is better to explain and support rather than to 'play the person instead of the ball', convince someone and they become a friend, suppress discussion and you end up with all the dark web stuff people complain about.

 

Throughout the pandemic my compass was a good friend who works as a doctor for the native american health service, part of a federal program. Throughout it he displayed great patience with people and offered nuanced explanations. He was quite honest - no we don't know everything, things may change but at the moment my best advice is.......'. On vaccines he was very clear, yes there will be some negative effects and some injuries, but you need to balance benefit against risk and if you run the numbers everything points to getting vaccinated being the safest option. He treated people with respect by treating them as intelligent individuals and appears to have gotten excellent results. He is really rather worried about the legacy of some of the push tactics we saw to get people to co-operate.  

 

There's a great example (and very local) example of how one junior researcher, J Harlen Bretz, stood the scientific establishment on its head just one hundred years ago here:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missoula_floods

[iL Dottore]

4 hours ago, jjb1970 said:

I find the current weaponization of science quite worrying. Those who demand that we listen to the science seem to be genuinely oblivious to the irony, science isn't about just believing what we're told, the scientific method relies on challenging knowledge, testing hypotheses and independence of thought.

 

4 hours ago, jjb1970 said:

I'd much rather that people feel empowered to challenge my views, for three reasons. The first is that if people don't feel comfortable about challenging things it indicates something rotten about society. The second is that it is quite a good exercise to rebut counter views and highlights areas I need to study more if I am unable to really develop a comprehensible case (and even as an ardent tree hugging environmentalist, if anyone can't tell you anything beyond 'listen to the science' it tells you they have no knowledge of the subject, so why would we attach any weight to their views?). And finally, if we really want to bring people with us it is better to explain and support rather than to 'play the person instead of the ball', convince someone and they become a friend, suppress discussion and you end up with all the dark web stuff people complain about.

What you have posted @jjb1970 should be mandatory reading for all (you have superbly encapsulated my strongly held feelings and beliefs about both science and [political] debate).

 

Science is, well basically messy! It thrives on people asking awkward questions about established knowledge. The best scientists have the inquiring mind of a three-year old, as in: the sky is blue why? Because of light passing through the air - why does it do that?, because the light hits the air - why does it do that? etc. etc. Furthermore, and I don’t recall who originated the quote I’m about to paraphrase (Asimov? Arthur C Clarke? Terry Pratchett?) one of the hallmarks and virtues of science is that if a senior and eminent scientist says you can do something - he’s probably right, if a senior and eminent scientist says you can’t do something - he’s possibly wrong…

 

In regards to debate: I have firmly held views on a number of “hot topics” (and being the obstreperous, cantankerous, cynical old s*d that I am, these views reflect most of the “reasonable” political spectrum - from left to right) but I’m always happy to engage in good natured (if sometimes heated debate) for three reasons: 1) I will learn something from my debating “opponent”; 2) my existing views will be, due to discussion, either reinforced or amended and 3) I will gain some understanding of how the “opposition” thinks - allowing me to craft a rebuttal (if needed and/or appropriate).

 

Finally, I am very much against banning books (with very few exceptions). I believe that you need to read those texts that “inspire” your political opponents in order to better understand their thinking and thus more effectively rebut their arguments and/or address their concerns. 

Edited February 12, 2023 by iL Dottore
Typo

[iL Dottore]

To amalgamate the topics of science and the vagaries of measurements, may I offer iD’s Law of Key Scientific Articles

 

Any key journal article that completely upends our understanding of any given scientific topic will:

1) be published in an obscure journal (e.g Lower Slobbovian Journal of Cell Manipulation) with limited circulation and no online presence. 
2) be written in something like Twi, Crio, Joruba or Aramaic with only a badly translated English synopsis.

3) have all measurements in arcane and esoteric units such as furlongs per fortnight or picograms per light-second

Edited February 12, 2023 by iL Dottore

[jamie92208]

While bringing a French friend back from Poitiers on Friday I mentioned to her that I find it difficult to estimate dustance in metric units though I have no difficulty in working in metric. Thisclead tona discussion about units.  This startedcwith pounds shillings and pence. When I got to furlongs and stones she got brain fade.  She now probably thinks that being able to understand  Imperial measurements is the causecof the Anglo/French divisions.

 

Jamie