• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Blog Comments posted by Peter

  1. Jonathan observed: The way that modern "science" works is that you make extreme and scary predictions based on your hypothesis, and then, when they don't come true, you do not conclude that your hypothesis has been falsified, but that new predictions, which are even scarier, need to be made and publicly promoted as being logically justified following the failure of the last predictions. end quote

    Wow. We have a real Karl Popper in our midst. Good thinking Jonathan! Hypothesis fails scrutiny so you up the ante and say, I was just a wee bit wrong, because obviously the evidence says even worse is going to happen. Two not so long quotes and then I shall reenter the conversation.  

    Karl Popper wrote: . . . .To this we have to add (3) the principle of empiricism which asserts that in science only observation and experiment may decide upon the acceptance or rejection of scientific statements, including laws and theories . . . . What is the justification for the belief that the future will resemble the past? What is the justification of so-called inductive inferences? By an inductive inference is here meant an inference from repeatedly observed instances to some as yet unobserved instances. It is of comparatively minor significance whether such an inference from the observed to the unobserved is, from the point of view of time, predictive or retro-dictive; whether we infer that the sun will rise tomorrow or that it did rise 100,000 years ago. Of course, from a pragmatic point of view, one might say that it is the predictive type of inference which is the more important. No doubt usually it is. end quote

    From “The Universe in a Nutshell,” by Stephen Hawking: “Any sound scientific theory, whether of time or any other concept, should in my opinion be based on the most workable philosophy of science: the positivist approach put forward by Karl Popper and others. According to this way of thinking, a scientific theory is a mathematical model that describes and codifies the observations we make. A good theory will describe a large range of phenomena on the basis of a few simple postulates and will make definite predictions that can be tested. If the predictions agree with the observations, the theory survives that test, though it can never be proven to be correct. On the other hand, if the observations disagree with the predictions, one has to discard or modify the theory.  (At least, that is supposed to happen. In practice, people often question the accuracy of the observations and the reliability and moral character of those making the observations.)  If one takes the positivist position, as I do, one cannot say what time actually is. All one can do is describe what has been found to be a very good mathematical model for time and say what predictions it makes.” end quote

    Back to me. Can the previous quotes about induction, science, and time also pertain to political theories and predictions? I think politics, which is a part of philosophy, should be based on as few postulates as needed and no more. And a political theory should be amendable to our current level of knowledge. But the basic premises cannot change. An example is, The Bill of Rights is the basis for long term existence of The Constitution of the United States. Only if current political thinking and action are in sync with the Constitution is it likely, probable, or certain to work and not be nullified by the Supreme Court or by failure. Sorry if that is jumbled. It’s late. Peter

  2. I remember BB was not happy with my little joke that spelled "the jews" as "the juice." Joos is a similar misspelling. I think one of the funniest fictional names ever is "Henny Penny." Is that from some children's story? I forget. Ms Money Penny, are you free tonight? Sorry James. I am watching you right now in "Indiana Jones and The Last Crusade." You look older.  

  3. Don't build near the water if ice shelves are "calving" at a higher rate. Venice's fame as a city is based on its waterways as is well known. My in-laws house is built on a hill from an old golf course and it is right next to the water, with a pier and boat house. In front of their house the road frequently floods, maybe 3 times a year, but the house is probably higher than mine, miles inland. One daughters house is 9 feet above and the other's is 40 feet above, while I am 14 feet above the highest tides. I am not worried but I am still glad my house is 3 cinder blocks above that 14 foot mark. Peter   

  4. 12 minutes ago, william.scherk said:

    While Elizabeth II is Queen of Canada, our Governor-General is Head of State, and her signature gives "Royal Assent" ... in other words, with her signature Canadian bills become law. She is our figurehead 'president.'

    Julie Payette is her name, and she is a former astronaut.



    Damn. That is cool. She and President Trump should be friends. It is pouring rain here with a low tonight in the mid fifties, with another quarter inch of rain to come. What's it like in BC?

  5. I just glanced at William’s article but I did read about this phenomenon several years ago. Repressed memories do exist but the therapy to retrieve them leads to false memories being easily “created.” It must be researched and studied more so “suggestions” are not implanted into children’s and adult’s brains. After the “false suggestion of a memory” is implanted the human subject will embroider upon it creating a false and sometimes destructive narrative about things that never happened. That sounds like brainwashing and the novel, “1984.”

  6. 2 minutes ago, william.scherk said:

    Perhaps. It's also used the other way, Peter -- Queen Victoria's spouse was styled Prince Consort -- and more recently, Prince Phillip, Duke of Edinburgh.  In any case, only one person shows up to work as the monarch -- playing the constitutional role assigned by law and custom. There is no consortium, so to speak. 


    I hope that PBS shows some more "Victoria's," though Albert died young. Bad joke. Perhaps Queen Kate (or consort) will be allowed "on top" more often in the royal bed chambers. I could picture that. I can't stop picturing that.

  7. I am writing a book of fine literature and I am calling it, “At Last Shirked.”Naw, too derivative.  I’ll pretend I am from the most northern province of The British Empire, Canada and call it, “Atlas Sherked” after contributor William. Naw . . . . I don’t want to upset The Crown but our William is fair game.

    William, People Magazine had an interesting article about the next British monarch and his wife who will be queen when Elizabeth steps down, if she ever does. Perhaps when she needs to walk with a cane Elizabeth will finally pass on the royal scepter. I can see the headline, “The Commoner Who Will Be Queen: King Charles and Queen Camilla.”

    Or if Charles decides to not accept, or Camilla is too old to do her royal duties, or when Charles abdicates, etc., it will go to Prince William and Kate. King William and Queen Katherine has a certain ring too and I bet a few Brits are looking forward to some younger royals. I know the paparazzi are. In the meantime, To the Queen. Hoist a pint! May Elizabeth rule until her one hundredth birthday or longer. She has been married to Prince Philip since 1947, and he is still driving a car but be wary around the old gentleman.   

  8. Palm trees. Hawaiian like nights. I can dig it. Though I do appreciate Air conditioning. Here it is going to be in the 90's for a few days with high humidity. Last night it was 77 with 96 percent humidity around 10pm and it felt like 100. I Cranked the AC down to 62 and slept with a sheet and two light blankets. Around 3 I must have pulled a quilt over me but by 4am I remember pulling it off and sweating between my . . . er. forget that. 

    Here is a stupefying question. Could, would humans prefer living without heat or AC? I could live without heat, and dress like a Brit, and have a goose down bed with quilts, but I would hate living without AC. This message was brought to you by Trogolytes United.  

  9. I haven't been following this thread but Mr. Trump lost because he distanced himself from the Republican Party and spoke disparagingly of Cruz and Rubio. If he had only had those two and Paul Ryan really working for him during the campaign, he might have picked up enough electoral votes to win. Now we have two more years of economic stagnation under Clinton, with a possibility of four more years after that. On the positive side we have eliminated North Korea with a mere 70 atomic bombs and we no longer need to prop up Israel. It was good of Hillary Clinton's ICE to allow a million Israeli's to immigrate to America but there are still quite a few living in concentration camps in Palestine. Let's hope for the best.  

  10. 2 hours ago, Jon Letendre said:

    Ok, good. No more cough medicine now, and go take a nap.

    That’s the best you got? So, you want to be grossed out? Close your eyes and imagine the following experiences after each suggestion. The idea of eating eel or (fill in the blanks) grosses me out. But I love fried soft shell crab sandwiches, and scrapple perhaps from living on the Eastern Shore. So, do we Amurican’s eat odd food? From my GPS tracker on the internet, here is what grosses out people from other countries. Olive loaf. Jello salad. Chicken and waffles. Grits. Green bean casserole. A donut burger.  "Rocky Mountain oysters: If you can't call something what it actually is (testicles), maybe we shouldn't be eating it." Chicken gizzards. Pickled pigs feet. Deep fried butter balls.

    But in the uncivilized world they eat, fried brain sandwich, Escamole: Ant larvae harvested from the roots of the agave plan. Bird’s Nest Soup. Cow’s stomach tacos in Mexico, Cuy or guinea pig in Peru, goats intestines called Buchada in Brazil, bull’s testicles called criadillas in Argentina, live dancing shrimp called goong in Thailand, Kiviak or dead birds stuffed into a dead seal in Greenland, snake soup in China, sheep’s head called Smalahove in Norway. In New Guinea they used to eat humans. 

    And Star Trek’s Worf eats gagh which are serpentine worms Klingons prefer to eat live as they try to crawl out of their bowls and then out of their bowels, and you chase it with a slug of blood wine, but don't mix it with whatever you are having. 

  11. Oh. I get it. But nope, not a drop to drink. Are we messing up Wilhelm's site? I hope not. The lack of infrequent typos is the internet proof of sobriety. Well shucks, you ARE smart enough to have a sense of humor. The OL bylines say no name calling and any comedic references to a frequent contributor must be humorous.

    “Well in that case by golly,” and “Watch your step, Buster,” (he said in his best imitation of Jim Carey) I remember the uproar when the 1969 movie “Krakatoa: East of Java” came out. It starred Maximilian Schell, Rossano Brazi, Sal Mineo, Diane Baker, Brian Keith and with “Little Jon” as his son. No one except “Lil Jon” (as he was known on the set) knew the startling secret about the film but he just had to go ahead and blab to a tabloid “The Hollywood Insider.”

    During filming but only after he had received his first pay check, he told the reporter: “Krakatoa was actually west of Java!” “Neither the director or producers would listen to him during filming,” he confided between sobs. When the news came out the film lost all chances for an Oscar for direction and “special effects,” and Mao banned it in China for being “lying propaganda from the Imperialist West” and he said it was in no way as good as the movie “The King and I” etcetera, etcetera, etcetera . . . .       

  12. 59 minutes ago, Jon Letendre said:

    We can see what Peter is working with, yet even he does not believe the stupidest conspiracy theory ever.

    Unless of course Billy no longer believes.

    He refuses to say.

    I coulda been a comedy writer for Jerry Seinfeld I tells ya. "His mudder was a mudder" coulda been thunk of by me. The dark side of the moon is an alien base is the stupid-i-est conspiracy ever, disproved by the first trip around da moon. Gotcha.

  13. "Friends and foes" is a logical fallacy. You can't be a friend and a foe at the same time. "Friends or foes" makes more sense. And I wish people would stop saying, "Cat got your tongue." There has been no recorded instance of a cat biting a tongue out of somebodies mouth. Everybody knows when you say "cat" you are just talking about a "house cat" and not a lion or a tiger. And I wish people would stop saying, "for instance" and "in an instant." It's just crazy talk.