I'm not going to go into detail, as the praise should go to Constantly Furious. For info, he has now enlisted the help of UKIP.
For the latest update, please visit the Constantly Furious Website
Well done CF
Tuesday, 24 November 2009
I'm glad I retired from The Royal Fleet Auxiliary
I used to work as a marine engineer with this outfit till last month.
On October 28, 2009, the armed Royal Fleet Auxiliary tanker Wave Knight met Somali pirates transferring the British couple Paul and Rachel Chandler from their yacht Lynn Rival to a hijacked Singaporean container vessel.
Hostage: Rachel Chandler and her Somali captors. The British couple has made a direct plea on video warning UK authorities they fear the 'kidnappers are losing patience' and may kill them
When warning shots from Wave Knight failed to deter the pirates, its 100-strong crew stood by and did . . . absolutely nothing.
The obsession with Health and Safety, Political correctness, and all the trapping of this modern world were stifling initiative. On the spot decisions were discouraged. Risk assessments, permits to work, Cossh regulations, preps for firing chits, etc. All these precluded prompt action.
Read the whole article here and weep.
Oh, and there was a two year argument, on whether ring bolts on the upper deck should be painted grey or white.
Grey argument: Must paint grey to prevent the enemy spotting us.
Counter argument: Radar has been in existence since WW2
White argument: Will prevent sailors stubbing their toes
Counter argument: Why don't they look where they're going
Read the whole article here and weep.
Oh, and there was a two year argument, on whether ring bolts on the upper deck should be painted grey or white.
Grey argument: Must paint grey to prevent the enemy spotting us.
Counter argument: Radar has been in existence since WW2
White argument: Will prevent sailors stubbing their toes
Counter argument: Why don't they look where they're going
It's not the Beeb, but the truth is leaking out slowly
I'm glad that the global warming con is now being talked about more openly, and not just behind closed doors.
Shamelessly knicked from Subrosa
Shamelessly knicked from Subrosa
Dead against Skyprotect
Aaaagh.
Dear Wankers at Skyprotect,
I have just received a letter from yourselves, thanking me for purchasing Skyprotect.
I have done no such thing. The only time I have contacted you was to inform you of the DEATH of my uncle, Mr xxxxxx . That's it, DEAD, DECEASED, SHRUGGED OFF HIS MORTAL COIL, Etc. Need I go on? Is no-one taught to actually read letters these days. There was also another slight clue in the envelope which you failed to spot. Why would I enclose a death certificate?. It's not a mandatory document required for a purchase as yet.
Yours, in disgust,
Mr Filthy Engineer
Soon to ditch Sky and turn to Virgin cable.
Hope I wasn't too hard on them for their minor mistake
Dear Wankers at Skyprotect,
I have just received a letter from yourselves, thanking me for purchasing Skyprotect.
I have done no such thing. The only time I have contacted you was to inform you of the DEATH of my uncle, Mr xxxxxx . That's it, DEAD, DECEASED, SHRUGGED OFF HIS MORTAL COIL, Etc. Need I go on? Is no-one taught to actually read letters these days. There was also another slight clue in the envelope which you failed to spot. Why would I enclose a death certificate?. It's not a mandatory document required for a purchase as yet.
Yours, in disgust,
Mr Filthy Engineer
Soon to ditch Sky and turn to Virgin cable.
Hope I wasn't too hard on them for their minor mistake
Monday, 23 November 2009
Climate change again.
In one of those CRU E mails
One prominent IPCC researcher concerned about this gap in knowledge is Simon Tett from the Hadley Centre for climate modelling at the Meteorological Office, home to one of the world's five leading global circulation models, capable of recreating a mathematical version of how the atmosphere works and of running simulations of climatic changes over decades or even centuries. He says that "in the past, our estimates of natural variability have been based on climate models." But this autumn [date?], he says, those estimates have been thrown into turmoil by a paper published in the journal The Holocene. In it, Tim Barnett of the Scripps Institution of Oceanography, part of the University of California at San Diego, compared model estimates of natural temperature fluctuations over the past 400 years with the best evidence from the real world -- from instruments in the past century and "proxy data", such as Briffa's tree rings, from before that.
The result was bad news for the modellers. The two models examined -- one German, the other American -- generated a natural variability of around 0.1 degree C per century. This was less than half that revealed in the proxy data. "Of course we don't have to believe the proxy data. They certainly have problems attached to them. But my belief is that they both models, and proxy data too, underestimate real variability," says Barnett
The models' error was not, perhaps, too surprising. As Barnett points out, they do not include vital "forcing" mechanisms that alter temperature, such as solar cycles and volcanic eruptions. Nor can they yet mimic the strength of the largest year-on-year variability in the natural system, the El Nino oscillation in the Pacific Ocean, which has a global impact on climate.
Nonetheless, the findings should serve as a warning, Barnett says, that "the current models cannot be used in rigorous tests for anthropogenic signals in the real world". If they are they "might lead us to believe that an anthropogenic signal had been found when, in fact, that may not be the case."
The science is settled then? Glad I'm only an engineer.
And does anyone know anything about this woman?
Anne JOHNSON
IIASA
International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis
A-2361 Laxenburg, Austria
E-Mail: johnson@iiasa.ac.at
Phone : +43 2236 807-0
Fax : +43 2236 71313
She seems quite important to the story.
PS. Real climate won't publish this
One prominent IPCC researcher concerned about this gap in knowledge is Simon Tett from the Hadley Centre for climate modelling at the Meteorological Office, home to one of the world's five leading global circulation models, capable of recreating a mathematical version of how the atmosphere works and of running simulations of climatic changes over decades or even centuries. He says that "in the past, our estimates of natural variability have been based on climate models." But this autumn [date?], he says, those estimates have been thrown into turmoil by a paper published in the journal The Holocene. In it, Tim Barnett of the Scripps Institution of Oceanography, part of the University of California at San Diego, compared model estimates of natural temperature fluctuations over the past 400 years with the best evidence from the real world -- from instruments in the past century and "proxy data", such as Briffa's tree rings, from before that.
The result was bad news for the modellers. The two models examined -- one German, the other American -- generated a natural variability of around 0.1 degree C per century. This was less than half that revealed in the proxy data. "Of course we don't have to believe the proxy data. They certainly have problems attached to them. But my belief is that they both models, and proxy data too, underestimate real variability," says Barnett
The models' error was not, perhaps, too surprising. As Barnett points out, they do not include vital "forcing" mechanisms that alter temperature, such as solar cycles and volcanic eruptions. Nor can they yet mimic the strength of the largest year-on-year variability in the natural system, the El Nino oscillation in the Pacific Ocean, which has a global impact on climate.
Nonetheless, the findings should serve as a warning, Barnett says, that "the current models cannot be used in rigorous tests for anthropogenic signals in the real world". If they are they "might lead us to believe that an anthropogenic signal had been found when, in fact, that may not be the case."
The science is settled then? Glad I'm only an engineer.
And does anyone know anything about this woman?
Anne JOHNSON
IIASA
International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis
A-2361 Laxenburg, Austria
E-Mail: johnson@iiasa.ac.at
Phone : +43 2236 807-0
Fax : +43 2236 71313
She seems quite important to the story.
PS. Real climate won't publish this
That M & S advert
Definitely not quite the real M & S. Hopefully this is more offensive than the real one that 8 people complained about. FFS, 8 out of 60,000,000 complained to the ASA,
H/T to the GOT for brightening up my day
H/T to the GOT for brightening up my day
Irish Viagra?
An Irish woman of advanced age visited her physician to ask his advice in reviving her husband's libido.
"What about trying Viagra?" asked the doctor
"Not a chance", she said. "He won't even take an aspirin."
"Not a problem," replied the doctor. "Give him an 'Irish Viagra'. It's when you drop the Viagra tablet into his coffee. He won't even taste it. Give it a try and call me in a week to let me know how things went."
It wasn't a week later when she called the doctor, who directly inquired as to her progress.
The poor dear exclaimed, "Oh, faith, bejaysus and begorrah!T'was horrid! Just terrible, doctor!"
"Really? What happened?" asked the doctor.
"Well, I did as you advised and slipped it in his coffee and the effect was almost immediate. He jumped straight up, with a twinkle in his eye and with his pants a-bulging fiercely! With one swoop of his arm, he sent me cups and tablecloth flying, ripped me clothes to tatters and took me then and there passionately on the tabletop! It was a nightmare, I tell you, an absolute nightmare!"
"Why so terrible?" asked the doctor, "Do you mean the sex your husband provided wasn't good?"
"Feckin jaysus, 'twas the best sex I've had in 25 years! But sure as I'm sitting here, I'll never be able to show me face in Starbucks again!"
"What about trying Viagra?" asked the doctor
"Not a chance", she said. "He won't even take an aspirin."
"Not a problem," replied the doctor. "Give him an 'Irish Viagra'. It's when you drop the Viagra tablet into his coffee. He won't even taste it. Give it a try and call me in a week to let me know how things went."
It wasn't a week later when she called the doctor, who directly inquired as to her progress.
The poor dear exclaimed, "Oh, faith, bejaysus and begorrah!T'was horrid! Just terrible, doctor!"
"Really? What happened?" asked the doctor.
"Well, I did as you advised and slipped it in his coffee and the effect was almost immediate. He jumped straight up, with a twinkle in his eye and with his pants a-bulging fiercely! With one swoop of his arm, he sent me cups and tablecloth flying, ripped me clothes to tatters and took me then and there passionately on the tabletop! It was a nightmare, I tell you, an absolute nightmare!"
"Why so terrible?" asked the doctor, "Do you mean the sex your husband provided wasn't good?"
"Feckin jaysus, 'twas the best sex I've had in 25 years! But sure as I'm sitting here, I'll never be able to show me face in Starbucks again!"
MSM now questioning AGW? How long will that last till they get bored?
It'll be interesting to see how long they run with this. I'm trying to wade through the whole FOI download at the moment. There's some interesting reading there.
Scientists at a British climate change research centre discussed ways of dodging Freedom of Information Act requests to release temperature data, it is claimed.Leaked emails and documents appear to show that scientists at the University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit conspired to keep US climate change sceptics in the dark about the existence of the act.
The private messages have been seized upon by climate-change sceptics, who claim one email includes an admittance that robust data to prove the world is warming up simply doesn't exist, and that data which did not support global warming was deliberately suppressed.
and this little snippet from
IPCC WGI THIRD ASSESSMENT REPORT – (TAR)
GOVERNMENT/EXPERT REVIEW – APRIL-JUNE 2000
COLLATED EXPERT COMMENTS
GENERAL
General Comments
The idea that climate without human intervention can only undergo “natural variability”, and that “climate change” can only result from human activity is false and fallacious. It is in conflict with all that we know of evolution and geology. It is simply wrong to assume that “ climate change” automatically implies human influence on the climate.
This fallacy is embraced by the Framework Convention on Climate Change, but the IPCC (Footnote to “Summary for Policymakers. Page 1) claim that they are prepared to accept “natural variability” as “climate change”. They are, however, unwilling to accept the truth, which is that climate can change without human intervention.
Alright, taken out of context I know, but there was plenty of internal dissent when the report was written
Harry at CRU
Just been reading through HARRY_README.txt. I do feel sorry for what he had to put up with. Here's a selection of his comments:
Oh, sod it. It'll do. I don't think I can justify spending any longer on a dataset, the previous version of which was completely wrong (misnamed) and nobody noticed for five years.
Bear in mind that there is no working synthetic method for cloud, because Mark New lost the coefficients file and never found it again (despite searching on tape
archives at UEA) and never recreated it. This hasn't mattered too much, because
the synthetic cloud grids had not been discarded for 1901-95, and after 1995
sunshine data is used instead of cloud data anyway."
Wrong again! The saga continues.. actually I'm beginning to wonder if it'll still be going when I JOIN SAGA
Hmmm.. still some problems. In several areas, including a swathe of Russia, the mean values drop around 1991 - just when MCDW comes in.
Back.. think.. even more complicated. My head hurts. No, it actually does.
I really thought I was cracking this project. But every time, it ends up worse than before.
OH FUCK THIS. It's Sunday evening, I've worked all weekend, and just when I thought it was done I'm hitting yet another problem that's based on the hopeless state of our databases. There is no uniform data integrity, it's just a catalogue of issues that continues to grow as they're found.Oh well, shit happens. Mind you I don't understand much of what he was doing except it seemed to be messing with incomplete data
Sunday, 22 November 2009
The Doggie diet
Yesterday I was buying 2 large bags of Purina dog food at a well known supermarket for my dogs Shadow and Lady.
I was about to check out when a woman behind me asked if I had a dog.
What did she think, that I had an elephant?
Since I had little else to do, on impulse, I told her that No, I didn't have a dog - that I was starting the Purina Diet again, although I probably shouldn't because I ended up in the hospital last time.
On the bright side though, I'd lost 50 pounds before I awakened in intensive care with tubes coming out of every hole in my body and IVs in both arms.
I told her that it was essentially a perfect diet and that the way that it works is to load your pockets with Purina nuggets and simply eat one or two every time you feel hungry and that the food is nutritionally complete so I was going to try it again.
(I have to mention here that practically everyone in the line was enthralled with my story by now.)
Horrified, She asked : "Did you end up in intensive care because the dog food had poisoned you?"
I said: No not at all; I had stopped in the middle of the parking lot to lick my ass and a car hit me.
The guy behind her was laughing so hard, I thought he was going to have a heart attack!
The well known supermarket won't let me shop there anymore.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)