N. 'Man O'Rage' R.

I haven’t been blogging much lately, for various reasons. I have been busy with my flights and consultancy work. It’s also the 'check ride' time of the year where I need to spend hours on the simulator proving that I am still a competent pilot.

All this means that I have to keep all the rage bottled up and focus on the tasks at hand. But the world is hell bent on giving that bottle a good shake. Just a few happenings around the world that I would love to rave and rant about...

• The Olympic Games - I am no fan of the Olympic Games. I don’t see what value they provide the public at large. They only benefit the tycoons who have made a business case around them and little prancing dip wads who have never done an hour of serious work in their life as they are dedicated to running around in circles and doing physical activities that are of no productive value. I have never seen the need for a law abiding citizen to pole vault or run fast - while jumping over hurdles - and take-a-dump-at-the-same-time. Let’s face it; the Olympics are antiquated games that were invented by the Greek aristocrats to entertain themselves while someone invented the television. Let’s get rid of them. They are a waste of time and other precious resources. 
• The Olympic Torch - What on earth is this all about? So some people run around the world with a torch? Why? This is of as much value as 'human chains' and other stupid gestures that hippies think of. Has the green brigade considered the carbon impact of this harebrained idea? As if it wasn’t stupid enough in the first place, it is now being used for political propaganda!! The only good thing that came out of this stupid fiasco was that it took the Met Police out for a jog. But then there were scuffles between the Police and concerned citizens who thought running around with fire was a bad idea. So instead of arresting the 'torch bearers' for attempted arson, the police were arresting people who were trying to prevent harm to others. Put that silly torch out you silly idiots! Didn’t your mothers tell you to not play with fire!!?
• Medical Astrology - What!!??? Well, the head quack HRH Prince Charles and his new Complementary and Natural Healthcare Council is introducing an idea in the wonderful new world of regulated alternative medicine, that all registered practitioners undergo Continuous Professional Development. That’s right - they want quacks to train to be able to quack better. As part of their rigorous training these quacks now have to learn the complicated and difficult method of Medical Astrology. Every ancient civilisation used astrology for forecasting events, promoting health and in the prevention of disease. The alchemists used astrology and based prescriptions on the patient’s planetary constitution. As good quacks, they need to understand patients in order to treat them. The best quack can predict a disease before it occurs- Why wait for a person to get sick? This simple yet effective system of astrology is based on ancient wisdom using Planetary Cycles and popularised by Robin Murphy. What new quackery is this? Are we still in the 21st century? Are you sure we didn’t encounter some rip in space-time and jump back to 300 BC?
• Expelled - the irony continues to burn!! - 'Expelled, No intelligence Allowed' the turdumentary by Ben Stein continues to burn on the irony stove. As if the stupid cdesign proponentists didn’t get a good roasting after having thrown out evolutionary biologist Prof. PZ Myers, in front of Prof. Richard Dawkins no less!!, they continue to break the barriers of stupid. Going where no stupid has gone before. Now they are lying, kicking themselves in the nuts and stealing copyrighted work! Well, nothing new you would say, but this is on a whole new level. Billy Dumbski says that they knew this would happen, so they budgeted for lawsuits! WHAAAAT!?
  

People, I know you miss me and I know I have been derelict in my duties by not blogging often enough. But throwing stupid at me isn’t going to help. It would just give me an aneurism and cause death by blogging. Please cease and desist immediately. You are putting all of humanity at risk.

• She is a scientific goddess.
• She has a pet dog called Arnie. She rescued him in Dec'2006.
• She is an evillution proponentist and Michael Behe doesnt like her. Neither does Bill Dembski.
• She is a super woo fighter.
• The Christian and Muslim fundies hate her more than they do me.
• She is an Atheist.
• Did I mention she is a superchick?

I can go on, but I would have to link to all her blog posts for the last 2 years. She does more for the public understanding of Science, in a single day, than the likes of Behe, Dembski and Horowitz can ever hope to achieve in their lifetimes. I thank her from the bottom of my heart!

Dr. David Gorski, a surgical oncologist and fellow oncologist and co-blogger at Science Based Medicine,(Retd.) Dr. Wallace Sampson have written a brilliant critique(s) of the study that claimed to increase chances of success in women undergoing IVF treatment.

The study, which made the headlines on Sky news on Saturday morning, claims that Acupuncture increases the chances of conceiving by over 65% in women undergoing IVF. The news media, especially Sky with Eamon Holmes, were reporting this as a matter of fact and were not providing any evidence to back the claim nor were they reading the fact that the study was in no way original - but mainly a meta-analysis, which was based on appeal to ancient knowledge. As Dr. Gorski points out that after all,  bloodletting and purging with toxic metals were also used for centuries as remedies; that does not mean that they actually did anything therapeutic.

He goes on to dissect the entire study and explaining point by point on how the study doesn't really provide any new information but merely amplifies noise and hype. In Dr. Gorski's own words - "The bottom line, is that no plausible physiologic mechanism has been shown or proposed. As we now know, when clinical studies are done about a hypothesis with a very low prior plausibility, noise predominates, producing a disturbingly high proportion of seemingly “positive” studies."

In his article, Dr. Sampson criticizes the British Medical Journal for publishing sectarian medicine methods more often than other journals. He had hoped that the change in editorship at the BMJ would have bought about a significant change in that policy.

The articles by both doctors are very good read, especially if, like me - you aren't in the medical industry and rely on good journalism (which the Sky miserably failed at) to stay in touch.

Science-Based Medicine » Hype over science: Does acupuncture really improve the chances of success for in vitro fertilization?

 VS.  

 I am a bit late in blogging about the new year, but there is a good reason for that. Everyone around the web is blogging about a great start to a new year with hope, excitement and enthusiasm all around. I on the other hand haven't had that great a start to the new year. The actual transition into the morning of the 1st of January was spectacularly breathtaking!! I was at 40,000 feet watching the sunrise in the eastern hemisphere. However, the brief elation and awe was quickly overwhelmed by humility and shame! For it was in those wee hours of the morning of 1st January 2008, that I finished reading the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report "The Physical Science Basis", which is the most comprehensive and up-to-date scientific assessment of past, present and future climate change.

In November, last year, I blogged about the IPCC/Al Gore Nobel Prize and my view on the climate crisis. I said, "I do not deny, but am skeptical of, the extent of the anthropogenic climate change. This is absolutely not the same as denial.". I couldn't have been more wrong! The evidence for anthropogenic influence on global warming is real and its overwhelming!.

To quote from the IPCC report "It is extremely unlikely (<5%) that the global pattern of warming during the past half century can be explained without external forcing, and very unlikely that it is due to known natural external causes alone.". It goes on to say "It is likely that anthropogenic forcing has contributed to the general warming observed in the upper several hundred meters of the ocean during the latter half of the 20th century. Anthropogenic forcing, resulting in thermal expansion from ocean warming and glacier mass loss, has very likely contributed to sea level rise during the latter half of the 20th century."

Admittedly, the report does use words like "likely" etc when describing the causal links for climate change in anthropogenic activities. However this uncertainty should not be confused (mea culpa) for total lack of evidence. Au contraire, there is substantial evidence that shows that anthropogenic activities are the cause of global warming! However, the data is complex and causality is inferred and hard to quantify. But the word "likely" is being used to describe a "scientific likelihood" and not an total uncertainty in understanding.

I am not a qualified climatologist, but I do have a good (professional) understanding of macro climate's as I use various global climate/metrological models in flight planning. Neither am I a scientist, but I can read, I can cogitate and I understand the Scientific Method. I have also had help from many reputed scientists in various different fields who have affirmed, corrected and strengthened my understanding of various aspects of the Scientific method and discipline. (look out for a following post on this)

So what have I changed my mind about? Well lots of things, but the scope of anthropogenic climate ranks high on the list. So does this mean, that I will stop flying? Absolutely not! The answer, if any, still lies in technological and scientific progress. And If I could be afforded any solipsism - I may just be a glorified bus driver, but I feel that I help bring about progress by making the world a little smaller.

At any rate, one of the consolations of science is that being wrong on occasion lets you know you don't know everything and motivates renewed curiosity. But one needs to exercise caution on their convictions of right and wrong in science, for as Prof. Kendric Smith of Stanford Univ. said "In religion one can often be forgiven for one's sins but no one should be forgiven for sins against science."

Last month, Al Gore, Michael Oppenheimer, and the IPCC were awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for their efforts in understanding climate change crisis and pointing the way forward to solving it; and last month I received over 120 email's in response to my blog post Climate Change: The new religion, lampooning me for being a climate change 'naysayer'. Those email's, most of them too rude to reproduce, accuse me of ignorance, sin and hypocrisy. Sin I can live with, but the other two I simply have to refute as nothing can be further from the truth.

a) I never have, and don't, deny climate change. Climate change is very real. Global Warming is unequivocal. Weather stations, ocean measurements, decreases in snow cover, reductions in Arctic sea ice, longer growing seasons, balloon measurements, boreholes and satellites all show results consistent with the surface record of warming.

b) I do not deny, but am skeptical of, the extent of the anthropogenic climate change. This is absolutely not the same as denial.

The scientific consensus is clearly expressed in the reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Created in 1988 by the World Meteorological Organization and the United Nations Environmental Programme, IPCC's purpose is to evaluate the state of climate science as a basis for informed policy action, primarily on the basis of peer-reviewed and published scientific literature (1). In its most recent assessment, IPCC states unequivocally that the consensus of scientific opinion is that Earth's climate is being affected by human activities: "Human activities ... are modifying the concentration of atmospheric constituents ... that absorb or scatter radiant energy. ... [M]ost of the observed warming over the last 50 years is likely to have been due to the increase in greenhouse gas concentrations" [p. 21 in (2)].

I agree. The American Meteorological Society (3), the American Geophysical Union (4), and the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) all have issued statements in recent years concluding that the evidence for human modification of climate is compelling (5).

However, I am skeptical of the extent to which the rise in greenhouse gases due to anthropogenic activities is going to lead to apocalyptic climate change. The skepticism stems from the following:

The drafting of such reports and statements involves many opportunities for comment, criticism, and revision, and it is not likely that they would diverge greatly from the opinions of the societies' members. Nevertheless, they might downplay legitimate dissenting opinions. That hypothesis was tested by analyzing 928 abstracts, published in refereed scientific journals between 1993 and 2003, and listed in the ISI database with the keywords "climate change" (6).

The 928 papers were divided into six categories: explicit endorsement of the consensus position, evaluation of impacts, mitigation proposals, methods, paleoclimate analysis, and rejection of the consensus position. Of all the papers, 75% fell into the first three categories, either explicitly or implicitly accepting the consensus view; 25% dealt with methods or paleoclimate, taking no position on current anthropogenic climate change.

Authors evaluating impacts, developing methods, or studying paleoclimatic change might believe that current climate change is natural. (Admittedly, none of these papers argued that point).

The scientific consensus might, of course, be wrong. If the history of science teaches anything, it is humility, and no one can be faulted for failing to act on what is not known. And as I said in my previous entry - Science is at ease with this. As more data becomes available old, flawed theories are thrown out and new theories take their place.

c) However, the climate eco-activists/terrorists don't offer any explanations nor do they proffer any viable solutions. In their opinion, the world is going to end unless I stop doing whatever I am doing now and go live in a straw hut and eat berries. In fact they are probably responsible for more 'waste' of precious resources than anyone else. Like the waste of time and millions of dollars worth of resources at the airports, the police, delays and inconvenience caused to airline passengers, to industry and so on.

Many details about climate interactions are not well understood, and there are ample grounds for continued research to provide a better basis for understanding climate dynamics. The question of what to do about climate change is also still open. But there is a scientific consensus on the reality of anthropogenic climate change, just not on the extent of it. Climate scientists have repeatedly tried to make this clear. It is time for the rest of us to listen.

Anyway's, the answers to the problems lie in scientific research and industry. Blind faith and proselytism isn't going to help. Handcuffing yourself to gates will get you ridicule or even arrested. Lying down in front of a train or an aircraft or running around airports is likely to get you killed and even put others in danger. The quest for solutions continues but going to back to our cave dwelling ways is definitely not the answer. Arguments over the Kyoto Protocol are outside the realms of science, although it certainly will not reduce greenhouse gas emissions as far or as fast as the IPCC indicates is necessary. The latest IPCC Working Group 2 report suggest that the impact of man-made climate change will on balance be deleterious, particular to the poorer countries of the tropics, although colder regions may see benefits such as increased crop yields. Investment in energy efficiency, new energy technologies and renewable's are likely to benefit the developing world and having a hippie infestation in the neighborhood doesn't help. 

But it's the fear mongering that till now has been the domain of religion and politics that I absolutely object to and will not stand for. And that was the point of my last article.

As Boris Johnson put it "Humanity has largely lost its fear of hellfire, and yet we still hunger for a structure, a point, an eschatology, a moral counterbalance to our growing prosperity. All that is brilliantly supplied by climate change. Like all the best religions, fear of climate change satisfies our need for guilt, and self-disgust, and that eternal human sense that technological progress must be punished by the gods."

Was a depressing day with aircraft in maintenance, bad weather and missing phones. This is my second weekend grounded and phoneless (I forgot my phone at the aerodrome desk in Le Touquet, 2 weeks ago) and I certainly dont like it. How is it that two extremely well qualified pilots, with over 4800 hours between them, can't find a dishwasher to fly!? No wonder GA is in decline. It's in decline because not all pilots can afford to buy their own aircraft and aviation clubs seem more interested in taking money off poor pilots rather than helping them fly!!

The worst was the flight club in Rotterdam. Not only do the ATC speak in dutch even though JAA mandates use of english once there is an english speaking pilot on frequency, but they issue weird clearances like 'CROSS IN THE MIDDLE RW06' during an standard overhead join. And the club owner tells me that I should treat the club as a social organization rather than a rental agency. Yea, like I go to Hertz to socialise and meet lonely fiat punto drivers and organize smart car drive aways. Then there are clubs like in Rochester that have aircraft but the check out instructor cant be bothered to get out of bed on a Sunday morning. I wish they started treating GA seriously and ran it professionally rather than as a hobby.

With any luck, I have found an aircraft (A Cessna 182) that is regularly available and will be checking it out next week. So the plan continues...

Quote

Dutch Fly Away

Hosted by: Capt. Nikhil Date and time: 09 December 2007 at 07:00 Location name: Denham View this event on Windows Live

and the Q&A session...

During direct action protests by eco-activists last week,

• Five people blocked the main gate at Sizewell B nuclear power station in Suffolk after locking their arms inside barrels of concrete.
• A dozen protesters super-glued their hands to entrance doors at BP's headquarters in central London.
• Campaigners dressed as "red herrings" protested at the offices of carbon offset firms Climate Care in Oxford and the Carbon Neutral Company in London.
• A group invaded the London offices of Bridgepoint Capital, a private equity firm which is behind the expansion of Leeds-Bradford Airport
• In total over 60 people were arrested when the 'peaceful' eco protests got out of hand.
• Millions of pounds of tax payers money were spent policing the protests. Thousands of ordinary people's lives were affected.

Their message - "Punish, O Lord, those of us who, through our own fault, are ungreen." (Matthew Parris, Times Online, 2006)

Climate Change and Global Warming have become the core belief in the new eco theocracy. The eco-theists put faith in anthropogenic, apocalyptic climate change. Well, the climate is always changing, so they must be right!

Faith is a belief held without evidence. And faith is what the eco-activists require of me. Any evidence that they attempt to provide is at best anecdotal. They make statements about 'facts', but evidence for the facts is often found lacking. Any skepticism is however akin to sacrilege. The eco-activists like to use the name of science in their arguments but they do not like the methods of science.  

The world might (or might not) have warmed by a fraction of a degree. This might (or might not) be all (or in part) due to the activities of mankind. It all depends on the quality of observations and the validity of various hypotheses. Science is at ease with this situation. It proposes various theories, discounts the most improbable and attempts to prove the most probable, but it does not believe. Religion is different.

The eco-activists (also referred to as eco-terrorists) resort to proselytism to promote the idea that the activities of modern man are going to lead to apocalyptic climate change and so modern man should desist immediately. Science doesn't seek converts, it merely empowers. It teaches those that are willing to learn, but it does not impose itself on those who are indifferent.

Guilt, resentment and apocalypse. Prophets have since the dawn of history recognized the power they can unleash by linking these three. Elijah told of earthquake, wind and fire; Jeremiah of disasters unnumbered. Ignatius Loyola, Luther, Calvin, the Wesley's, Moses, Mohammad . . . and countless other seers, ayatollahs and divines, have called upon us to bail out of whatever version of Sodom and Gomorrah it has pleased them to paint, before those cities burn.

The prophets of climate change are their inheritors, clothing new belief in the metaphor of the old, reconnecting it to those ancient drives. The Archbishop of Canterbury has sensed as much. Dr Rowan Williams told politicians this week that they would face “a heavy responsibility before God” if they failed to act to control climate change. He described the lifestyle of those who contribute most to global warming as “profoundly immoral”. Asked how God would judge our age if we fail to act, Dr Williams said: “If you look at the language of the Bible on this, you very often come across situations where people are judged for not responding to warnings.”

Admittedly, Some data is beyond refutation: sea levels are surely rising; carbon dioxide levels are up; and the climate is changing. There are likely to be linkages of some sort. Around these rocks of hard facts, however, swirls a sea of guesswork and speculation. It is here where — as we observe philosophical currents at work that are not so much scientific as driven by guilt's, envies and yearnings — we need to observe particular caution.

Secondly, research will follow funding. It is the familiar refrain of the green movement that “climate-change denial” finds funding from the pockets of carbon-producing or carbon-hungry big business, especially in America. That is a fair point, and a reason for skepticism, but it is sauce for both goose and gander. Eco-alarmism has a ready market of its own amongst politicians, journalists and moralists and they have deep pockets too.

Starting with the deceptively simple story of an ant, Dan Dennett unleashes a dazzling sequence of ideas, making a powerful case for the existence of "memes" -- a term coined by Richard Dawkins for mental concepts that are literally alive and capable of spreading from brain to brain.
On the way, look out for:
• a powerful one-sentence secret of happiness
• a compelling insight into terrorists' motivation
• a chilling view of Islam
And just when you think you know where the talk's heading, it dramatically shifts direction and questions some of our fundamental assumptions.

This kind of explains the viral memes in many societies in the west and especially the east. I was bought up in a strong Hindu sub-culture which embraces the idea of a elephant headed god - Ganesha. During the annual festival the normally benign worship turns into euphoria. I let go of the meme a long time ago, as I just cant bear the concept of a god, any god (esp. Elephant headed humanoid god.) in a rational society. However, many of my friends and family, while not particulary religious, do continue on with the traditions and ceremonies involved. The meme survives almost irrespective of daily professions (Doctors, Engineers, Writers, Scientists...), activities or personal beliefs. A cousin admitted that he was an agnostic, but still took part in the ceremonies because it was a part of his culture. It seems that otherwise rational people are often corrupted by an overwhelming desire to preserve their cultures. Is this a viral meme fighting for survival?

What is wrong with culture attrition [sic] anyways? It was part of a Hindu sub-culture to burn widows on their husbands pyre. That didn't survive... so why the desire to preserve other parts of that culture? Casteism, which is not dissimilar to racism, finds legal and government backing in India.

When subjected to individual meme's in a culture or religion, humans form groups to oppose assimilation or attrition. Yet, we are united in following the meme, that we are to preserve these viral agglomeration of memes, sometimes at whatever cost necessary.

It's just 100 and some years since we took the first steps in learning how to fly. Since then many have made the ultimate sacrifice in pursuit of the most beautiful dream that has haunted mankind since Icarus – Flight.

21^st April, 2007, 32 year old Lt. Cmdr. Kevin J. Davis of Pittsfield, Mass. was killed while performing with the Blue Angels in Beaufort, South Carolina. His F/A-18 "Hornet" never joined the Delta formation the other Angels had formed over the crowd and his parents, who were there to watch their son's first ever Blue Angel performance. During his Navy career, he earned "Top Stick" status in his class at Fighter Squadron 101 at Naval Air Station Oceania, Va., while training in F-14 Tomcat jets. He flew missions supporting the U.S.-led war in Afghanistan and graduated from Navy Flight Weapons School in 2004.

The Blue Angels are unique from other jet aviators because they don't wear the traditional G-suits that most jet pilots use to avoid blacking out during manoeuvres that exert strong gravitational forces. The suits inflate around the lower body to keep blood in the brain, but that could cause a pilot to bump the control stick — a potentially deadly move when flying inches from other planes.

"He was fascinated with airplanes from the time he was little," former neighbour Betty Sweeney said. "He knew what he wanted to do, and he did it. That's the only relief, that he went doing what he wanted to do."

At Marine Corps Air Station Beaufort, the site of Saturday's crash, a sombre crowd watched Sunday as six jets flew overhead in formation. Smoke streamed behind one of the jets as it peeled away from the others to complete the "missing man formation," the traditional salute for a lost aviator.

I am asked again and again – "Why fly?" What's so fascinating about flying? Well, it's quite simple really. I'm just not happy unless there is some room between me and the ground. Like Leonardo Da Vinci said "When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, and there you will always long to return."

And the Air! The Air up there is very pure and fine, bracing and delicious! And why shouldn't it be? – It is the same air that the Angles breathe.

It was on this day 2 years ago that I published the first entry on this blog. I know I have a fair amount of readers and I would like to thank you all for your subscription. Those who haven't sent me the £2 a month it takes to keep this blog alive please send in your cheque ASAP.

I would like to hear from you guys! So leave a comment, especially if you haven't done so before. If you can't think of anything to say, here are a few good questions:

1. Have we met before? In person? Email? Chat? Prison?
2. How did you learn about my blog?
3. What do you do?
4. What do you like most about my blog?
5. Which kind of posts do you enjoy reading? Anything specific you would like my opinion on?
6. Were you offended by the content? If yes, would you like some more? If not, tell me the ways...
7. Anything else?

It is easy to be depressed when your planet has been demolished by ignorant aliens, the woman you love is gone due to a misunderstanding about the nature of space-time and the spaceship in which you were travelling has crashed in flames on a remote and God fearing planet, and a