Counting Cats in Zanzibar Rotating Header Image

June, 2011:

Stony Stratford

A campaign has been launched to outlaw smoking in all public places in Stony Stratford near Milton Keynes, Buckinghamshire.

If passed, the new bylaw would mean anyone caught lighting up in the historic market town would face a fine.

Senior politicians on the town’s council have indicated their support for the scheme, which comes after the mayor of New York banned smoking from parks and beaches in the US city last month.

The town’s council will discuss the concept next month before Milton Keynes Council is likely to be asked to use its powers to introduce the ban.

So the Jedi High Council Milton Keynes Council has such powers? Roll on the Empire I say! Darth and the Emporer both sounded like 60-a-day men if you ask me.

Stony Stratford Councillor Paul Bartlett, who is leading the campaign, said: “When you walk through the high street in any town, smoke is in your face and harming you and any children there.

Always with the children, Moriaty! It is utterly cockatoo. That’s beyond parrotty.

“Smokers then get their butt, which is full of saliva, and chuck it on the floor. It costs millions to clear street rubbish.”

Really. If a “town” the size of Stony Stratford (which frankly sounds like the kind of place Inspector Barnaby clears up three murders in two hours courtesy of ITV2) has a total street cleaning bill in the millions then I suspect vastly more serious questions need asking.

The ban, which would be the first of its kind in the country, would be enforced by Police Community Support Officers, traffic wardens and members of the public.

PCSO. Give me strength! Fortunately my council appears to have cut those. Since then where I live now resembles the final days of Sodom (or the current days of Athens). Do you know what they did around here (very middle-class area – I feel a right chav)? They wandered around and had tea and cake at the library. That’s one of the vital front-line services cut round here. Undoubtedly it has had dire consequences such as some old biddy weeping into her apron until she decided to take her fondant fancies to the postie. Or Heaven forfend the milkman.

Cllr Robert Gifford, chairman of town’s council, described the ban as “appealing”.

That one word says it all. I hope that is a genuine quote. Note he doesn’t say “desirable” or “a good idea” but “appealling”. You don’t have to have semantic synesthesia to picture Bob in his robes and chain rubbing his hands in glee at getting more petty power.

“A result of the smoking ban is that smokers now go outside and drop their cigarette butts all over the streets,” he said.

“And legislation shall begotten of legislation, yeah unto the umpteenth generation until all of the peoples of Israel are counted as miscreants under the Tyrant Milton of the Keynes of make-work for the mouth breathers of the lands of Esau. And there shall be much wailing and indeed the gnashing of teeth and a great terror shall be upon the land. ” (Apocryphal Book of Nicholas 3:17-18 – in the vulgate these are known as the “Fuck Off Verses”. ) At least that is what St Thomas Aquinas called them.

I shall leave you to read the whole thing including the dementations of the ASH smokeswoman.

Except…

… for one comment…

Smoking in the street in Japanese cities was essentially banned after a number of children accidentally walked
into a lit cigarette.

Is it going to take a kid being blinded in one eye before selfish smokers in UK do the obvious, and refrain from smoking in the street?

Usually Japan follows Britain in areas of social engineering, but in this case Britain is the socially backward
country.

The Telegraph commentators (admittedly) hammer this fantastical theatrical gayness but will that matter when it is our “betters” who decide?

First Contact

And pray that there’s intelligent life somewhere up in space,
‘Cause there’s bugger all down here on Earth.

- Monty Python, Galaxy Song

Russian scientists expect humanity to encounter alien civilisations within the next two decades, a top Russian astronomer said on Monday.

“The genesis of life is as inevitable as the formation of atoms … Life exists on other planets and we will find it within 20 years,” said Andrei Finkelstein, director of the Russian Academy of Sciences’ Applied Astronomy Institute, according to the Interfax news agency.

Riight… Isn’t interfax the scion of TASS?

Speaking at an international forum dedicated to the search for extraterrestrial life, Finkelstein said 10% of the known planets circling suns in the galaxy resemble Earth.

When astronomers talk of “Earth-like planets” they don’t mean quite what you might think they mean. That description covers a multitude of sins. It doesn’t necessarily mean somewhere Captain Kirk can go and snog green-skinned princesses. This is probably as close to “Earth-like” that has been found and it’s very different.

If water can be found there, then so can life, he said, adding that aliens would most likely resemble humans with two arms, two legs and a head.

“They may have different colour skin, but even we have that,” he said.

Or pointed ears or interesting cranial ridges… The short version is the good Professor is just wildly speculating on the basis of way too much Star Trek. There are two big unknowns about alien life. The first is its existence and the second is what it’s like. The second is the really interesting one. I could be very wrong here but I suspect that the discovery of alien life* may well fundamentally challenge our assumptions of what life is. It really could be anything and we don’t know. Certainly the good Prof’s assumption of bilateral symmetry can be little more than guesswork.

Underlying all of this is though is a deeper assumption which is that first contact (the Trek again!) is a big deal. It is utterly predicated upon the idea that an alien “civilization” (a totally anthropocentric term anyway) is commensurable with ours. Carl Sagan said of his gold record to the stars something like, “To send Bach would be boasting” but what if they just didn’t “get it”? In Next Generation you have Worf (a Klingon) who is fond of Shakespeare. In the context of the show the civilizations encountered are probably culturally no different from say the Roman and Chinese Empires two thousand years ago. Physiology is similar (despite Dr McCoy’s grumblings about green blood). They invariably have two sexes and inter-species breeding is possible. Even the (constructed) Klingon language uses concepts such as verbs and nouns ( which might not be in the intellectual armoury of aliens) so whether we get on or fight essentially we have commensurable paradigms. On Earth different cultures may disagree vehemently on many matters but the terms of debate are generally the same and we just take different sides of the fence (the point here is whatever side of the fence you’re on the fence itself intellectually exists). Although I don’t know! Some cultural differences challenge the idea that we are culturally operating within the same paradigm. Things like “honour” killings almost aren’t just deeply wrong but verging on the inexplicable within our terms of reference. So if the mores and tastes (there are tribes in Africa where long, flat, pendulous breasts – to the extent she can fling them over her shoulder when pounding maize are prized – try getting that on Page 3 of The Sun) of our fellow humans can sometimes seem inexplicable yet we are the same species, shaped by the same planet, how much different might the aliens be? On other planets with other species and other twists and turns evolution could have taken** how much more incommensurable could such paradigms be?

But what if pysiologically and therefore metaculturally (all this shaped by the interaction with a very different environment***) we are totally incommensurable. This you might term the “Heaven’s Gate” scenario. After we have got over sending each other binary expansions of pi (or tau) to umpteen places then what? If they have no ears then Bach is not even boasting, if their social structure is so different as not to be understandable in our terms then what sense is there to them in Hamlet? What if they don’t even have the concept of individuality and their (singular, obviously) physiology bears this out. And of course obviously this is a two way street.

What indeed if we had nothing to say to each other because we just couldn’t anymore than I could explain a strongly typed computer language to Timmy, my cat? Our intuitive knowledge of physics comes from chucking spears at things. Their’s might come from something totally different. Oh, I’m not saying it wouldn’t converge on similar results in the higher echelons of science but all of that is purely of extremely abtuse academic interest. What if they have no aesthetics? Every culture on this planet has some. They can be wildly different but at least the concept applies. But what if they don’t? Just think how often you talk about everything from Kylie’s buttocks to Rouen Cathedral in aesthetic terms? Moreover, in the context, note the number of comments here about what is fundamentally an aesthetic issue in mathematics.

I can’t help but feel that first contact might be utterly underwhelming after the initial hype. Lord David of Beckham presents the ambassador from Tau Ceti with an FA-Cup ball and utters the universal greeting, “On me ‘ead son!” and it’s like “whatever?”. The two general scenarios we tend to have are of benign beings who turn-up with the cure for cancer and usher in a Golden Age (StarTrek: First Encounters) or all out war. Both seem to me a bit silly. Assuming they are physiologically very different why would they know anything about cancer any more than we’d know about their dread malady Grlkjk’khy. Even naming that is assuming vocalisation on their part. As to war… Well, if it’s about the usual, “Our planet is dying!” resource quest then I consider that highly unlikely because there is just so much stuff out there.

We could even be so different we could pass like ships in the night. We could be their masters, their allies, their rivals, their slaves (and vice versa for all of the above) or we could just both be, “Yeah, like whatever”. Neither of us might even recognize each other for what we purport to be (a “civilization”). At which point I must mention another SF cliché. The benign aliens who are put off saving us because we’re not worthy. Think of the movie The Fifth Element where Leeloo reviews the stock footage of war and chaos on Earth and has a crisis as to whether we are worth saving on moral grounds. It’s unbelievably commonplace in SF (and the stock footage of the Third Reich, Pol Pot’s mounds of skulls, naked, napalmed, Vietnamese girls running down roads… must be cheap in every sense) but my point is that that cliché of the higher technological and moral power judging us is a very human cliché. At the risk of sounding sacrilegious it is elevating them to the status of gods which are one of the earliest creations of human culture. The assumption is that essentially their morality is commensurable with ours, just better (more superego, less ego and they passed on the id a while back****). It is one of the standard visions of the other-worldly – the angel (in the case of Leeloo- in the form of a Czech supermodel which I suppose is as good as anything else). There is of course the all conquering and demonic baddies as well. Odd that SF, perhaps more than any other genre, despite warp-drives and ray-guns so often tells much the same tales Ugg told Ogg round the camp fire as the glaciers retreated. The demon and the angel. The worst of us and the best of us cast out as grand opera amidst the stars that Ugg and Ogg stare at whilst digesting the fruits of the hunt.

To put it mathematically the aliens might not be better or worse than us (however that is measured) but rather just orthogonal .

Finkelstein’s institute runs a programme launched in the 1960s at the height of the cold war space race to watch for and beam out radio signals to outer space.

Or could they have just been using their big dishes to watch the Enterprise boldly split infinitives? Funny thing about SETI projects – nobody expects you to actually find anything. The capacity that gives (whilst the funding holds) to – to use a technical term – “bugger about” is staggering.

The article continues with a Richard Hoover of NASA writing in the Journal of Cosmology about alien fossils in meteorites.

Astrophysicists have a saying about cosmologists, “Frequently in error but never in doubt.”

*How very anthropocentric of me! They might discover us!
**Assuming evolution as we know it applies there.
***That is non-linear. We have an atmosphere that supports life as we know it partly because of the life as it was then in the old primordial soup.
****Star Trek Vulcans immediately spring to mind here.

That movie, Cats and Dogs

It’s real you know. The damned animals are faking everything.

H/T Tim Blair

Modern ideas

Tell me, what do you think? Is Johann Hari indulging in Post Normal Journalism?

Is the pursuit of The Greater Truth at the expense of mundane truth, or ‘reality’ as it is sometimes known, now just standard intellectual practice?

Tau

The mathematical constant pi is under threat from a group of detractors who will be marking “Tau Day” on Tuesday.

Tau Day revellers suggest a constant called tau should take its place: twice as large as pi, or about 6.28 – hence the 28 June celebration.

Tau proponents say that for many problems in maths, tau makes more sense and makes calculations easier.

It makes more sense but does it make it easier? Well, not really. I think anyone who can even pretend to be able to hack trigonometry really can cope with a few factors of 2 kicking around.

“I like to describe myself as the world’s leading anti-pi propagandist,” said Michael Hartl, an educator and former theoretical physicist.

I once knew someone who played a sport internationally for England – unicycle polo. You gotta have a hobby.

“When I say pi is wrong, it doesn’t have any flaws in its definition – it is what you think it is, a ratio of circumference to diameter. But circles are not about diameters, they’re about radii; circles are the set of all the points a given distance – a radius – from the centre,” Dr Hartl explained to BBC News.

Yes, admitted. τ does perhaps have that elegance and such thoughts had occurred to me when I were a lad but… nobody who handles π outside the context of Greggs knows that Dr Hartl. There are other logically equivalent definitions of a circle but if you ask any student 999/1000 that is the definition they’ll give despite that evil π.

By defining pi in terms of diameter, he said, “what you’re really doing is defining it as the ratio of the circumference to twice the radius, and that factor of two haunts you throughout mathematics.”

I think “haunts” is putting it a bit strongly. As I hinted before I struggled learning a lot of the concepts and machinery of mathematics as a student (everyone does apart from geniuses and liars) but a factor of 2 kicking about in there was the least of my worries. Indeed in a field such as complex analysis which has more &pis; than John Prescott’s freezer to complain about those pesky factors of 2* when you got poles at infinity (something The Express would approve of) and Laurent series and even the dreaded Bromwich contour to worry about is like complaining about the in-flight meal when the aircraft is at nearly π/2 radians from the horizontal and both engines are on fire. “Stewardess, I don’t think you understand, I specifically requested the vegetarian option at check-in!”.

Dr Hartl reckons people still use degrees as a measure of angle because pi’s involvement in radians makes them too unwieldy.

Er, no. People use degrees because 360 is a very easily divisible number. π or τ aren’t being (a) rather small and (b) transcendental and therefore irrational. In order for Dr Hartl to be right on this point you’d have to imagine this scene on a building site with the foreman upbraiding an underling over a wonky door fitting, “Does that look like τ/4 radians to you pal?” It is not going to happen. Can you even conceive of the mathematical joinery posse? Imagine the discussions! “Well yeah, but that’s only if we accept Euclid’s fifth…” And that’s just applied mathematicians. Let the logicians and set theorists loose and they’d be bijecting the set of screws with the set of holes…

Dr Hartl is passionate about the effort, but even he is surprised by the fervent nature of some tau adherents.

“What’s amazing is the ‘conversion experience’: people find themselves almost violently angry at pi. They feel like they’ve been lied to their whole lives, so it’s amazing how many people express their displeasure with pi in the strongest possible terms – often involving profanity.

I don’t condone any actual violence – that would be really bizarre, wouldn’t it?

Well for a certain value of “bizarre” possibly but having met a lot of mathematicians it’s hard to say really. I’d love to see the expression on the face of a beak who was more used to dealing with yobs who got into a barney because someone had called someone’s “pint a puff” deal with a pair of dishevelled looking men with the leather patches hanging forlornly from their torn tweed jackets because one had called the other’s τ a 2π.

The (real, apocryphal, whatever) disagreements of medieval theologians are often mocked by our modern men of science as being an exercise in playing les buggeurs risible but dear me! (I can’t believe this but I’m actually going to start getting serious here). The history of mathematics has indeed seen some massive changes in notation which have dramatically improved the usability of mathematics. The Great Grandpappy of course is Indian numerals rather than Roman and before that even place-ordering (thank you Babylon!). But you also have Leibniz notation over Newtonian for The Calculus*** and things like Boolean algebra and vector and tensor notation**.

Maybe τ is neater (sometimes – τ/2r2?) but Hell’s teeth I’m typing this on a QWERTY keyboard which is hardly ideal is it? It ain’t going to change. Anyway π is a cultural icon par excellence. It symbolises mathematics in a way both subtle and profound becuse it bestrides both the pure and the applied. It is to paraphrase my Grandmother one of the few things that separates use from things “eating shit in the trees.”

And it goes without saying that re-writing the whole corpus of mathematics for τ rather than π would be a monumental and confusing Children’s Crusade. An almost Borgesian endeavour.

Anyway I’d have to stop referring to people I disagreed with totally as being π rads off kilter. τ/2 rads doesn’t have the same kerching.

*What’s wrong with 2? Damn fine number if you ask me.
**I am aware that the last three aren’t just new notation but the idea of tackling Maxwell’s equations without vector or tensor notation is really scary.
***Newtonian is still used in some areas.

Honest dealing is still illegal

When the Canadian Stasi went after Ezra Levant and Mark Steyn the censors hadn’t considered that they had taken on two of the loudest mouths the Dominion possessed, and who kicked up such a stink that the faux courts fell over themselves concocting reason not to convict. These days Levant and Steyn are in enviable positions, they are untouchable and can pretty much say whatever they wish knowing that the thought police are too scared to go after them.

Well, others are not in the same position. Speech control is alive and well in Canada, and truth still no defence.

Linux Lite

I’m looking for a Linux distro which is pretty straightforward to install (I shall be buggered if I’m re-compiling kernels and that malarkey) and use but sits pretty wittin 512Mb of physical RAM. It’s for an old desktop machine I have acquired (Celeron D 345, 3.06GHz). It is mainly to be used for mathematicl programming for fun and frolics (yes, I am that sad) and for me to get a sniff around Linux which I have never used. I did use UNIX many years ago on SG and Sun workstations.

Any help is gratefully appreciated.

Greenpeace

Hmph,

If Daniel Hannan has taken seriously anything from Greenpeace up to this point I gotta say he is more gullible than I would ever have given him credit for. I haven’t believed any Greenpeace spokesman on any topic since the fiasco of Brent Spar.

Hell, if Greenpeace were to declare the sun were due to rise in the east tomorrow morning I would look for independent confirmation.

The Jizzard of Oz

Climate alarmist propaganda is the gift that just keeps on giving.

Yet another Downunder MSM prick rears its slot-eyed, self-important tumescence and spunks out its warmist dogma informed journalistic opinion regarding AGW heretics carbon tax protesters.  But, unlike her fellow MSM dickhead Richard Glover, Jill Singer of the Herald Sun isn’t prepared to stop at merely tattooing unbelievers concerned Australian citizens.  Hell no.  There ain’t gonna be no poncey half measures for this verminous cunticulate.  She’s verging orgasmic to see the return of the gas chambers in order to silence the voices of reason enemies of Gaia Julia Gillard.  Here’s what passes for open minded comment at the Herald Sun:

I’m prepared to keep an open mind and propose another stunt for climate sceptics – put your strong views to the test by exposing yourselves to high concentrations of either carbon dioxide or some other colourless, odourless gas – say, carbon monoxide.

You wouldn’t see or smell anything. Nor would your anti-science nonsense be heard of again. How very refreshing.

Meanwhile the greenscum prokaryotes look on, vacantly scratching their arses and wondering why the tide of public opinion is turning against them…

H/T WUWT

Pearls of Wisdom

Single acts of tyranny may be ascribed to the accidental opinion of a day; but a series of oppressions, begun at a distinguished period and pursued unalterably through every change of ministers, too plainly prove a deliberate, systematic plan of reducing a people to slavery.

Thomas Jefferson

Apparently…

…the oceans are dying.

Does this mean we’ll have to eat…ghaaaahg…Soylent Greenies?

Clive Crook of the Financial Times – the absurdity of Keynesian “economics” exposed.

In some ways this is another “how can people not see….” post – accept I think I know why people can not see the absurdity of Keynesian economics, they are utterly brainwashed into it. Not just by formal education (both school and university – so the more “educated” in economics they are the worse, in some ways, they may be), but also by the media (including the entertainment media) which constantly claims such absurdities as spending is good and saving is bad (and that investment is good – without seeing any link between saving and investment), and that unemployment and rising prices are alternatives. This is not a comment on the intelligence of the elite, they may well be highly intelligent (much more intelligent, on average, than nonestablishment people), but they have been picked out when young (because of their ability to absorb what they are taught – and because of their interest in policy) and “educated” in doctrines that are not just false, but are (in various respects) the opposite of the truth.

All the absurdities of Keynesian “economics” were on display in today’s Clive Crook article in the Financial Times (even if I did links – I still would not link to this, it almost made me explode with rage and grief).

Supposedly in a “special case” (itself nothing more the consequence of Keynesian monetary expansion and wild government spending – i.e. “monetary and fiscal stimulus”) rising productivity (people working more effectively) is bad, wage flexibility (i.e. a free market in labour) leads to higher (not lower) unemployment, less regulations are bad as well (especially in the labour market) and on and on. Work and saving bad, innovation bad (shades of Barack Obama blaming higher unemployment on ATM machines and computers generally), everything that political economy said was good is bad and everything that political economy said was bad (lazyness, spendthriftness, lack of innovation, waste….) is good.

And we are supposed to applaud – as people do when a modern physicist shows how the universe does not accord with the old fuddy duddy notions of human logic. As if economics was physics and Keynes sat in the place of Einstein, producing a “new economics” to match the “new physics” (in reality the subjects are totally different).

These “paradoxies” are, of course, just absurdities (like saying that A is not A, or that I am am you), Clive Crook’s article exposes Keynesian “economics” to be either a pack of lies or the ravings of a lunatic.

Yet Mr Crook does not see this – on the contrary, he does not even use the word “Keynesian”. To him these absurdities are just what economics is – explained by wonderful “studies” by Paul Krugman (a winning of the so called “Nobel Prize” in economics – and as fitting a winner as Barack Obama was as the winner of the Nobel Peace Prize) and by Mr Crook’s own fellow writer at the Financial TImes – Martin Wolfe (a man who “explained” how in this “special case” lazyness and lack of innovation are good things – because higher productivity, working more effectively, is a bad thing).

How does one reach a mind that can lay out (quite openly and directly) the most blatent absurdities – and yet not see that they are absurd? Instead seeing them as clever pieces of economics?

I do not think one can reach such a mind – it is too far gone. Too saturated in absurdites that it can only react to the failure of print-and-spend by demanding more print-and-spend and by denouncing anything that actually makes sense (like higher productivity or alllowing labour, and other, markets to clear – by allowing prices, and wages, to adjust to supply and demand).

And Mr Crook does not just speak for himself – he is typical of the academic, media, political and (yes) business establishment. The establishment (the elite) is rotten to the core – these people can not be saved (their minds are too corrupted) and their power makes them a clear and present danger to the survival of civilization.

The sakes are as high as that.

What should be done to remove the influence of these people? I do not know – I wish I did know, but I do not.

Feed-in Frenzy

According to Ronan McGreevy of the Irish Times, the Irish Government has today come calling and it’s brought along a Mr. Creosote sized begging bowl.  The impecunious Hibernians have probably heard about Cameron’s largesse with pointlessly pissing our money up the wall in order to inflate his head ego international prestige.  Mr. McGreevy’s article is both depressing and blood-boiling in equal measures.

THE BRITISH government could massively subsidise the Irish wind energy industry under proposals to be considered in London today.

The British Government isn’t subsidising a single fucking thing because it isn’t their fucking money.  The wind turbine industry is massively subsidised by a massive stealth tax masquerading as forcibly increased domestic energy bills.  How many Brits will plummet into energy poverty to pay for an Irish wind industry that will never live up to the exaggerated claims printed on the packaging?

Britain believes the west coast and the seas around Ireland can provide it with a large amount of its renewable energy and could be willing to subsidise offshore wind farms there.

Britain believes no such thing.  The Westminster village idiots, on the other hand…

Industry groups here say such a move could be worth up to €1.6 billion a year to the Irish economy.

And how many tens of billions is it going to cost the British taxpayer to subsidise that pathetic return?

Taoiseach Enda Kenny and Minister for Energy Pat Rabbitte will be attending the British-Irish Council, where the issue of electricity interconnectivity will be high on the agenda.

Advice to the O’Pollies: if you believe windmills are the answer I suggest you plant more spuds because you’re gonna need all the fucking battery power you can get.

Mr Rabbitte will have separate meetings with his British counterpart, Charles Hendry, who said at the weekend that the proposals could bring “significant wealth [to Ireland] with very little downside”.

Significant wealth with no downside, eh?  Maybe Charlie “pants on fire” Henry will explain the “no downside” angle to the British taxpayers who will be significantly impoverished by footing this bill?

Mr Hendry said the west coast of Ireland was an ideal location for wind farms, but the small Irish market meant there was no demand for the potential power generation. “We want to put that right,” he said.

Government speak for:  We’re fucking up all of our breathtaking scenery for no good reason and now we’ll do the same for you.

The British government is considering directly subsidising electricity through its feed-in tariff system, which would be a subsidy to private investors operating on Irish territory. It could also operate by a system known as “supplier obligation”, whereby British power companies would be mandated to buy a certain amount of renewable energy from Irish sources.

The fucking lowlife fucking cunts in the fucking British fucking cunting government are fucking considering fucking subsidising fucking WHAT?  Can’t say I’m that surprised, really.  I mean, what the fuck are we going to do about it?  Protest?  Mewl feebly as we freeze to our fucking armchairs while staring at a screen blacked out by unpaid energy bill arrears?

Although Britain has significant wind resources of its own, especially in Scotland, it does not have enough to meet its targets of having 15 per cent of all energy from renewables by 2020.

What part of windfarms don’t work and they are the most expensive folly ever foisted upon a nation don’t you people understand?  The British government is either insane or it has deliberately turned on its own people.  And the Irish want to buy in on this?  Oh, I forgot.  Someone else will be picking up the tab…

Cunts

In addition, onshore wind farms are facing considerable opposition from environmentalists and offshore wind farms are having to be built far out to sea.

Why aren’t the O’Pollies asking for money to build something that actually produces energy? You know, like a power station or something? Why  wind farms that are so successful they need massive subsidies to keep them going in order to produce piddling amounts of the most expensive electricity on the planet?

Despite Ireland’s offshore wind potential, there is only one wind farm off Irish coasts. Offshore wind is considered uneconomic because of the extra costs involved and because of the belief that Ireland can meet its target of generating 40 per cent of electricity from renewable resources by 2020 by using onshore wind.

Yeah, the Irish do understand the economic downside to wind generated power which is why they want us to pay for it.  It’s too much to hope that the Westminster village idiots will tell them we can’t afford it so fuck off.  Therefore I’ll do it.

WE CAN’T AFFORD IT SO FUCK OFF!

The development of the east-west electricity connector between Rush North Beach, north Co Dublin, and Barkby Beach in north Wales is expected to be completed by the end of next year and will dramatically improve the capacity for both countries to supplement each other’s electricity grids.

And we’ve all seen how well that works.  So, not only will we have to foot the bill for the Irish wind farms, we’ll probably have to subsidise them not working too.  Nice.

A spokesman for British department of energy and climate change said the British government would be seeking assurances that investment in Irish wind farms could be met within the existing regulatory framework.

But if you can’t, not to worry.  We’ll just pile the extra costs onto British domestic energy bills.  It’s not like our tax slaves proles possess sufficient intelligence to notice and complain or anything…

Irish Wind Energy Association chief executive Dr Michael Walsh welcomed the wind farm proposal.

There’s nothing like a vested interest cheering on the blatant arse rape of taxpayers.  It high time these scumbags and government twunts get what’s coming to them.  It’ll be a necessary act of self defence.

He said Ireland needed to generate 4,500 to 5,000 megawatts a year by 2020 to meet renewable targets. He believed there was capacity to generate 6,000 megawatts from onshore and a further 4,000 from offshore, meaning half of all Irish wind-generated energy could be exported to Britain.

KA-BOOM!  Bugger, I think I’m going to need a bigger bullshit meter…

In my opinion, Dr. Walsh is just another government favoured, opportunist cunt who is happy to make himself rich off the backs of people who can’t afford to have a fucking parasite like him sucking the blood from their veins and the cash from their pockets.

He estimated that 5,000 megawatts of exported electricity would be worth €1.6 billion annually at current electricity prices.

So not only will Brit taxpayers stump up for these wind farms and stump up even more for the windfarms not working, they will also stump up more than a potential billion annually thanks to the legalised theft know as the feed-in tariff.   And how do you think the arrogant mental pygmy we call a Prime Minister will respond to this request?

Angry yet?

H/T Bishop Hill

Perspective

Lefty or not, I like Jon Stewart. He keeps things in perspective.

Absolutely nucking futz

And this is just from The Telegraph.

A Jerusalem rabbinical court condemned to death by stoning a dog it suspects is the reincarnation of a secular lawyer who insulted the court’s judges 20 years ago, Ynet website reported on Friday.

Frankly if that is the level of their judgement they probably ought to be insulted more.

Greece is definitely going utterly tits-up. Can the EU sell the Bubbles to Turkey or something?

Morale in the British Army is rock bottom. Is anyone surprised by this? I’m not. Of course the best and brightest are getting out. D’oh! They saw the mass sackings of almost trained RAF pilots recently.

Meanwhile Argentina is rattling it’s rusty sabre. Could we re-take the Falklands? No. But there is a bright side. Could Argentina mount the sort of operation it did in 1982? No. The country is a basket case. We stick a couple of nuclear attack subs there and we can prevent it. One to watch.

And finally Trevor Phillips proves that he is the gift that keeps on giving. It is a while since I read something as incoherent as this. It’s all over the place.

And that is just the Telegraph. I don’t dare yank-up the Mail and the Express is almost certainly suggesting put a paper bag on your head and waiting for the rapture.

%d bloggers like this: