all right

Occasionally adding corroborative details to add verisimilitude to otherwise bald and unconvincing,
but veridicous accounts
with careful attention, indefatigable assiduity, and nice discrimination.

23 April, 2011

A Fairy Tale

Jimmy and the Lump of Coal

Once upon a time, a little boy named Jimmy told many lies.  One Christmas, little Jimmy, who had been naughty all year, received in his Christmas stocking only a lump of coal and no other present.  This upset Jimmy so much that then and there he vowed to hate coal forever and to hate anybody who mined or sold or burned coal.
When Jimmy grew up, he discovered that telling lies did not get him into trouble but instead made many people want to shake his hand and give him dinner and hand him lots of money.   Jimmy was very happy to be rich and famous and invited to lovely dinners all the time, but he was still angry that he had once received a filthy lump of coal instead of a nice present.
Jimmy soon learned that other people liked him even more when he told them how coal was bad and would make the world very unpleasant.  Soon, Jimmy had convinced the king and queen and lots of other important people that coal was so bad that it ought to be banned.
“Coal is so bad that it makes the seas flood the land, and the weather get really hot or really cold, and it will kill all of us very soon,” he shouted.
The people clapped and cheered when Jimmy said such things.  “Coal is so bad that it makes puppies and kittens and cuddly polar bears sad, and all food taste horrid.  Burning coal causes hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes, heart disease, all sorts of aches and bad breath!  Stop using coal and people won’t get sick!  If you don’t stop using coal, you will all burn to death or be frozen solid in next to no time,” he yelled.
People applauded Jimmy, and shouted that the king should ban coal.  The king said that he’d start by putting a big tax on coal, which would make it too dear for poor people to buy, and by passing a law which said burning coal was wrong.  Nearly everyone believed Jimmy because he was a friend of the king and queen, and everybody who had ever received a lump of coal for being too naughty, or thought that coal was smelly or dirty, agreed that coal was bad.
Not everyone agreed with Jimmy, though.  Some miners, for instance, who dug coal out of the ground for a living, were angry with Jimmy because they would lose their jobs and have no money to buy food and nice things.  Blacksmiths too were unhappy because without coal they could not make tools and horse-shoes out of iron.  Some wise men said that Jimmy was wrong because there was no proof that coal could make the weather change.
After many years, the king and queen and other important people realised that the seas were not flooding the land at all, and the weather was not really getting worse, and all the other things that Jimmy said would happen had not happened, so they decided that perhaps coal was not so bad after all, and they felt very sorry that many miners and blacksmiths and their families had starved to death when they lost their jobs.
“It’s not our fault, though,” they said. “Jimmy told us that coal was bad and we believed him.  In a way, we are just as much victims as the miners and blacksmiths, because now we feel quite silly.”
Jimmy did not live happily ever after.  He choked to death on some of his own words.  After Jimmy died, the doctors found a lump of coal where his heart should have been.

The End.

22 April, 2011

A Parliament of Beasts

Who Represents Cock-Robin?*

“Who will talk to men?”
“I must,” announced the Southern Emu-Wren,
“I’ll learn English, then swiftly deal with men.”

“Who’ll fight for each inch?”
“I shall,” yelled the threatened, Black-Throated Finch,
“It will be a cinch to fight for each inch.”

“Who’ll give humans hell?”
“I,” claimed the Christmas Island Pipistrelle,
“I’ll do very well at giving men hell.”

“Who’ll make this legal?”
“Well, I, of course,” drawled the Wedge-Tailed Eagle
“I am so regal, I’ll make this legal.”

“Who will bring a suit?”
“I,” declared the Eastern Barred Bandicoot,
“I shall prosecute any legal suit.”

“Who’ll serve for one term?”
“I,” whispered the Giant Gippsland Earthworm,
“I’ll make humans squirm, and serve for a term.”

“Who will take the poll?”
“Let me, let me!” shouted the Eastern Quoll,
“I shall grab a scroll, and prepare the poll!”

“Who will count the vote?”
“I,” said the Forty-Spotted Pardalote,
“I’ll take careful note, and then count the vote!”

“Who’ll say ‘hyper-bowl’?”
“I,” slurred the Southern Marsupial Mole,
“I’ll take on that rôle, saying ‘hyper-bowl’.”

“Who will ‘bell the cat’?”
“Ah, well,” murmured the Bare-Rumped Heathtail Bat,
“I’m no democrat when it comes to that—”.

*  Peter Hunt writes, “Animal land rights bid”, in the Weekly Times:
University of Western Sydney academic John Hadley, who is at the forefront of a global push to give animals property rights, believes farmers should be forced to negotiate with the legal guardians of Australia’s native animals before clearing their land.
‘Under an animal guardianship system, landholders who want to modify habitat on their land would have to negotiate with a guardian acting on behalf of a designated group of animals,’ Dr Hadley said in his article on a new academic website The Conversation.
UPDATE (27 May, 2013):  in the House of Representatives today, Dr. Bandt, of the Australian Greens, introduced a bill into the House of Representatives to establish an independent Office of Animal Welfare.

Farm Animals Join the Moot

“Who’ll mock the Greens now?”
“I,” lowed the Hereford-Angus-cross cow,
“I’ll orate somehow, and mock the Greens now.”

“Who’ll say “it’s a sham?”
“I shall,” bleated the pure Aussiedown lamb,
“I should gladly damn the Greens’ latest sham.”

09 April, 2011


Flammery’s Lament

“They’ll run a front-page feature*
     too full of awful lies; 
they’ll state that I’m a creature
     of avaricious guys.
They’ll run a weekend-story
     to spread deceit and fear,
forgetting all my glory—
     an Aussie of the year!
Then comes a little stinger
     on Monday, on page three:
some dreadful paper’s stringer
     will dare to sneer at me.
Why are such people teasing?
     I cannot understand!
I’m clearly born for pleasing—
     a prophet of the land.

“Desert seers were oft abused
     by those they came to lead.
Similarly, I’ve been accused
     of clumsiness and greed.
I am not the worst of chaps,
     no author of a plot;
scientific dunce, perhaps,
      a genius I am not.”

Tim Blair reports that Tim Flannery “might be exaggerating just a little”.  The delusional and, perhaps, paranoid Prof. Flannery said:  “The campaign [against the IPCC] was very much like the sort of media campaign that I’m used to when people try to discredit me.  And the way that works is usually on a Friday they’ll run a front-page story saying what a ratbag I am.  You know, front page, and that’s all right, interesting, someone’s been a bit, you know, corrupt or a bit rotten.
“And then on the Saturday they’ll run a page three story, usually a much longer story, listing everything you’re supposed to have done, and all the reasons why you’re a ratbag. 
“And then on the Monday they’ll put a little stinger in. A little reminder, just to remind people what a rotten person you are.”
†  John, iv. 44; Mark, vi. 4; Matt., xxxv. 57. 

07 April, 2011

Call That a Conspiracy? This Is a Conspiracy!

An alternative to CAGW

The problem with the catastrophic anthropogenic global warming (CAGW) hypothesis, to many people disordered by an inconvenient preference for logical reasoning, is that, for CAGW’s proponents, their all-encompassing, misanthracist hypothesis explains everything:  all results prove their hypothesis; all data which contradict their models’ forecasts are conveniently used to confirm the hypothesis.  If the meaningless, mathematical average of global temperature increase, it must be because of anthropogenic carbon dioxide; if the average decrease, it must be because of the dangerous, turbulent effects of anthropogenic carbon dioxide; if the average remain the same, it must be because of the strange, unpredictable nature of anthropogenic carbon dioxide.
The circular reasoning for proponents of the CAGW hypothesis cannot be disproven (they believe) because the hypothesis holds that all changes of climate—for better or worse—are forced by carbon dioxide (and other greenhouse gases) and, paradoxically, that any period of no change is a concomitant part of the modelling.
Two sides, however, can play this game.  The SCI-FI-PAL* theory maintains that the world is not endangered by any increase or decrease of carbon dioxide but by the costly theories of alleged scientists, self-interested purveyors of doom, and their foolish fellow travellers, who falsely prophesy in the vainglorious pursuit of profits and in support of the powerful. 
Any evil of the modern world is the fault of the SCI-FI-PAL collective.  Are educational standards falling in your schools?  It is because educational theories and practices have been perverted by the SCI-FI-PAL thinking in faculties of education.  Are meteorological or economic forecasts too often wrong?  Clearly, SCI-FI-PAL-style reasoning has infected the forecasting staff and their computer programmers.  Have the standards of the supposed journalism of our national broadcasters fallen?  Blame SCI-FI-PAL thinking. Have supposed democracies stupidly appeased wicked dictators or, equally foolishly, tried to subvert their domination without considering the consequences?  The politicians have been afflicted with SCI-FI-PAL wickedness.
Proponents of CAGW calumniate anyone who refuses to profess the new faith as illiterate and unscientific, yokels and deniers.  Again, two can play that game.  If an adherent of the CAGW cult proclaim anything at all, it can be completely refuted by saying, “Sadly, you’re just saying that because of your SCI-FI-PAL beliefs,” and, should a CAGW-cultist call you a denier, remind him or her that every single architect of the Holocaust was a wicked supporter of SCI-FI-PAL
The SCI-FI-PAL theory cannot be disproven, for the theory shows that doubters of the theory are contaminated by their sycophancy, and only those who promote the SCI-FI-PAL attempt to disprove it.  QED.
Remember, all conspiracy theories emanate from our universities.  Why?  The universities are controlled by self-interested cabals who are attempting to indoctrinate society into mindlessly licking the arses of those who have (or want to have) power.  Resist!  Resist the proctoleichous SCI-FI-PAL collective!

*  selfish conspirators instigating, for income, perpetual arse-licking.