 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 5/8/2017 3:58 PM, clipka wrote:
> You do know that, say, 1000 years ago the sun had already been around,
> and in pretty much its current form, right?
But its output does vary. Don't forget it was bloody cold in Europe
during The Maunder Minimum.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 08.05.2017 um 17:59 schrieb Stephen:
> On 5/8/2017 3:58 PM, clipka wrote:
>> You do know that, say, 1000 years ago the sun had already been around,
>> and in pretty much its current form, right?
>
>
> But its output does vary. Don't forget it was bloody cold in Europe
> during The Maunder Minimum.
Yes, there are some fluctuations in solar output.
For instance, since 1960 the solar output has been declining.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
clipka <ano### [at] anonymous org> wrote:
> For instance, since 1960 the solar output has been declining.
See???!! CLIMATE CHANGE!!!
_Impending threat_ of another ICE AGE!!!!
Panic!
Pass more legislation without reading it!
"We" _must_ ***DO*** ........... SOMETHING!!!!
Sorry, I just find the claim that human generated CO2 is the be-all end-all
cause of "global warming" --- I mean, "Climate Change".
Correlation does not imply causation, and
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.
And all I see is some pretty fishy things going on, with agendas and computer
models, and people being pretty fast and loose with whatever facts there might
be, and massaging and manipulating and cherry picking the data, and then
shouting down anyone who dares even question the premise, the model(s), or the
conclusion.
I was a scientist in a past life, and I got to get a long, close look at the way
the game is played, and who the players are. Take 5 minutes, and look into even
the mundane fields - and they're rife with vested interest.
I've regularly seen people take "creative license" with reporting research
results, avoiding doing the obvious experiment because that would settle the
issue right away and therefore end funding, make the most tenuous of
hypothetical connections between their pet research project and "cancer
research", diabetes, you-name-it. I was struggling with the latest "Here, go
cut down the largest tree in the forest with ---- A HERRING!" project, when my
research "advisor" told me to "just get the data for your thesis" (*). I said,
"What do you want me to do --- lie?"
His response: "If you have to."
That's pretty much when I quit.
There's plenty of things in the world of "science" that I just don't trust.
https://pubs.acs.org/cen/news/89/i28/8928notw1.html
http://retractionwatch.com/2016/08/04/why-did-a-chemistry-journal-fix-fraud-with-a-correction-instead-of-a-retraction/
https://nzic.org.nz/CiNZ/articles/CiNZ%20Jul%202011_rubin.pdf
http://cen.acs.org/articles/88/i32/Fraud-Chemistry.html?type=paidArticleContent
https://www.chemistryworld.com/news/chemistrys-colossal-fraud/3000886.article
just to give a taste.
Then there's the issue that over 10% of the things that people submit to a
journal - where they know the results are going to be checked for accuracy and
reproducibility, and the scientists have everything right there in front of
them, on a manageable scale, and all the equipment to unambiguously see what's
going on - aren't able to be reproduced.
http://pubs.acs.org/doi/pdf/10.1021/op500341h
But you're gonna tell me that I need to TRUST ---- an entire pyramid and chain
of things to the point where we're going to put a _government_ in control of
people's livelihoods on that basis alone....
Nope.
[So glad this is in off-topic, otherwise I'd request a povray.politics
subgroup... :D ]
(*) You had to be there, to know that I'd been trying _everything_ in [and out
of] the book to "get it done", and really hear _the tone_ and see the manner
that was used, to properly interpret what was being said. That he just came
right out and replied to my question that way was pretty surprising.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 08.05.2017 um 19:04 schrieb Bald Eagle:
> Sorry, I just find the claim that human generated CO2 is the be-all end-all
> cause of "global warming" --- I mean, "Climate Change".
>
> Correlation does not imply causation, and
> Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.
No scientist in their sane mind will say "climate change is /all/
human-made". But it's a pretty clear fact that humans have a major
influence on climate change -- more specifically, on the climate change
seen in the last 30 years.
Correlation does not imply causation, but /absence/ of correlation
clearly implies the absence of causation - and in the last 30 years
scientists are seeing changes in the climate without correlation to
/any/ natural causes.
Moreover, the scientists' arguments in favour of major human
contribution to climate change are not just from correlation -- it is
from a pretty clear understanding of the mechanism behind it.
You want extraordinary proof? It's right in front of your nose: The last
30 years have seen climate change in a magnitude that has rarely been
seen in nature before, with a remarkable absence of correlation to all
the usual culprits found in nature associated with such events.
With the only exception of greenhouse gases -- the increase of which is,
again, remarkably uncorrelated to all the known natural causes, e.g.
volcanism.
On the other side of the aisle there's the unprecedented situation that
a staggering amount of CO2 that had been eliminated from the atmosphere
over the course of millions and millions of years and deposited in the
form of carbohydrates has been introduced back into the atmosphere in
essentially just a single century.
It is a long-recognized fact that the sun's output (or, more precisely,
the sun's input to earth) has been slowly increasing throughout all
those millions and millions of years, and it had already been an
accepted fact, long before man-made climate change was even a topic,
that this increase in solar energy has been just about canceled out by a
steady elimination of CO2 from the atmosphere over the same time, so
that Eath happens to have kept a habitable climate.
And now that all this CO2 is re-released you expect it to have _no_
effect on climate whatsoever?
> But you're gonna tell me that I need to TRUST ---- an entire pyramid and chain
> of things to the point where we're going to put a _government_ in control of
> people's livelihoods on that basis alone....
And what if YOU are wrong?
If I am wrong, then in the worst case we'll waste lots and lots of money
to achieve independence from fossil fuels decades earlier than we'd have
to. (Because face it: Ultimately the fossil fuel reserves /will/ be used
up. And in the best case the money spent won't even be wasted, just
spent earlier.)
If YOU are wrong, we'll waste the one and only place we can call our
home. And not even just for us, but potentially for all life.
So pray tell me, on which side would YOU prefer to err if there's nobody
we can really trust?
Also, achieving the ability to live from only what the sun gives us on a
day-to-day basis might have the beneficial side effect on reducing the
frequency of international conflicts.
And when I ask, "cui bono?" I always keep coming up with the same
answer: There are some very powerful and well-established interest
groups that benefit a lot from keeping the world entangled with fossil
fuels; on the other hand, at least from my seat, the interest groups
that would benefit from getting the world out of the fossil fuel trap
seem to be mostly underdogs, some of which weren't even around when the
scientific discussion about human-made climate change started.
So if we should be wary of manipulation, then isn't the powerful
pro-fossil-fuel faction the one we should be most wary of?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Sorry, I just find the claim that human generated CO2 is the be-all end-all
> cause of "global warming" --- I mean, "Climate Change".
>
> Correlation does not imply causation, and
Correlation of what? Man-made CO2 output and atmospheric CO2 levels? Or
atmospheric CO2 levels and global temperature? Both have pretty good
(and not too difficult for the non-scientist to understand) physical
explanations for the causation link.
> Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.
It depends on the potential outcomes. You'd probably not want to wait
until you were 99% sure you were going to die of heart disease before
changing your lifestyle and allowing doctors to help you. Whenever
assessing any risk or failure mode, you need to take into account both
the chance of something happening AND how severe that event is.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 08 May 2017 20:13:03 +0200, clipka wrote:
> So if we should be wary of manipulation, then isn't the powerful
> pro-fossil-fuel faction the one we should be most wary of?
Indeed. It always strikes me as interesting that climate change deniers
always point to the (apparently) lavish lifestyles of scientists as the
'vested interests' that make them lie about the data, but are happy to
ignore the actual profit-driven lies put out by the petroleum industry.
Because we all know that OPEC is all about low environmental impact and
dealing with ecological disasters they cause in a manner that keeps
people safe, regardless of the impact to their profits.
m-/
--
"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and
besides, the pig likes it." - George Bernard Shaw
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 5/9/2017 4:54 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Mon, 08 May 2017 20:13:03 +0200, clipka wrote:
>
>> So if we should be wary of manipulation, then isn't the powerful
>> pro-fossil-fuel faction the one we should be most wary of?
>
> Indeed. It always strikes me as interesting that climate change deniers
> always point to the (apparently) lavish lifestyles of scientists as the
> 'vested interests' that make them lie about the data, but are happy to
> ignore the actual profit-driven lies put out by the petroleum industry.
>
> Because we all know that OPEC is all about low environmental impact and
> dealing with ecological disasters they cause in a manner that keeps
> people safe, regardless of the impact to their profits.
>
> m-/
>
I'm keeping out of this one. I spent 20 years working for oil companies.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 09 May 2017 19:09:43 +0100, Stephen wrote:
> On 5/9/2017 4:54 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> On Mon, 08 May 2017 20:13:03 +0200, clipka wrote:
>>
>>> So if we should be wary of manipulation, then isn't the powerful
>>> pro-fossil-fuel faction the one we should be most wary of?
>>
>> Indeed. It always strikes me as interesting that climate change
>> deniers always point to the (apparently) lavish lifestyles of
>> scientists as the 'vested interests' that make them lie about the data,
>> but are happy to ignore the actual profit-driven lies put out by the
>> petroleum industry.
>>
>> Because we all know that OPEC is all about low environmental impact and
>> dealing with ecological disasters they cause in a manner that keeps
>> people safe, regardless of the impact to their profits.
>>
>> m-/
>>
>>
> I'm keeping out of this one. I spent 20 years working for oil companies.
I remember. :)
--
"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and
besides, the pig likes it." - George Bernard Shaw
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I should feel guilty, I think.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 2017-05-09 16:36, also sprach Stephen:
> I should feel guilty, I think.
I demand restitution! I have been moderately inconvenienced!
--
dik
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 09 May 2017 21:36:31 +0100, Stephen wrote:
> I should feel guilty, I think.
Nah, you shouldn't, unless you have specific reason to.
--
"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and
besides, the pig likes it." - George Bernard Shaw
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 5/9/2017 10:24 PM, dick balaska wrote:
> Am 2017-05-09 16:36, also sprach Stephen:
>> I should feel guilty, I think.
>
> I demand restitution! I have been moderately inconvenienced!
>
Nah! That's a political thing.
I'm sure you mean reconstitution. :) <-- Smiley
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 5/9/2017 11:49 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Tue, 09 May 2017 21:36:31 +0100, Stephen wrote:
>
>> I should feel guilty, I think.
>
> Nah, you shouldn't, unless you have specific reason to.
>
>
>
I feel I'm missing out.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 8-5-2017 16:58, clipka wrote:
> Am 08.05.2017 um 16:09 schrieb Bald Eagle:
>> Stephen <mca### [at] aolcom> wrote:
>>
>>>> "... However, due to the gradually increasing luminosity of the Sun, the oceans
>>>> of the Earth will have vaporized long before that time (about 2,100 million
>>>> years from now)."
>>>>
>>>> Hmmmm....
>>>>
>>>>
>>> You weren't planning to be around for it, were you? :)
>>
>>
>> I was just observing that there definitely seems to be SOMETHING that will warm
>> our planet.... What _could_ it be...?
>>
>> It certainly can't be that ridiculously huge thermonuclear furnace that's
>> 1,300,000 times the size of the Earth, that's for sure.
>>
>> Must be something _we_ did. :|
>
> Yeah, that unprecedented sudden temperature increase over the last 100
> years or so, that's _totally_ just the sun.
>
> (facepalm)
>
> You do know that, say, 1000 years ago the sun had already been around,
> and in pretty much its current form, right?
>
I don't buy that. Given the rate of combustion, the sun cannot be more
than a couple of centuries old. I got secret information telling me that
the mysterious NASA space craft that landed a couple of days ago has
something to do with the kindling of a new sun...
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 5/10/2017 7:46 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> On 8-5-2017 16:58, clipka wrote:
>>
>> You do know that, say, 1000 years ago the sun had already been around,
>> and in pretty much its current form, right?
>>
>
> I don't buy that. Given the rate of combustion, the sun cannot be more
> than a couple of centuries old. I got secret information telling me that
> the mysterious NASA space craft that landed a couple of days ago has
> something to do with the kindling of a new sun...
>
Fair point.
Isn't that what kings and queens are for, to make the gods do their job?
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 10-5-2017 8:56, Stephen wrote:
> On 5/10/2017 7:46 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>> On 8-5-2017 16:58, clipka wrote:
>
>>>
>>> You do know that, say, 1000 years ago the sun had already been around,
>>> and in pretty much its current form, right?
>>>
>>
>> I don't buy that. Given the rate of combustion, the sun cannot be more
>> than a couple of centuries old. I got secret information telling me that
>> the mysterious NASA space craft that landed a couple of days ago has
>> something to do with the kindling of a new sun...
>>
>
> Fair point.
> Isn't that what kings and queens are for, to make the gods do their job?
>
>
Exactly. Not enough kings and queens in this world. Climate change
started when the populace killed them or exiled them.
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 5/10/2017 8:09 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> On 10-5-2017 8:56, Stephen wrote:
>> On 5/10/2017 7:46 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>>> On 8-5-2017 16:58, clipka wrote:
>>
>>>>
>>>> You do know that, say, 1000 years ago the sun had already been around,
>>>> and in pretty much its current form, right?
>>>>
>>>
>>> I don't buy that. Given the rate of combustion, the sun cannot be more
>>> than a couple of centuries old. I got secret information telling me that
>>> the mysterious NASA space craft that landed a couple of days ago has
>>> something to do with the kindling of a new sun...
>>>
>>
>> Fair point.
>> Isn't that what kings and queens are for, to make the gods do their job?
>>
>>
>
> Exactly. Not enough kings and queens in this world. Climate change
> started when the populace killed them or exiled them.
>
The timing is right. If you look at the curve.
You are beginning to convince me.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 10-5-2017 9:19, Stephen wrote:
> On 5/10/2017 8:09 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>> On 10-5-2017 8:56, Stephen wrote:
>>> On 5/10/2017 7:46 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>>>> On 8-5-2017 16:58, clipka wrote:
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> You do know that, say, 1000 years ago the sun had already been around,
>>>>> and in pretty much its current form, right?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I don't buy that. Given the rate of combustion, the sun cannot be more
>>>> than a couple of centuries old. I got secret information telling me
>>>> that
>>>> the mysterious NASA space craft that landed a couple of days ago has
>>>> something to do with the kindling of a new sun...
>>>>
>>>
>>> Fair point.
>>> Isn't that what kings and queens are for, to make the gods do their job?
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Exactly. Not enough kings and queens in this world. Climate change
>> started when the populace killed them or exiled them.
>>
>
>
> The timing is right. If you look at the curve.
> You are beginning to convince me.
>
I have never spoken out publicly before for fear of retaliation but
patriotism and true love for my queen and king has convinced me to start
this crusade.
[takes stance, watching the far horizon]
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 10-5-2017 0:49, Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Tue, 09 May 2017 21:36:31 +0100, Stephen wrote:
>
>> I should feel guilty, I think.
>
> Nah, you shouldn't, unless you have specific reason to.
>
>
>
I suspect Stephen leaked oil from the pipes to cook his haddocks... :-)
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 5/10/2017 8:33 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> On 10-5-2017 9:19, Stephen wrote:
>> On 5/10/2017 8:09 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>>> On 10-5-2017 8:56, Stephen wrote:
>>>> On 5/10/2017 7:46 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>>>>> On 8-5-2017 16:58, clipka wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You do know that, say, 1000 years ago the sun had already been
>>>>>> around,
>>>>>> and in pretty much its current form, right?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't buy that. Given the rate of combustion, the sun cannot be more
>>>>> than a couple of centuries old. I got secret information telling me
>>>>> that
>>>>> the mysterious NASA space craft that landed a couple of days ago has
>>>>> something to do with the kindling of a new sun...
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Fair point.
>>>> Isn't that what kings and queens are for, to make the gods do their
>>>> job?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Exactly. Not enough kings and queens in this world. Climate change
>>> started when the populace killed them or exiled them.
>>>
>>
>>
>> The timing is right. If you look at the curve.
>> You are beginning to convince me.
>>
>
> I have never spoken out publicly before for fear of retaliation but
> patriotism and true love for my queen and king has convinced me to start
> this crusade.
>
It is cold. The wind blows from the North East.
And the mouse eats the uncovered corn in the yard. ;-)
> [takes stance, watching the far horizon]
>
>
[takes stance, watching the other horizon]
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 5/10/2017 8:38 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> On 10-5-2017 0:49, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> On Tue, 09 May 2017 21:36:31 +0100, Stephen wrote:
>>
>>> I should feel guilty, I think.
>>
>> Nah, you shouldn't, unless you have specific reason to.
>>
>>
>>
>
> I suspect Stephen leaked oil from the pipes to cook his haddocks... :-)
>
Not me. I was miles away at the time.
I have seen the sea on fire and a burning circle in the sky.
It was a sign writ large in flame.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 10-5-2017 10:21, Stephen wrote:
> On 5/10/2017 8:33 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>> On 10-5-2017 9:19, Stephen wrote:
>>> On 5/10/2017 8:09 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>>>> On 10-5-2017 8:56, Stephen wrote:
>>>>> On 5/10/2017 7:46 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>>>>>> On 8-5-2017 16:58, clipka wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You do know that, say, 1000 years ago the sun had already been
>>>>>>> around,
>>>>>>> and in pretty much its current form, right?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't buy that. Given the rate of combustion, the sun cannot be
>>>>>> more
>>>>>> than a couple of centuries old. I got secret information telling me
>>>>>> that
>>>>>> the mysterious NASA space craft that landed a couple of days ago has
>>>>>> something to do with the kindling of a new sun...
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Fair point.
>>>>> Isn't that what kings and queens are for, to make the gods do their
>>>>> job?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Exactly. Not enough kings and queens in this world. Climate change
>>>> started when the populace killed them or exiled them.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The timing is right. If you look at the curve.
>>> You are beginning to convince me.
>>>
>>
>> I have never spoken out publicly before for fear of retaliation but
>> patriotism and true love for my queen and king has convinced me to start
>> this crusade.
>>
>
> It is cold. The wind blows from the North East.
> And the mouse eats the uncovered corn in the yard. ;-)
That look suspiciously like a citation, hum? ;-)
>
>> [takes stance, watching the far horizon]
>>
>>
>
> [takes stance, watching the other horizon]
(Always people copying their betters.) :-)
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 5/10/2017 11:52 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>>>
>>> I have never spoken out publicly before for fear of retaliation but
>>> patriotism and true love for my queen and king has convinced me to start
>>> this crusade.
>>>
>>
>> It is cold. The wind blows from the North East.
>> And the mouse eats the uncovered corn in the yard. ;-)
>
> That look suspiciously like a citation, hum? ;-)
>
No. The passcode for the return of the 45'ers*.
>>
>>> [takes stance, watching the far horizon]
>>>
>>>
>>
>> [takes stance, watching the other horizon]
>
> (Always people copying their betters.) :-)
>
I know my place.
*
That is 1745 the last uprising we had.
And they still sing this, in that so called palace:
Lord grant that Marshal Wade
May by thy mighty aid
Victory bring.
May he sedition hush,
And like a torrent rush,
Rebellious Scots to crush.
God save the King!
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 10-5-2017 13:30, Stephen wrote:
> On 5/10/2017 11:52 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I have never spoken out publicly before for fear of retaliation but
>>>> patriotism and true love for my queen and king has convinced me to
>>>> start
>>>> this crusade.
>>>>
>>>
>>> It is cold. The wind blows from the North East.
>>> And the mouse eats the uncovered corn in the yard. ;-)
>>
>> That look suspiciously like a citation, hum? ;-)
>>
>
>
> No. The passcode for the return of the 45'ers*.
>
>>>
>>>> [takes stance, watching the far horizon]
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> [takes stance, watching the other horizon]
>>
>> (Always people copying their betters.) :-)
>>
>
>
> I know my place.
>
>
> *
> That is 1745 the last uprising we had.
>
> And they still sing this, in that so called palace:
>
> Lord grant that Marshal Wade
> May by thy mighty aid
> Victory bring.
> May he sedition hush,
> And like a torrent rush,
> Rebellious Scots to crush.
> God save the King!
>
Ah, yes of course! It sounded that way somehow. Thanks for this
historical reminder. Always glad to learn.
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 10.05.2017 um 08:46 schrieb Thomas de Groot:
>> You do know that, say, 1000 years ago the sun had already been around,
>> and in pretty much its current form, right?
>>
>
> I don't buy that. Given the rate of combustion, the sun cannot be more
> than a couple of centuries old. I got secret information telling me that
> the mysterious NASA space craft that landed a couple of days ago has
> something to do with the kindling of a new sun...
Dummo. Everyone knows the Anunaki are refueling the sun every couple
hundred years.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Stephen <mca### [at] aolcom> wrote:
> I'm keeping out of this one. I spent 20 years working for oil companies.
> Regards
> Stephen
I think I'm gonna just let it go for now, and get back to coding and hopefully
raytracing something interesting and/or aesthetically pleasing.
Too much faith, religious fervor, ad-hominem, and casino-betting.
Not interested in turning this little corner of the newsgroup into a pissing
match or flame war.
With all due respect, gracefully bowing out.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 5/10/2017 3:00 PM, Bald Eagle wrote:
> Stephen <mca### [at] aolcom> wrote:
>
>> I'm keeping out of this one. I spent 20 years working for oil companies.
>
>> Regards
>> Stephen
>
> I think I'm gonna just let it go for now, and get back to coding and hopefully
> raytracing something interesting and/or aesthetically pleasing.
>
> Too much faith, religious fervor, ad-hominem, and casino-betting.
>
> Not interested in turning this little corner of the newsgroup into a pissing
> match or flame war.
>
> With all due respect, gracefully bowing out.
>
It is always good to know when to make your excuses and leave. As our
newspaper reporters say. When they reach that part of the drug
deal/whatever that they have to something naughty.
This is a nice part of the internet.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 2017-05-10 09:36, also sprach clipka:
>
> Dummo. Everyone knows the Anunaki are refueling the sun every couple
> hundred years.
>
Blasphemer! Jesus does it. Like when we were running out of oil in the
70s and then Jesus made us more. (Bible belters actually believe this.)
--
dik
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 10 May 2017 15:58:39 +0100, Stephen wrote:
> It is always good to know when to make your excuses and leave. As our
> newspaper reporters say. When they reach that part of the drug
> deal/whatever that they have to something naughty.
>
> This is a nice part of the internet.
Which is one of the reasons I like this corner of it.
Jim
--
"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and
besides, the pig likes it." - George Bernard Shaw
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 10 May 2017 09:24:33 +0100, Stephen wrote:
> On 5/10/2017 8:38 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>> On 10-5-2017 0:49, Jim Henderson wrote:
>>> On Tue, 09 May 2017 21:36:31 +0100, Stephen wrote:
>>>
>>>> I should feel guilty, I think.
>>>
>>> Nah, you shouldn't, unless you have specific reason to.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> I suspect Stephen leaked oil from the pipes to cook his haddocks... :-)
>>
>>
>
> Not me. I was miles away at the time.
>
> I have seen the sea on fire and a burning circle in the sky.
> It was a sign writ large in flame.
"We apologise for the inconvenience"?
--
"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and
besides, the pig likes it." - George Bernard Shaw
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 10-5-2017 22:19, dick balaska wrote:
> Am 2017-05-10 09:36, also sprach clipka:
>
>>
>> Dummo. Everyone knows the Anunaki are refueling the sun every couple
>> hundred years.
>>
>
> Blasphemer! Jesus does it. Like when we were running out of oil in the
> 70s and then Jesus made us more. (Bible belters actually believe this.)
>
Gentlemen, I am beginning to /believe/ that this little corner of the
internet is the nexus of different overlapping world realities. I
suspect we could not meet, even if we wanted to. A pity, as I would much
like to take you on one of our steam punk rocket visits through the
Dutch Continental Empire (DCE; I guess that some of you call that the
European Union? I am not sure) and especially to our new conquered
province of Engelland.
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 5/11/2017 7:54 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> On 10-5-2017 22:19, dick balaska wrote:
>> Am 2017-05-10 09:36, also sprach clipka:
>>
>>>
>>> Dummo. Everyone knows the Anunaki are refueling the sun every couple
>>> hundred years.
>>>
>>
>> Blasphemer! Jesus does it. Like when we were running out of oil in the
>> 70s and then Jesus made us more. (Bible belters actually believe this.)
>>
>
> Gentlemen, I am beginning to /believe/ that this little corner of the
> internet is the nexus of different overlapping world realities.
Slow, aren't you? ;-)
> I suspect we could not meet, even if we wanted to. A pity, as I would much
> like to take you on one of our steam punk rocket visits through the
> Dutch Continental Empire (DCE; I guess that some of you call that the
> European Union? I am not sure)
That would be nice. Then we could jaunt off in my interdimensional,
travelling pawn shop. You get to see some of the best parts. :-)
> and especially to our new conquered
> province of Engelland.
>
I'm glad someone's finally taking responsibility for them. They have
been a hell of a neighbour. Since the French took over. ;-)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 5/11/2017 12:21 AM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Wed, 10 May 2017 09:24:33 +0100, Stephen wrote:
>
>> On 5/10/2017 8:38 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>>> On 10-5-2017 0:49, Jim Henderson wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 09 May 2017 21:36:31 +0100, Stephen wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I should feel guilty, I think.
>>>>
>>>> Nah, you shouldn't, unless you have specific reason to.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> I suspect Stephen leaked oil from the pipes to cook his haddocks... :-)
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Not me. I was miles away at the time.
>>
>> I have seen the sea on fire and a burning circle in the sky.
>> It was a sign writ large in flame.
>
> "We apologise for the inconvenience"?
>
>
"Would you please make your way to your designated lifeboat."
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 11-5-2017 10:22, Stephen wrote:
> On 5/11/2017 7:54 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>> On 10-5-2017 22:19, dick balaska wrote:
>>> Am 2017-05-10 09:36, also sprach clipka:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Dummo. Everyone knows the Anunaki are refueling the sun every couple
>>>> hundred years.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Blasphemer! Jesus does it. Like when we were running out of oil in the
>>> 70s and then Jesus made us more. (Bible belters actually believe this.)
>>>
>>
>> Gentlemen, I am beginning to /believe/ that this little corner of the
>> internet is the nexus of different overlapping world realities.
>
> Slow, aren't you? ;-)
I do what I can.
>
>> I suspect we could not meet, even if we wanted to. A pity, as I would
>> much
>> like to take you on one of our steam punk rocket visits through the
>> Dutch Continental Empire (DCE; I guess that some of you call that the
>> European Union? I am not sure)
>
> That would be nice. Then we could jaunt off in my interdimensional,
> travelling pawn shop. You get to see some of the best parts. :-)
>
That would certainly be nice. The interdimensionality though is still a
problem, except for words it seems.
>
>
>> and especially to our new conquered
>> province of Engelland.
>>
>
> I'm glad someone's finally taking responsibility for them. They have
> been a hell of a neighbour. Since the French took over. ;-)
>
Oh! Responsibility is a big word. We just put them to work to keep their
mind off trivial things.
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 5/11/2017 11:59 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> On 11-5-2017 10:22, Stephen wrote:
>> On 5/11/2017 7:54 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>>> On 10-5-2017 22:19, dick balaska wrote:
>>>> Am 2017-05-10 09:36, also sprach clipka:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Dummo. Everyone knows the Anunaki are refueling the sun every couple
>>>>> hundred years.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Blasphemer! Jesus does it. Like when we were running out of oil in
>>>> the
>>>> 70s and then Jesus made us more. (Bible belters actually believe this.)
>>>>
>>>
>>> Gentlemen, I am beginning to /believe/ that this little corner of the
>>> internet is the nexus of different overlapping world realities.
>>
>> Slow, aren't you? ;-)
>
> I do what I can.
>
>>
>>> I suspect we could not meet, even if we wanted to. A pity, as I would
>>> much
>>> like to take you on one of our steam punk rocket visits through the
>>> Dutch Continental Empire (DCE; I guess that some of you call that the
>>> European Union? I am not sure)
>>
>> That would be nice. Then we could jaunt off in my interdimensional,
>> travelling pawn shop. You get to see some of the best parts. :-)
>>
>
> That would certainly be nice. The interdimensionality though is still a
> problem, except for words it seems.
>
Still unsure?
>>
>>
>>> and especially to our new conquered
>>> province of Engelland.
>>>
>>
>> I'm glad someone's finally taking responsibility for them. They have
>> been a hell of a neighbour. Since the French took over. ;-)
>>
>
> Oh! Responsibility is a big word.
It is, as you will know from that Spanish time.
> We just put them to work to keep their
> mind off trivial things.
>
You're not saying that work will make them free, are you?
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 11 May 2017 09:25:10 +0100, Stephen wrote:
> On 5/11/2017 12:21 AM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> On Wed, 10 May 2017 09:24:33 +0100, Stephen wrote:
>>
>>> On 5/10/2017 8:38 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>>>> On 10-5-2017 0:49, Jim Henderson wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 09 May 2017 21:36:31 +0100, Stephen wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I should feel guilty, I think.
>>>>>
>>>>> Nah, you shouldn't, unless you have specific reason to.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> I suspect Stephen leaked oil from the pipes to cook his haddocks...
>>>> :-)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Not me. I was miles away at the time.
>>>
>>> I have seen the sea on fire and a burning circle in the sky.
>>> It was a sign writ large in flame.
>>
>> "We apologise for the inconvenience"?
>>
>>
>>
>
> "Would you please make your way to your designated lifeboat."
I like my answer better. :)
--
"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and
besides, the pig likes it." - George Bernard Shaw
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 5/11/2017 5:34 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>>>> I have seen the sea on fire and a burning circle in the sky.
>>>> >>>It was a sign writ large in flame.
>>> >>
>>> >>"We apologise for the inconvenience"?
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>> >
>> >"Would you please make your way to your designated lifeboat."
> I like my answer better.:)
>
So would I but unfortunately...
We were stood by the lifeboats for about six hours. It was some trip. :)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 11 May 2017 17:56:51 +0100, Stephen wrote:
> On 5/11/2017 5:34 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>>>>> I have seen the sea on fire and a burning circle in the sky.
>>>>> >>>It was a sign writ large in flame.
>>>> >>
>>>> >>"We apologise for the inconvenience"?
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>> >"Would you please make your way to your designated lifeboat."
>> I like my answer better.:)
>>
>>
> So would I but unfortunately...
> We were stood by the lifeboats for about six hours. It was some trip. :)
Ah, well, in that case, your answer is the better answer. Mine's just a
reference to H2G2. :)
Jim
--
"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and
besides, the pig likes it." - George Bernard Shaw
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 5/11/2017 7:06 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Thu, 11 May 2017 17:56:51 +0100, Stephen wrote:
>
>> On 5/11/2017 5:34 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>>>>>> I have seen the sea on fire and a burning circle in the sky.
>>>>>>>>> It was a sign writ large in flame.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "We apologise for the inconvenience"?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>> "Would you please make your way to your designated lifeboat."
>>> I like my answer better.:)
>>>
>>>
>> So would I but unfortunately...
>> We were stood by the lifeboats for about six hours. It was some trip. :)
>
> Ah, well, in that case, your answer is the better answer. Mine's just a
> reference to H2G2. :)
>
But my answer to your answer was a continuation in the same style. With
a soupspoon of RL.
There was a "please" in the sentence!
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 11 May 2017 19:30:02 +0100, Stephen wrote:
> On 5/11/2017 7:06 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> On Thu, 11 May 2017 17:56:51 +0100, Stephen wrote:
>>
>>> On 5/11/2017 5:34 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>>>>>>> I have seen the sea on fire and a burning circle in the sky.
>>>>>>>>>> It was a sign writ large in flame.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "We apologise for the inconvenience"?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Would you please make your way to your designated lifeboat."
>>>> I like my answer better.:)
>>>>
>>>>
>>> So would I but unfortunately...
>>> We were stood by the lifeboats for about six hours. It was some trip.
>>> :)
>>
>> Ah, well, in that case, your answer is the better answer. Mine's just
>> a reference to H2G2. :)
>>
>>
> But my answer to your answer was a continuation in the same style. With
> a soupspoon of RL.
> There was a "please" in the sentence!
That did seem odd to me. :)
--
"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and
besides, the pig likes it." - George Bernard Shaw
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 11-5-2017 13:28, Stephen wrote:
> On 5/11/2017 11:59 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>> On 11-5-2017 10:22, Stephen wrote:
>>> On 5/11/2017 7:54 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>>>> On 10-5-2017 22:19, dick balaska wrote:
>>>>> Am 2017-05-10 09:36, also sprach clipka:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Dummo. Everyone knows the Anunaki are refueling the sun every couple
>>>>>> hundred years.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Blasphemer! Jesus does it. Like when we were running out of oil in
>>>>> the
>>>>> 70s and then Jesus made us more. (Bible belters actually believe
>>>>> this.)
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Gentlemen, I am beginning to /believe/ that this little corner of the
>>>> internet is the nexus of different overlapping world realities.
>>>
>>> Slow, aren't you? ;-)
>>
>> I do what I can.
>>
>>>
>>>> I suspect we could not meet, even if we wanted to. A pity, as I would
>>>> much
>>>> like to take you on one of our steam punk rocket visits through the
>>>> Dutch Continental Empire (DCE; I guess that some of you call that the
>>>> European Union? I am not sure)
>>>
>>> That would be nice. Then we could jaunt off in my interdimensional,
>>> travelling pawn shop. You get to see some of the best parts. :-)
>>>
>>
>> That would certainly be nice. The interdimensionality though is still a
>> problem, except for words it seems.
>>
>
> Still unsure?
Walking a thin line here....
>
>>>
>>>
>>>> and especially to our new conquered
>>>> province of Engelland.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I'm glad someone's finally taking responsibility for them. They have
>>> been a hell of a neighbour. Since the French took over. ;-)
>>>
>>
>> Oh! Responsibility is a big word.
>
> It is, as you will know from that Spanish time.
Oh them! A boot in their lower back and good riddance!
>
>> We just put them to work to keep their
>> mind off trivial things.
>>
>
> You're not saying that work will make them free, are you?
>
>
Of course not! Bind them to their looms I say! As one of their minor
authors once wrote: "and in darkness bind them". That is exactly right
to increase production.
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 5/12/2017 8:06 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>>>
>>> That would certainly be nice. The interdimensionality though is still a
>>> problem, except for words it seems.
>>>
>>
>> Still unsure?
>
> Walking a thin line here....
>
>>
Okay, I can take a hint. :-)
>>>
>>> Oh! Responsibility is a big word.
>>
>> It is, as you will know from that Spanish time.
>
> Oh them! A boot in their lower back and good riddance!
>
>>
So say thee, now.
At the time you had a lot to say about it. :-)
>>
>> You're not saying that work will make them free, are you?
>>
>>
>
> Of course not! Bind them to their looms I say! As one of their minor
> authors once wrote: "and in darkness bind them". That is exactly right
> to increase production.
>
Good luck with that, then. They are an unruly lot. Much want to rabble
and rouse. Once they get the scent of pink gin. They are harder to herd
than cats.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 12-5-2017 9:32, Stephen wrote:
> On 5/12/2017 8:06 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>>>>
>>>> That would certainly be nice. The interdimensionality though is still a
>>>> problem, except for words it seems.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Still unsure?
>>
>> Walking a thin line here....
>>
>>>
>
> Okay, I can take a hint. :-)
Equipoise is always a tricky business...
>
>
>>>>
>>>> Oh! Responsibility is a big word.
>>>
>>> It is, as you will know from that Spanish time.
>>
>> Oh them! A boot in their lower back and good riddance!
>>
>>>
>
> So say thee, now.
> At the time you had a lot to say about it. :-)
We did, we did! We are of the bragging sort. See our period paintings. :-)
>
>
>
>>>
>>> You're not saying that work will make them free, are you?
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Of course not! Bind them to their looms I say! As one of their minor
>> authors once wrote: "and in darkness bind them". That is exactly right
>> to increase production.
>>
>
> Good luck with that, then. They are an unruly lot. Much want to rabble
> and rouse. Once they get the scent of pink gin. They are harder to herd
> than cats.
>
>
Water be the strongest drink then. The Thames can be put to good use for
that.
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 5/12/2017 11:54 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>> So say thee, now.
>> At the time you had a lot to say about it. :-)
>
> We did, we did! We are of the bragging sort. See our period paintings. :-)
>
>>
Funny, how whenever we imagine ourselves in the past. We are almost
always well off.
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>> You're not saying that work will make them free, are you?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Of course not! Bind them to their looms I say! As one of their minor
>>> authors once wrote: "and in darkness bind them". That is exactly right
>>> to increase production.
>>>
>>
>> Good luck with that, then. They are an unruly lot. Much want to rabble
>> and rouse. Once they get the scent of pink gin. They are harder to herd
>> than cats.
>>
>>
>
> Water be the strongest drink then. The Thames can be put to good use for
> that.
Now that that is going too far. Where's this famed Dutch courage?
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 13-5-2017 12:03, Stephen wrote:
> On 5/12/2017 11:54 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>>> So say thee, now.
>>> At the time you had a lot to say about it. :-)
>>
>> We did, we did! We are of the bragging sort. See our period paintings.
>> :-)
>>
>>>
>
>
> Funny, how whenever we imagine ourselves in the past. We are almost
> always well off.
All joking aside, the wealth is what remains tangible I think, more than
poverty and decrepitude which are rapidly erased by the wear and tear of
history and age.
Interestingly, in that respect, there has been a book published recently
of letters from wives to sailors on the Dutch ships during the wars we
fought against each others. Those letters were intercepted by English
privateers and so never reached destination. It is amazing to see how
literate those humble women were in those days; reading and writing was
rather common and especially the reading of gazettes, which were also
sent alongside the letters.
>
>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> You're not saying that work will make them free, are you?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Of course not! Bind them to their looms I say! As one of their minor
>>>> authors once wrote: "and in darkness bind them". That is exactly right
>>>> to increase production.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Good luck with that, then. They are an unruly lot. Much want to rabble
>>> and rouse. Once they get the scent of pink gin. They are harder to herd
>>> than cats.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Water be the strongest drink then. The Thames can be put to good use for
>> that.
>
> Now that that is going too far. Where's this famed Dutch courage?
>
Indeed, where?
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 13.05.2017 um 12:59 schrieb Thomas de Groot:
> All joking aside, the wealth is what remains tangible I think, more than
> poverty and decrepitude which are rapidly erased by the wear and tear of
> history and age.
>
> Interestingly, in that respect, there has been a book published recently
> of letters from wives to sailors on the Dutch ships during the wars we
> fought against each others. Those letters were intercepted by English
> privateers and so never reached destination. It is amazing to see how
> literate those humble women were in those days; reading and writing was
> rather common and especially the reading of gazettes, which were also
> sent alongside the letters.
I would be wary of sampling bias when assessing the literacy of a group
of people by such a sample of letters sent.
For example, people of poor literacy might have tended to send fewer
letters than their more literate peers, causing them to be
underrepresented in the sample; and illiterate people will be excluded
from the sample entirely for obvious reasons.
Also, the letters might not necessarily reflect the literacy of the
purported authors, as there is at least the possibility that they might
have been dictated into the hand of a more literate member of the
household or neighborhood.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 5/13/2017 12:48 PM, clipka wrote:
> Am 13.05.2017 um 12:59 schrieb Thomas de Groot:
>
>> All joking aside, the wealth is what remains tangible I think, more than
>> poverty and decrepitude which are rapidly erased by the wear and tear of
>> history and age.
>>
>> Interestingly, in that respect, there has been a book published recently
>> of letters from wives to sailors on the Dutch ships during the wars we
>> fought against each others. Those letters were intercepted by English
>> privateers and so never reached destination. It is amazing to see how
>> literate those humble women were in those days; reading and writing was
>> rather common and especially the reading of gazettes, which were also
>> sent alongside the letters.
>
> I would be wary of sampling bias when assessing the literacy of a group
> of people by such a sample of letters sent.
>
> For example, people of poor literacy might have tended to send fewer
> letters than their more literate peers, causing them to be
> underrepresented in the sample; and illiterate people will be excluded
> from the sample entirely for obvious reasons.
>
> Also, the letters might not necessarily reflect the literacy of the
> purported authors, as there is at least the possibility that they might
> have been dictated into the hand of a more literate member of the
> household or neighborhood.
>
All what you say is true. But it was also the Age of Enlightenment and
literacy rates were rising.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 13-5-2017 14:15, Stephen wrote:
> On 5/13/2017 12:48 PM, clipka wrote:
>> Am 13.05.2017 um 12:59 schrieb Thomas de Groot:
>>
>>> All joking aside, the wealth is what remains tangible I think, more than
>>> poverty and decrepitude which are rapidly erased by the wear and tear of
>>> history and age.
>>>
>>> Interestingly, in that respect, there has been a book published recently
>>> of letters from wives to sailors on the Dutch ships during the wars we
>>> fought against each others. Those letters were intercepted by English
>>> privateers and so never reached destination. It is amazing to see how
>>> literate those humble women were in those days; reading and writing was
>>> rather common and especially the reading of gazettes, which were also
>>> sent alongside the letters.
>>
>> I would be wary of sampling bias when assessing the literacy of a group
>> of people by such a sample of letters sent.
>>
>> For example, people of poor literacy might have tended to send fewer
>> letters than their more literate peers, causing them to be
>> underrepresented in the sample; and illiterate people will be excluded
>> from the sample entirely for obvious reasons.
>>
>> Also, the letters might not necessarily reflect the literacy of the
>> purported authors, as there is at least the possibility that they might
>> have been dictated into the hand of a more literate member of the
>> household or neighborhood.
>>
>
>
> All what you say is true. But it was also the Age of Enlightenment and
> literacy rates were rising.
>
I agree with both of you but must add that not only literacy was rising,
but in the Netherlands it was one of the highest in Europe at the time,
particularly with women whose husbands were at sea and who had to carry
on their business at home. It was one of the few countries (if not the
only one) were women were entitled to own a shop or trade independently
from husbands or male relatives.
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
