Archive For The Month: November, 2009“Following expert evidence from a psychiatrist it was suggested that no useful purpose would be served by Mr Thomas being detained and treated in a psychiatric hospital, which would be the consequence of a special verdict in this case.
“It is now clear that the psychiatrists feel the risk of reoccurrence is very, very small. It is only because of highly sophisticated tests carried out by sleep experts that Mr Thomas’s condition could be confirmed.”
Judge Mr Justice Nigel Davis told Thomas that although he would feel guilty about killing his wife: “In the eyes of the law you bear no responsibility for what happened.”
The greatest error in the current conventional wisdom is that, if you accept the (present) majority scientific view that most of the modest global warming in the last quarter of the last century — about half a degree centigrade — was caused by man-made carbon emissions, then you must also accept that we have to decarbonise our economies.
Nothing could be further from the truth. I have no idea whether the majority scientific view (and it is far from a consensus) is correct. Certainly, it is curious that, whereas their models predicted an acceleration in global warming this century as the growth in emissions accelerated, so far this century there has been no further warming at all. But the current majority view may still be right.
Even if it is, however, that cannot determine the right policy choice. For a warmer climate brings benefits as well as disadvantages. Even if there is a net disadvantage, which is uncertain, it is far less than the economic cost (let alone the human cost) of decarbonisation. Moreover, the greatest single attribute of mankind is our capacity to adapt to changing circumstances. By adapting to any warming that may occur over the next century, we can pocket the benefits and greatly reduce the disadvantages, at a cost that is far less than the cost of global decarbonisation — even if that could be achieved.
(Via AoSHQ, where I ripped off the headline.)
I admit it, I’m a sucker for the “Where are they now: sitcoms” series that Fox has been running on the web. They usually end with at least one cast member in prison, dead, or addicted to meth. (Jodie Sweeten, I’m looking in your direction)
The latest was Step By Step.
Surprisingly, the cast fared pretty well, in that no one had a tragic ending. Yet, to call the show a launching pad for a long term acting career would not be accurate either.
One kid works at a gas station, one is a political science teacher, and one is listed as a “renaissance fair enthusiast.” Three have had bit parts since leaving the show.
The closest thing to a tragedy is that one of the girls started a charity organization for child actors after finding out that her parents stole and spent all of her money from the show.
The trend began in America in the Eighties, but it’s finally taking hold here, with Christian weight-loss groups springing up, and dramatically increased sales of ’spiritual dieting’ books such as What Would Jesus Eat?, Hallelujah Diet and The God Diet.
Colbert explains: ‘Jesus ate primarily natural foods in their natural states – lots of vegetables, especially beans and lentils. He would have eaten wheat bread, fruit, drunk a lot of water and also red wine. And he would only eat meat on special occasions, maybe once a month.’
‘This diet takes a very sensible approach,’ says Dr Weichselbaum. ‘The staple food would be bread, and food from plant sources, with moderate amounts of proteins.
Subscribe / RSS
