Author Archive for geoff

“if waterboarding does not constitute torture, then there is no such thing as torture”

Christopher Hitchens sees for himself.

I am somewhat proud of my ability to “keep my head,” as the saying goes, and to maintain presence of mind under trying circumstances. I was completely convinced that, when the water pressure had become intolerable, I had firmly uttered the pre-determined code word that would cause it to cease. But my interrogator told me that, rather to his surprise, I had not spoken a word. I had activated the “dead man’s handle” that signaled the onset of unconsciousness. So now I have to wonder about the role of false memory and delusion. What I do recall clearly, though, is a hard finger feeling for my solar plexus as the water was being poured. What was that for? “That’s to find out if you are trying to cheat, and timing your breathing to the doses. If you try that, we can outsmart you. We have all kinds of enhancements.” I was briefly embarrassed that I hadn’t earned or warranted these refinements, but it hit me yet again that this is certainly the language of torture.

{{This article was retrieved (or, possibly, scraped) from the blog of Geoff Arnold.}}

“if waterboarding does not constitute torture, then there is no such thing as torture”

Rewriting history (as we all do, all the time)

Further confirmation (and expansion) of Libet’s classic work demonstrating that we start to act before we are conscious of our decision to do so, and rewrite our subjective experience so that we feel that we’re in control:

Dutch researchers led by psychologist Ap Dijksterhuis at the University of Amsterdam recently found that people struggling to make relatively complicated consumer choices — which car to buy, apartment to rent or vacation to take — appeared to make sounder decisions when they were distracted and unable to focus consciously on the problem.

Moreover, the more factors to be considered in a decision, the more likely the unconscious brain handled it all better, they reported in the peer-reviewed journal Science in 2006. “The idea that conscious deliberation before making a decision is always good is simply one of those illusions consciousness creates for us,” Dr. Dijksterhuis said.

(From the Science Journal at WSJ.com)

{{This article was retrieved (or, possibly, scraped) from the blog of Geoff Arnold.}}

Rewriting history (as we all do, all the time)

Re-Hipify John Scalzi

This is going to be a really educational thread…

Tell me what new music or artists you’re listening to these days.

For the purposes of this discussion, “new” is defined to mean:

1. The artist/band started publicly releasing music (or alternately made their major label debut) after January 2005;

or

2. The artist/band started publicly releasing music (or alternately made their major label debut) after January 2003, but you only heard about them in the last year.

(From Whatever » Re-Hipify Me: A Weekend Assignment, over at John Scalzi’s site.)

{{This article was retrieved (or, possibly, scraped) from the blog of Geoff Arnold.}}

Re-Hipify John Scalzi

How to shoot yourself in the foot…

Riazat Butt, the Guardian’s religion reporter, has been writing about Gafcon, the meeting of conservative Anglicans in Jerusalem. Ostensibly this movement is all about African bishops bemoaning the moral laxity of US and UK Anglicans, and offering them an alternative free from the blight of homosexuality. Apparently, the American conservatives (dominionists, even) who are actually behind the whole thing are now trying to keep the Africans in their place:

In the fateful press conference – regarding torture – Akinola said that what was permissible in one culture was not permissible in another, without realising that same-sex unions have become the norm in western society and should therefore be accommodated in the same way that discriminatory legislation and treatment of homosexuals are par for the course in some African countries.

If the white bishops can turn a blind eye to polygamy and persecution then surely the courtesy should be returned.

Hypocrisy seems to be thriving in the Southern Cone…

{{This article was retrieved (or, possibly, scraped) from the blog of Geoff Arnold.}}

How to shoot yourself in the foot…

Do I know any of you?

Via the Bad Astronomy Blog comes this graph from a Gallup Poll of US beliefs.
Gallup Poll data on beliefs about human origins.
Now a number of bloggers have commented on the party political differences that are highlighted by the survey. However, I want to ask a different, rather simpler question.

Do I know any of you?

More specifically, is there anyone that I know - someone who reads this blog - who actually falls into the category “God created humans as is, within the last 10,000 years.”. Because if the answer is “yes”, I’d really love to exchange email with you.

I know that people with these ideas exist - I’m confident that Gallup isn’t simply making up the numbers - but I simply haven’t ever (knowingly) met any of you. And I’d love to learn more. Do you take medicine? Do you use computers or fly on airliners? How do you reconcile your trust in science with your anti-scientific beliefs? Do you keep the ideas in different mental compartments, or do you find them genuinely compatible? I’m honestly interested in your answer. Puzzled. Incredulous, even. But definitely curious.

{{This article was retrieved (or, possibly, scraped) from the blog of Geoff Arnold.}}

Do I know any of you?

Walkers’ Paradise

Here’s why I was able to give up my car when I moved to Seattle. Walk Score Seattle map clippingFrom where I live in the International District, through Downtown, up to South Lake Union (where Amazon is moving in a couple of years) is a “Walkers’ Paradise”. And I agree 100%. Check out the interactive map at Walk Score.
(Via O’Reilly Radar.)

{{This article was retrieved (or, possibly, scraped) from the blog of Geoff Arnold.}}

Walkers’ Paradise

Farewell Routemaster (and other interesting fare)

I discovered the rather strange online video site Jaman today. It’s a streaming (or download-to-rent) service, which has a large library of movies and short subject material from “the long tail”. The films range from silent classics to recent gems such as “Conversations with Other Women”, which I saw recently. In addition to pay-to-rent items, there are also quite a few free (ad-supported) treasures: cult schlock like “Bad Girls Go To Hell”, quirky short subjects like the strange Greek film “Single Bed”, and documentaries like “Farewell Routemaster”. It’s a long tail indeed….

{{This article was retrieved (or, possibly, scraped) from the blog of Geoff Arnold.}}

Farewell Routemaster (and other interesting fare)

Lack of blogging, and a thought

A quick check at the posting dates for the last few entries in my blog confirms that my blogging rate has fallen off recently. The interesting thing is that I’ve been contributing as much to the blogosphere as I usually do; it’s just that I’ve found myself contributing a lot of comments to other people’s blogs.

And this provoked the following thought. Presumably, people that visit my blog do so because they are interested in what I’m writing about - atheism, science, philosophy, software, aviation, music, the family, whatever. And most of my recent comments have been about these very subjects. I wonder if there’s an easy way to weave these threads together: to post a comment on, say, Secular Philosophy, and have the same material show up here, decorated with just enough contextual infirmation that you could decide whether you wanted to pop over to the story I had commented on and read the whole thread.

If we all used the same blogging software, I could imagine ways of implementing true “multiple inheritance” of blog content. Absent standards, this is likely to be a manual process for a while. (Or can Digg or Feedburner help out, perhaps?)

{{This article was retrieved (or, possibly, scraped) from the blog of Geoff Arnold.}}

Lack of blogging, and a thought

By way of an experiment… Recent music

Amazon just developed a blog widget that provides access to the samples for their MP3 music. I thought I’d use it to show you some of the music I’ve been adding to my collection. One track per album:
Amazon.com Widgets
Click the play button to get things started; then you can browse the list of songs. Select a song to see the artist and album info.

I still buy the occasional physical CD, and there are a few things that I can only get at iTunes, but these days I’m buying most of my music from Amazon. It’s not just that I work for them (which I do), or that the prices are good (which they are). It’s mostly the convenience of browsing. The feature that lets you play all of the clips from an album is incredibly useful: that’s the main reason why I bought the first Chicago album, for example. Everybody knows the big hits - “Listen”, “I’m A Man” - even if you’ve only heard them at the start of a “Greatest Hits” collection. Anyway, I’d forgotten what an impressive album that first release was. I bought it when it first came out, along with the second Blood, Sweat & Tears album, and I was blown away by the aggressive fusion of jazz, rock, and blues.

Anyway, let’s see how this MP3 widget thing works. I might start using it for my “random 10″ postings (which have fallen off recently - mea culpa).

{{This article was retrieved (or, possibly, scraped) from the blog of Geoff Arnold.}}

By way of an experiment… Recent music

The Atheist Thirteen

I just noticed an atheist blog-meme over at The Barefoot Bum. I’m shocked, shocked that nobody has tagged me with it, but never mind: I figure that I can always tag myself. So here goes.

Q1. How would you define “atheism”?
Atheism is the opposite of theism: the belief in god. This may seem to be a cop-out, but in fact it’s inevitable. People have used the word “god” to label many different (and incompatible) concepts; and what they mean by “believe in” usually depends on the type of god involved. At its simplest, atheism is just a psychological state in which one has no kind of “belief in” anything that one would label “god”.

Q2. Was your upbringing religious? If so, what tradition?
My mother converted from the Church of England to Roman Catholicism when I was about 6, and I attended various RC churches until I was about 13. I was an altar boy (but never abused), and I sang in the choir. I loved the Latin of the Mass, and the antiphonal church music of the time. I read the Bible from cover to cover, which was an eye-opener.

In spite of all this activity, I never had any kind of strong religious feelings, and by about the age of 12 I realized that I was an atheist. It was pretty clear to me that conventional concepts of god were simply contradictory or incoherent, and that there were perfectly good natural explanations for everything that religious people ascribed to the supernatural. I hung around the church for a bit longer, just for the chance to sing in the choir, and then I quit.

Q3. How would you describe “Intelligent Design”, using only one word?
Devious.

Q4. What scientific endeavor really excites you?
Neuroscience.

Q5. If you could change one thing about the “atheist community”, what would it be and why?
Make it larger! Otherwise, nothing. It’s a stretch to refer to it as a “community”, anyway; the only thing that really brings them together is dealing with the prejudice of theists.

Q6. If your child came up to you and said “I’m joining the clergy”, what would be your first response
Well, he did! (And he’s well on his way to achieving his objective.) I can’t remember what my first response was, but I think that I hoped for his happiness at the same time that I worried about how he’d cope with the turmoil in his denomination (the Episcopalians).

Q7. What’s your favorite theistic argument, and how do you usually refute it?
No, not design, or first cause, or evil, or anything like like. My favourite is the “argument from personal experience”, which I enjoy because it lets me go after the dualism which is, I think, at the root of most of this nonsense. Side-trips can include the synthesis of religious experience using drugs, the gradual re-interpretation of demonic possession as mental illness, mental causation, and Descartes‘ infamous pineal gland.

Q8. What’s your most “controversial” (as far as general attitudes amongst other atheists goes) viewpoint?
I’m vehemently opposed to religious schools of any kind. I think I was strongly influenced by the conflict in Northern Ireland, and the way denominational schools were used to inflame sectarian hatred. (See Stephen Law’s “The War for Children’s Minds”.) But there’s probably a personal element in her as well: I remember when I was a student at the Royal Grammar School, High Wycombe, how I had to stand outside the morning assembly with other non-members of the Church of England until they’d finished the hymn and the lesson. (Remember Monty Python’s “The Meaning of Life”?) Then we would all walk in and stand at the back for the secular part of assembly - announcements, awards, that kind of thing.

Q9. Of the “Four Horsemen” (Dawkins, Dennett, Hitchens and Harris) who is your favourite, and why?
Dennett, but only because I count him a friend. Three of the four are wonderful, each in his way: Dennett’s robustly naturalistic philosophy, Hitchen’s exquisite prose and biting wit, and Dawkins for one of the greatest books of science ever written: “The Ancestor’s Tale”. Harris is OK, but I wish he wouldn’t get all dewy-eyed about Buddhism.

Q10. If you could convince just one theistic person to abandon their beliefs, who would it be?
Tony Blair. No, that’s too easy. The Pope - just for the theatrical possibilities.

Now name three other atheist blogs that you’d like to see take up the Atheist Thirteen gauntlet:
No thanks. I think I’ll let them select themselves.

{{This article was retrieved (or, possibly, scraped) from the blog of Geoff Arnold.}}

The Atheist Thirteen

While we were looking the other way….

Casualties in Afghanistan now exceed those in Iraq (and they’re growing).

By the Pentagon’s count, 15 U.S. and two allied troops were killed in action in Iraq last month, a total of 17. In Afghanistan it was 19, including 14 Americans and five coalition troops. […] Even when non-combat deaths are included, the overall May toll was greater in Afghanistan than in Iraq: a total of 22 in Afghanistan, including 17 Americans, compared with 21 in Iraq, including 19 Americans, according to an Associated Press count.
The comparison is even more remarkable if you consider that there are about three times more U.S. and coalition troops in Iraq than in Afghanistan.

This story was linked to by Juan Cole as part of his reporting of a major guerilla offensive in Afghanistan. But he didn’t quote from it, possibly because AP is running around harassing bloggers and trying to rewrite the “fair use” doctrine. My old friend John thinks that we should boycott AP; I’d prefer to smother them with love, and generate so many trackbacks and pingbacks that it looks like a DDoS. Atrios just tags them as the “wankers of the day”, which seems a fair compromise.

{{This article was retrieved (or, possibly, scraped) from the blog of Geoff Arnold.}}

While we were looking the other way….

Seeking advice on cases

I have some more business travel to India coming up, and I think I want to get a bit more efficient about my packing for this kind of trip. On my recent swing around the world, I took the wrong mix of stuff. There were some items that I wound up not wearing, but I still needed a mid-trip laundry drop for things that I’d under-provisioned or had got particularly dirty. Or wet. And that was another thing: I’ve found that a soft-sided roller isn’t particularly waterproof.

Anyway, I’m thinking of going rigid, and getting myself a couple of Pelican cases: a 1510 carry-on and a 1490 laptop case. Waterproof, o-rings, reputedly indestructible. However most of the reviews are from photo buffs and other gadget freaks who use these cases to transport cameras, lenses, and so forth. How are they for clothing, shoes and books? And how heavy or awkward is the 1490 compared with soft laptop bags? (I rather like the look of the new Belkin messenger bag…)

{{This article was retrieved (or, possibly, scraped) from the blog of Geoff Arnold.}}

Seeking advice on cases

Mental health break


(Scooter’s “Jumping All Over The World”. H/t to the Pub Philosopher.)

{{This article was retrieved (or, possibly, scraped) from the blog of Geoff Arnold.}}

Mental health break

Obama on faith, reason and politics

My last posting was of a man who doesn’t understand the Constitution of his own country. Here, by way of contrast, is a man who understands extremely well:

PZ thinks that this speech dates back to June ‘06. My (reluctant) guess is that Obama won’t be able to express himself this clearly between now and November 4, but I have no reason to doubt that this is what he really believes. I hope so.

{{This article was retrieved (or, possibly, scraped) from the blog of Geoff Arnold.}}

Obama on faith, reason and politics

Another ignorant fool

First George Bush senior, now John McCain:

I would have to say that the Constitution established America as a Christian nation.

Since calculated pandering would presumably be more deliberate and less incoherent, I guess he really is as ignorant as he sounds.

(H/t to Jim Lippard.)

{{This article was retrieved (or, possibly, scraped) from the blog of Geoff Arnold.}}

Another ignorant fool

Lewis Hamilton… WTF?

What a bizarre Canadian Grand Prix. Lewis Hamilton rear-ends Raikkonen at pit out.After a sublime performance in qualifying, Lewis Hamilton threw it all away with a stupid mistake. Oh well: it was great to see BMW scoring a 1-2, with Robert Kubica getting his first win. And it was nice to see David Coulthard, the grand old man of F1, up there on the podium.

But Lewis… WTF? Really….

{{This article was retrieved (or, possibly, scraped) from the blog of Geoff Arnold.}}

Lewis Hamilton… WTF?

PZ on eyes

Yesterday evening I completed my trifecta of PZ events by attending the meeting of the Seattle Skeptics (otherwise known as the Society for Sensible Explanations). PZ Myers was the guest speaker, and after we’d socialized and eaten he educated us about the evolution of eyes. Rather than trying to summarize, I’ll point you at the posts by PZ himself and PvM (at Panda’s Thumb). Hopefully PZ will post the slides to his site; I definitely want to get another look at some of the diagrams, and to check out the links he mentioned.

The Seattle Skeptics seem like a nice bunch; I think I’ll get involved.

{{This article was retrieved (or, possibly, scraped) from the blog of Geoff Arnold.}}

PZ on eyes

Books for young freethinkers

During the Q&A at Pacific Science Center on Monday, someone asked PZ to recommend a good children’s book on atheism. At the time, the best that PZ could suggest was that someone needed to write such a book; there was then a brief discussion of books on evolutionary science for kids. I didn’t have anything to offer: I dimly remembered a book by the philosopher Michael Martin called “The Big Domino In The Sky”, but that was about it. The subject came up again last night (E.coli for kids?), and so I decided to do a little digging.

Prometheus Books has published a number of children’s books on humanism, origins, evolution, and skeptical thinking. They include:

I have no idea how good these are, in part because such books often attract contrarian reviews at Amazon. It does appear, however, that there’s an opportunity for someone to come up with a children’s (or “young adult”) book on atheism: what it is, what it isn’t, an account of the natural origins of supernatural beliefs, how to respond to some of the common arguments against atheism, and a resource guide. Any volunteers? And any other suggestions and recommendations? (For or against!)

{{This article was retrieved (or, possibly, scraped) from the blog of Geoff Arnold.}}

Books for young freethinkers

Bored with ORD

It’s not just me.

{{This article was retrieved (or, possibly, scraped) from the blog of Geoff Arnold.}}

Bored with ORD

Microcosm

A few of us braved the torrential rain and went to Town Hall Seattle yesterday to hear Carl Zimmer speaking about his book Microcosm. PZ was there - I’m not stalking you, PZ, honest! - and I really enjoyed both the presentation and the conversations before and after. The book is wonderful: I can’t do better than quote Sean Carroll (author of Endless Forms Most Beautiful, another of my favourite science books):

Microcosm could well be entitled Fantastic Voyage. Carl Zimmer, one of our most talented and respected science writers, guides us on a memorable journey into the invisible but amazing world within and around a tiny bacterium. He reveals a life-or-death battle every bit as dramatic as that on the Serengeti and one that offers profound insights into how life is made and evolves. Microcosm expands our sense of wonder by illuminating a microscopic universe few could imagine and instills a sense of pride in the great achievements of the scientists who have discovered and mastered its workings.

Carl Zimmer with the Kindle edition of Microcosm.As for the problem of autographing a Kindle edition, I persuaded Carl to let me photograph him with my Kindle displaying the title page. I think my camera must have been affected by the rain, because the picture was lousy, but never mind. Many thanks, Carl.

{{This article was retrieved (or, possibly, scraped) from the blog of Geoff Arnold.}}

Microcosm

United untied?

One legacy of my time with Sun Microsystems, during which I did a lot of travelling, is a healthy balance in MileagePlus, the United frequent flier program. Obviously such an asset is valuable only if there are opportunities to redeem the miles for tickets, which in turn requires that United actually keeps flying where I want to go. So today’s reports from PlaneBuzz caught my attention. Among the likely moves:

  1. Culling the B737 fleet (94 airplanes) by Fall 2009.
  2. Selling off 7 B747s by Fall 2008.
  3. 25 percent staff cuts by Fall 2008.
  4. Death to TED (quickly but painfully).

Obviously such changes will be accompanied by schedule and route cuts. Now one of the most frustrating things about the state of the US airline business is the grotesque inefficiency - in terms of fuel and airport slots - of flying so many segments with small planes. Twenty years ago, the SFO-BOS red-eye was a TWA L-1011, stopping in JFK. Today, there’s a swarm of 737s and A319s on the route. If the price of fuel isn’t sufficient, we need to find some regulatory or tariff-based mechanism to make it much more expensive to fly 300 people in three A319s than in one 777. All of this is a roundabout way of saying that if United is going to park the old 737s rather than its 757s and 767s, this might be good news. And hopefully there will still be enough 777s and 747s to let me use my miles in creative ways.

{{This article was retrieved (or, possibly, scraped) from the blog of Geoff Arnold.}}

United untied?

Philosophers and evolution

Yesterday evening, PZ Myers shared with us some of his email (2,000 messages a day, after excluding spam) to illustrate the variety of personae who feel compelled to rant against evolution (sorry, “Darwinism”). As he pointed out, some of them are clearly bright, thinking individuals who are spectacularly ill-informed, having been fed a diet of religious nonsense in their homes, churches, and (illegally but inevitably) schools. The other half are just plain whacko, some of them dangerously so.

But there is another group of antievolutionists that it’s worth noting. It may be numerically tiny, but they tend to punch above their weight. I’m referring to a small group of academic philosophers, of whom the most vocal is undoubtedly Jerry Fodor. 3 quarks daily just reported on an exchange in the latest issue of Mind & Language in which Fodor makes a fool of himself and Dan Dennett and others pile on to show him up. Dan’s piece is quite devastating: Fodor’s argument, according to Dan…

… has the startling conclusion:

Contrary to Darwinism, the theory of natural selection can’t explain the distribution of phenotypic traits in biological populations.

Now this really is absurd. Silly absurd. Preposterous. It is conclusions like this, built upon such comically slender stilts, that give philosophy a bad name among many scientists. Fodor’s argument really does follow from his premises, though, so far as I can see, so I am prepared to treat it as a classic reductio. A useful reductio, as we all learned in our first logic course, has just one bad premise that eventually sticks out like a sore thumb, but in this case we have an embarrassment of riches: four premises, all of them false. I will leave as an exercise for the reader the task of seeing if any presentable variation of Fodor’s argument can be constructed in which some or all of these are replaced by truths.

Dan concludes by pointing out the damage that Jerry’s kind of nonsense can do:

I cannot forebear noting, on a rather more serious note, that such ostentatiously unresearched ridicule as Fodor heaps on Darwinians here is both very rude and very risky to one’s reputation. (Remember Mary Midgley’s notoriously ignorant and arrogant review of The Selfish Gene? Fodor is vying to supplant her as World Champion in the Philosophers’ Self-inflicted Wound Competition.) Before other philosophers countenance it they might want to bear in mind that the reaction of most biologists to this sort of performance is apt to be—at best: ‘Well, we needn’t bother paying any attention to him. He’s just one of those philosophers playing games with words’. It may be fun, but it contributes to the disrespect that many non-philosophers have for our so-called discipline.

And he’s right. Science needs the philosophers of science, to remind them of the epistemological underpinnings of the discipline, and to police the boundaries between science and metaphysics. Of course there are some philosophers who misread the zeitgeist and try to maintain a philosophical stake in a scientific debate. But I think they are in a minority.

In addition to Dan’s piece, there are useful perspectives from Peter Godfrey-Smith and Elliott Sober. (The other article cited, by Kirk and Susan Schneider, addresses a completely different aspect of Fodor’s work.)

{{This article was retrieved (or, possibly, scraped) from the blog of Geoff Arnold.}}

Philosophers and evolution

A good time with PZ

There was a pretty good turnout for PZ’s talk last night at the Pacific Science Center, and a significant proportion of the attendees (including yours truly) continued the discussion over beer at McMenamins.

I hadn’t realized this until a UW grad student pointed it out to me, but PZ’s talk was sponsored in part by the Forum on Science Ethics and Policy, which hosted the session by Nisbet and Mooney last October. The similarity and difference was striking. Both PZ and Nisbet/Mooney argue that scientists need to change the way they behave in public in order to communicate more effectively. The difference was that Nisbet/Mooney want scientists to deliberately frame the issues to achieve a particular effect, while PZ simply wants them to drop the mask of cool, cautious, measured objectivity and be themselves: let the excited, passionate, human side of science come through. Drop the weasel words. Be advocates. Be positive. And focus on the beauty of science, of the sheer delight in solving elegant puzzles and discovering the extraordinary. Forget about importance. (I’m reading Carl Zimmer’s “Microcosm” right now, and the highest accolade that he bestows on experimental work is “beautiful”.)

During Q&A, I asked PZ what he thought had changed over the last 15 years, from the days when discussions of atheism and creationism were largely confined to alt.atheism and talk.origins on the Usenet. He gave the “endogenous” answer - a bunch of atheists got uppity, and eventually broke through into the cultural mainstream. Obviously that’s a part of it, but I strongly believe that we were reacting to a bunch of “exogenous” changes: a significant rise in fundamental religionist activity which provoked our responses. Everything from creationists in schools, to ten commandments in courthouses, to pharmacists refusing to fill prescriptions, to religious takeovers of military institutions, to Terry Schiavo. Yes, of course some of it had been going on for years - battles over prayers and “moments of silence” at school events, abortion rights, and so forth - and some of the increase might simply be explained by greater media attention (what happens in Kansas doesn’t stay there any more). But I’m convinced that there was a shift. Some of it was a consequence of the cynical exploitation of religious groups by the Gingrich and Rove Republicans. 9/11 undoubtedly had an effect.

The bottom line is, I think, that there was a great deal of stuff for atheists to get angry about. I’ve written about this before, in my review of Hitchens’ “God Is Not Great”. I wrote then:

But suppose that an old friend came to me and asked, “Why are you so fired up about atheism and religion these days? I remember you 15 years ago, and back then you were posting on alt.atheism, and having fun roasting creationists on talk.origins, and reading books on the philosophy of religion. But you didn’t talk - and write - about it all the time, and you certainly didn’t publically define yourself by your disbelief. So what happened?”

Instead of trying to explain all of my reasons, I think I’d simply give them Hitchens’ new book and say, “Read this. He puts it better than I ever could. I merely experience the occasional (but increasingly frequent) feelings of frustration, impatience, outrage, and even anger. Hitchens is an unequalled exponent of the art of the rant: he says what I feel, with passion, intensity and wit.”

Indeed.

{{This article was retrieved (or, possibly, scraped) from the blog of Geoff Arnold.}}

A good time with PZ

A scientifically skeptical week ahead

This is going to be fun….

On Monday, PZ Myers (Pharyngula) is going to be speaking at the Pacific Science Center. Then on Tuesday, Carl Zimmer - author of “Microcosm: E. coli and the New Science of Life” - is at Town Hall Seattle. And finally on Friday the Seattle Skeptics have organized “An Evening with PZ Myers” - skeptical socializing, followed by dinner. (RSVP required.)

I’m still wrestling with one little problem, however: how do I get Carl Zimmer to autograph my Kindle edition of “Microcosm”?

{{This article was retrieved (or, possibly, scraped) from the blog of Geoff Arnold.}}

A scientifically skeptical week ahead

Time travel

Two brief items about time and my recently completed circumnavigation.

For years, my timepiece of choice has been the Citizen Skyhawk. It’s a solar-powered marvel, with only one flaw: its multiple city feature doesn’t accomodate the Indian time zone (IST=UTC+5:30). When I was at Hyderabad Airport last week, I stopped by a watch store and asked if, by any chance, Citizen now had a watch that could handle Indian time. They showed me a Navihawk: an earlier design, no longer sold in the USA, without solar power, but with full support for IST. I bought one in a heartbeat: highly recommended for those who visit India regularly.

The Navihawk was a hit; the iPhone less so. I disabled data roaming on my travels, for all the well-documented reasons; I also found that very few of the roaming carriers would send out the signal needed to automatically set the time. This shouldn’t have mattered: the iPhone allows you to set the date, time, and time zone by hand, so everything should just work. Well, no. Despite my best efforts, the world clock and alarm functions were totally confused. I had planned to rely on the alarm function, and so I hadn’t bothered to pack a separate alarm clock. Eventually I worked out that the most reliable (but awkward) technique was to use the count-down timer. I’m surprised at how buggy this part of the iPhone software is; I can only assume that Steve Jobs has never travelled abroad with his iPhone. Please fix it, Apple.

{{This article was retrieved (or, possibly, scraped) from the blog of Geoff Arnold.}}

Time travel

Photos are up

The photos from the trip (334 of them) are now up here. Among my favourites:
The “broken rainbow” bridge in Beijing.
The sheer scale of the Forbidden City.
A view inside….
Announcing a bake sale in my hotel for the earthquake victims.
Tianenman Square.

Hutong pics: #1, #2, #3.
Beijing subway.
Beijing Airport, Terminal 3.
An A380 at SIN.
Sign on a balcony at the Bangalore office.
Signs at the Java conference: #1, #2.
The A321 that took me from FRA to LHR.
The controversial Heathrow T5 in the rain.

{{This article was retrieved (or, possibly, scraped) from the blog of Geoff Arnold.}}

Photos are up

Heathrow works, Chicago sucks

I’ve just arrived back in Seattle after my circumnavigation. The day started out uneventfully: I drove from Oxford to Heathrow, dropped off the car, took the shuttle to Terminal 3, checked in, and flew through security. What’s wrong with this picture? I thought Heathrow was the airport we all hated…

The flight to Chicago aboard an aging United 767 was long, a bit tedious, but mostly harmless. I could tell that I was back in the mediocre arms of the US airline industry, because the food was crap and you had to pay $5 or 3 Euros for a miniature alcoholic beverage. This particular 767 configuration did have seat-back video screens in coach, but (a) the screens were incredibly small, (b) the screen was fixed in place, and thus unviewable if the person in front reclined their seat, and (c) the IFE wasn’t working properly in my seat row anyway.

After watching postage-stamp sized snippets of various movies over the shoulders of those in front of me, I sat back and read “Into The Darkness”, Peter Zimonjic’s graphic but confused assemblage of survivors’ stories from the 7/7 bombings in London. (It would be greatly improved by the addition of three diagrams showing the positions of the trains and where each of the characters was.) My other book was Stephen Fry’s elegant tutorial on versification, “The Ode Less Travelled”. Unfortunately I had not brought along a notebook and pencils, and so I was unable to carry out the exercises that he directed his readers to perform before reading any further. Furthermore he also encouraged us to read the examples out loud, repeatedly, in order to appreciate the “stress-timed” nature of spoken English. Richard Feyman may have lived by the precept “What do you care what other people think?”, but I am rather more inhibited.

So I slept. This was a good preparation for the chaos that was Chicago O’Hare. It started well, with a landing in strong, gusty cross-winds that had many passengers squeaking in fear and prompted me to have a delightful chat with the captain about how nicely he’d handled things, which led on to discussions about trends in oceanic flow management (there’s been a widespread slowdown of Mach 0.02-0.03 to save fuel; we were cruising at M0.77 rather than the earlier standard of M0.8). Then immigration, and getting our bags, and clearing customs: all fairly mundane.

And then things started to go downhill. The baggage handling system for rechecking luggage through to domestic connections was broken, so everybody was forced to lug their bags to their domestic departure terminals. International travellers tend to have more baggage than most, and this completely swamped the inter-terminal rail service. I had to wait for three trains before I was able to board one. When we got to United’s Terminal One, none of the staff there were ready for the influx of bags, even though the system had been down for hours.

Next, security… We’re all used to the arrangement where a serpentine queue feeds into separate queues for each x-ray/metal detector. Only in Chicago would they think of having several TSA staff “tapping into” the serpentine queue at different points, so that nobody knew whether to wait for particular official or go further down the queue. The mood of the mob was not improved by the fact that only half of the x-ray units were open, despite the fact that the lines were all overflowing. Most of the TSA staff were as confused as we were, and kept asking each other who was in charge.

During my trip I visited ten airports: Seattle, San Francisco, Beijing, Singapore, Hyderabad, Bangalore (two different ones!), Frankfurt, London, and Chicago. Obviously the worst was the old Bangalore airport, which none of us will miss. That aside, Chicago clearly gets the wooden spoon. And it wasn’t just a problem of volume: Beijing, Singapore, Frankfurt and London all handle plenty of traffic. The sad truth is that US commercial aviation - the airports, the airlines, the planes they fly, the ATC that guides them - is in a pretty shabby state: a suicidal business model leading to underinvestment and decrepitude.

Here’s an interesting nugget. In India, I flew from Hyderabad to Bangalore on Kingfisher, one of the recent arrivals on the Indian scene. Even though the flight was only 90 minutes, on an ATR turboprop, the staff served everyone a three-course meal. How come? (Particularly when United cabin staff can barely manage a beverage service in that length of time.) I think what’s happening is that the Indian airlines haven’t got any elaborate fuel price hedging plans, and so fares are pretty much determined by a “fuel cost plus” calculation. But there are several carriers competing on every route, and since price competition is impractical in an era of volatile oil prices, they have to compete on service. What a concept!

Anyway, I eventually boarded the 757 to take me from Chicago to Seattle. It was late, it was oversold, the in-flight entertainment system was broken, and one of the toilets needed last-minute repairs. There was no Indian-style three-course meal for us; we were given the opportunity to buy $5 boxes containing various ill-assorted snack products. Mine contained, inter alia, a can of tuna, a jar of hummus, various kinds of crackers, a bar of chocolate, some raisins, and a yellowish slab in a plastic wrapper, labelled “Edam style cheese food product“. The ingredients were listed as “Cheddar cheese”, followed by various chemicals designed to create the illusion of Edam. If I were a resident of Edam or Cheddar, I would consider a lawsuit.

Never mind. I’m home.

{{This article was retrieved (or, possibly, scraped) from the blog of Geoff Arnold.}}

Heathrow works, Chicago sucks

“Tragic life stories”

I was in the Oxford W.H.Smith’s just now, and among the books upstairs they had two full shelves devoted to “Tragic life stories”. Accounts of abused childhood, “white slavery”, honour crimes, prostitution, life with medical or psychiatric conditions (including anorexia and self-mutilation), drugs, and kidnapping. And that’s just a sample: I found it too depressing to look any further. There was more space devoted to this subject than religion (good, I guess), science (bad, but not surprising) or football (truly bizarre).

{{This article was retrieved (or, possibly, scraped) from the blog of Geoff Arnold.}}

“Tragic life stories”

In Oxford

I’m blogging from a Starbucks n Oxford, grimacing at the expense of the T-Mobile WiFi. Never mind. Herewith a random collection of observations about the last couple of days.

  • Bangalore was cool. The staff in the Amazon Bangalore office were very welcoming, and presentations and meetings went very well. I have a bunch of action items!
  • The IT conferences (on Java and Startups) and the ACM meeting I attended were full of energetic, ambitious people.
  • The new airport at Bangalore isn’t as pretty as the one at Hyderabad. It was functional, but barely. Most shops were empty of stock, the WiFi didn’t work, and everything seemed to happen 15-30 minutes behind schedule. The road from the city to the airport was… well, it was a typical Indian highway. Leave plenty of time….
  • I’d forgotten how much I hate Lufthansa’s long-haul service - especially the 747-400 fleet. Uncomfortable economy seats, minimal pitch, no real in-flight entertainment, and indifferent and poorly-timed service. The house magazine claims that they are replacing the economy seats with new ones, with seat-back video. Maybe. I’d settle for the nice leather seats from the A-321 that flew me from Frankfurt to Heathrow.
  • I’m flying back to Seattle on Tuesday, and I’ll be in the office on Wednesday. Phew!

{{This article was retrieved (or, possibly, scraped) from the blog of Geoff Arnold.}}

In Oxford

“House of Suns” by Alastair Reynolds

My review from Amazon.com:

Incredibly ambitious, but it works
Publishing’s a funny old business. Reynolds’ magnum opus, “House of Suns” has only just come out in hardback in both the UK and the US, but I found a paperback copy at Singapore Airport last Saturday. I hesitated for a moment - this is a big book: did I really want to lug it around the world? - but only for a moment.

One of the age old problems in science fiction is that of the speed of light. How can one write a decent space opera, with exotic starships visiting improbable planets, without violating the speed limit? Reynolds decides to stick with relativistic limitations (well, mostly) by playing with the other side of the equation: time. The result is an extraordinary mystery story at galactic scale, in which (for a few travellers) time is measured in thousands, even millions of years.

“House of Suns” is an audacious work. I’ve enjoyed all of Reynolds’ earlier books: even though the stories were more conventional than, say, those of Iain M. Banks, Reynolds confident mastery of his material has been undeniable. In the new book, he takes quite a few risks, and gets away with them. The conclusion… well, my first reaction was confusion, but I found myself realizing how utterly apposite it was.

Comparison between writers is invidious, but inevitable. Right now, two of the best science fiction writers are British: Banks and Reynolds. Before “House of Suns”, I would have said that Banks was clearly the greater talent. Now, I’m not so sure. What fun!

{{This article was retrieved (or, possibly, scraped) from the blog of Geoff Arnold.}}

“House of Suns” by Alastair Reynolds