It seemed rather apt that I was reading Michael Crichton’s State of Fear when Climategate 3.0 broke yesterday. The book is, after all, the work of an author who was deeply sceptical about global warming.
I’ve nearly reached the end of it now. It’s a pretty long book, and packs in several high drama adventures. But my attention span has been low over the past few days, and so I’ve been reading it spasmodically.
In retrospect, it seems a deeply prophetic book. It was written in 2004, before I’d really taken any real notice of global warming, and long before I’d become thoroughly sceptical about it. It’s a book that lays out almost all the arguments against it that have become the common currency of scepticism: the poverty of the the instrumental record of warming, the inadequacy of climate simulation models, the cooling of Antarctica, the absence of sea level rise, and so on. They’re all there. Except they were all set out by Crichton 10 years or so ago, long before I’d heard of any of them. In that respect, the book hasn’t dated at all.
Crichton even foresaw the shift from Global Warming to Climate Change, something that I only remember happening in 2008/9.
“So what you need,” Henley said, “is to structure the information so that whatever kind of weather occurs, it always confirms your message. That’s the virtue of shifting the focus to abrupt climate change. It enables you to use everything that happens. There will always be floods, and freezing storms, and cyclones, and hurricanes. These events will always get headlines and airtime. And in every instance, you can claim it is an example of abrupt climate change caused by global warming…” (p372)
And precisely this is what is happening right now, over and over again, as if the alarmists had also read State of Fear.
I was beginning to think that the book consisted in high adventure interspersed with graphs and references when I came to what seemed to be the core chapter of the book, in which a Professor Hoffman makes his first (and most likely, last) appearance, to set out the wider vision of the book, which extends beyond global warming/climate change.
“I am leading to the notion of social control, Peter. To the requirement of every sovereign state to exert control over the behavior of its citizens, to keep them orderly and reasonably docile. To keep them driving on the right side of the road, – or on the left, as the case may be. To keep them paying taxes. And of course we know that social control is best managed through fear.” (p 541)
Hoffman (who is probably Crichton himself) is goes on:
“Has it ever occurred to you how astonishing the culture of Western society really is? Industrialized nations provide their citizens with unprecedented safety, health, and comfort. Average life spans increased fifty percent in the last century. Yet modern people live in abject fear. They are afraid of strangers, of disease, of crime, of the environment. They are afraid of the homes they live in, the food they eat, the technology that surrounds them. They are in a particular panic over things they can’t even see – germs, chemicals, additives, pollution. They are timid, nervous, fretful, and depressed And even more amazingly they are convinced that the environment of the entire planet is being destroyed around them. Remarkable! Like the belief in witchcraft, it’s an extraordinary delusion – a global fantasy worthy of the Middle Ages. Everything is going to hell, and we must all live in fear. Amazing.”
Hoffman explains how this has been achieved.
“For the past fifteen years we have been under the control of an entirely new complex, far more powerful and far more pervasive [than the old military-industrial complex foreseen by Eisenhower]. I call it the political-legal-media complex. The P.L.M. And it is dedicated to promoting fear in the population – under the guise of promoting safety.”
He explains how universities changed.
“What happened,” he continued, “is that the universities transformed themselves in the 1980s. Formerly bastions of intellectual freedom in a world of Babbitry, formerly the locus of sexual freedom and experimentation, they now became the most restrictive environments in modern society. Because they had a new role to play. They became the creators of new fears for the PLM. Universities today are factories of fear. They invent all the new terrors and all the new social anxieties. All the new restrictive codes. Words you can’t say. Thoughts you can’t think. They produce a steady stream of new anxieties, dangers, and social terrors to be used by politicians, lawyers, and reporters. Foods that are bad for you. Behaviors that are unacceptable. Can’t smoke, can’t swear, can’t screw, can’t think. These organisations have been stood on their heads in a generation. It is really quite extraordinary.
“The modern State of Fear could never exist without the universities feeding it. There is a peculiar neo-Stalinist mode of thought that is required to support all this, and it can thrive only in a restrictive setting, behind closed doors, without due process. In our society, only universities have created that – so far. The notion that these institutions are liberal is a cruel joke. They are fascist to the core, I’m telling you.’
And he condemns it.
“We are talking about a situation that is profoundly immoral. It is disgusting, if truth be told.”
I suppose that I found this chapter arresting because it mirrored much of what I’ve gradually come to think in recent years.
What this prophetic book doesn’t address, is what can be done about the situation. Michael Crichton didn’t live to see Climategate, because he died of throat cancer in 2008 (as I read the book I wondered if he might have been murdered).
And I think that what happens is a withdrawal of belief, of trust, of faith. People start out believing in scientists and doctors and ‘experts’ and ‘authorities’ for the simple reason that these people used to be honest and trustworthy in the past. It takes time to realise that the institutions of science and medicine have become utterly corrupted and perverted, and they are now simply using their former high status and prestige to dupe people, manipulate people, and ultimately rob people. And that prestige and respect is now trickling away. In fact, it’s flooding away. There’s a deepening loss of faith in all politicians, in all experts, in all mainstream media. And when this trust has completely gone, the media can no longer get their university-fear-mongered stories heard, and the politicians must lose credibility and relevance – and votes -, and the whole attempt to exert social control must fail.
It’s happening right now with the crackpot alcohol minimum pricing scheme, which is strongly rumoured to be about to be ditched – because of increasing political nervousness among unpopular mainstream politicians – and has resulted in doctors resorting to outrageous lies in their desperate attempts to push forward the policy, and the social engineering agenda underlying it.
And it’s also happening because people like FOIA – the anonymous Climategate leaker/hacker (and who might well have been a fictional character in one of Crichton’s books) – felt morally obliged to act. As he wrote yesterday:
If I had a chance to accomplish even a fraction of that, I’d have to try. I couldn’t morally afford inaction. Even if I risked everything, would never get personal compensation, and could probably never talk about it with anyone.
So, yes, we are living in precisely the State of Fear that Crichton foresaw. But we are also beginning to witness its disintegration. For disintegrate it must, once trust and faith in authorities and experts and pundits has gone.








For the longest time now I’ve been wanting to quickly describe a certain unbelievable PSA that frequently appears on California television which is put out by the vile tobaccofreeCA group (which incidentally has California Department of Health in fine print down at the bottom).
It uses such obvious CGI tricks that an eight year old could see through it.
Well, a certain well known centre-right blogger named Ann Coulter has not only concisely described it, but thanks to her personage and web traffic, it is my hope that tobaccofreeCA gets the national-sized black eye it so deserves as a result.
Here’s a teaser and why she’s a famous blogger and I’m not (51 words):
“California is currently running a series of Reefer Madness -style anti-smoking ads, including one that shows cigarette smoke going from a woman outside on her porch, up a story, through the door of another apartment, across the living room, down the hallway and into a room where a baby is sleeping. That would be the equivalent of the Bloomberg ads claiming teen pregnancy causes genocide.”
You can read the whole thing for yourself if you’re so inclined. The article is entitled Trouble in the Nanny State. She mentions the demonization of smokers many times in it.
Fully agree with you on State Of Fear. I’d always been moderately on the side of the global warming scare folks. The base argument seemed reasonable, the idea of multiplier effects and exponential curves looked good, and the background of having grown up during a period when imminent nuclear disaster seemed almost inevitable provided very fertile soil for believing we were in the midst of doing ourselves in with climate change.
Crichton’s book deeply surprised me. I was aware that it was not necessarily gospel, but he delivered facts and arguments very convincingly and my background in the smoking area allowed me to understand how people could whip up fears and mix up idealism and greed and neuroticism. I wasn’t necessarily ready to swallow his argument whole just from reading the one book, but he moved me from perhaps being 70% believing in the Warmers to being 70% doubtful of the Warmers — a pretty big swing for an innately skeptical person the take from reading a single fictional book!
Heh, I remember thinking, from about the halfway point onward, “God but I wish he’d written this about the Antismokers!” Also: in case you don’t know, Crichton has a nice YouTube type video out there attacking the Antis. Hmmm…… OK… this is fairly short and I thought I’d seen something a bit more in-depth, but it’s a starter: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aGoZ-b1OaW4
:)
MJM
Crichton wrote about secondhand smoke, but unfortunately not in a novel that might reach a mass audience. It’s part of an essay about global warming / junk science.
http://www.s8int.com/crichton.html
Halfway through the text there’s a section on the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency’s report on secondhand smoke.
Two quotes:
This was openly fraudulent science, but it formed the basis for bans on smoking in restaurants, offices, and airports. California banned public smoking in 1995. Soon, no claim was too extreme. By 1998, the Christian Science Monitor was saying that “Second-hand smoke is the nation’s third-leading preventable cause of death.” The American Cancer Society announced that 53,000 people died each year of second-hand smoke. The evidence for this claim is nonexistent.
.
Again, note how the claim of consensus trumps science. In this case, it isn’t even a consensus of scientists that Browner evokes! [About the dangers of secondhand smoke.] It’s the consensus of the American people.
The entire essay is well worth reading. Multiple times.
Thanks for the link to the essay Mike! I *knew* I’d seen more than just that short clip! My memory banks tend to get visual clips mixed up with things I’ve read for some reason. Heh, I sit there thinking, “Did I see that movie? Or just read the book?”
- MJM
Life is now. Don’t let the professional anti-smoking brigade ruin it
The UK’s remaining smokers can’t be legislated out of existence. Everyone dies and to be obsessed with longevity is life-denying
David Hockney
guardian.co.uk, Friday 15 March 2013 09.19 EDT
Jump to comments (1555)
There are about 10 million adult smokers in the UK. None are professional. There are far too many professional anti-smokers whose aim is to get rid of smoking altogether. They will fail.
They are people with a purpose in life (and are convinced everyone would be better off not smoking), but others can have a purpose in life as I do, which I’m quite convinced keeps me going, as did Monet (never seen without a cigarette in his mouth).
The NHS never mentions this, and few doctors do. We live in a very shallow age. Now the latest thing is that bacon is bad for you, another killer. It’s as though shortly death itself can be postponed. That seems to be a mad aim.
We are all going to die, and this luckily comes at the end of life. People are living longer, yes, but this includes the smokers. We are moving into a very different world. Newspapers are dying (the young don’t read them), and online everyone becomes editor. Things are going to be very different. The way things are advertised is going to be very different, with less, not more, control.
The figures for smoking have been the same for about four or five years now. This means that you have a hardcore of smokers – naughty people who should know better – who accept the fact that fate plays a part in life and know that to be obsessed with longevity is life-denying. There is only now.
The aim of the professional anti-smoker is to get rid of it. The press tells us “it’s not acceptable”. Well, it is for 10 million people, who probably don’t all read newspapers and have little to do with the political and media elite. So how come the professional anti-smoker is now an expert in packaging? Have you noticed that marijuana has quite good sales (they tell me) with no packaging whatsoever? Tobacco will be the same. Why does the government only listen to the anti-smokers who obviously natter and natter about it? My father was one of these anti-smokers, and they won’t be happy until it’s gone.
But aren’t we heading for some kind of showdown here? Why won’t they accept that there are still a lot of smokers and that the reports of its demise are wildly wrong? The young think they are immortal and this won’t change.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/mar/15/life-now-anti-smoking-brigade-ruin-it
The other night I was watching a documentary about Ötzi the man found in the ice, I must have missed it first time round.
Fascinating subject, but what shocked me was the reaction of the scientists when they discovered the markers for cardiovascular disease and signs of arteriosclerosis in a 5000 year old, 40 year old man.
It became clear that they had genuinely believed that heart disease was caused by modern lifestyles!
How did medicine go so badly wrong? How did lifestyle epidemiology become so powerful in the last century that intelligent and learned people could be so convinced that no one had previously suffered from these diseases that they were visibly shocked?
Initial Genetic Analysis Reveals Iceman Ötzi Predisposed to Cardiovascular Disease
“Ötzi was genetically predisposed to cardiovascular diseases, according to recent studies carried out by the team of scientists working with Albert Zink and Angela Graefen from Bolzano’s EURAC Institute for Mummies and the Iceman, Carsten Pusch and Nikolaus Blin from the Institute for Human Genetics at the University of Tübingen, along with Andreas Keller and Eckart Meese from the Institute of Human Genetics at Saarland University.
Not only was this genetic predisposition demonstrable in the 5,000-year-old ice mummy, there was also already a symptom in the form of arteriosclerosis, or hardening of the arteries.
And yet, in his lifetime, Ötzi was not exposed to the risk factors which we consider today to be the significant triggers of cardiovascular disease. He was not overweight and no stranger to exercise.
“The evidence that such a genetic predisposition already existed in Ötzi’s lifetime is of huge interest to us. It indicates that cardiovascular disease is by no means an illness chiefly associated with modern lifestyles.”
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/02/120228123847.htm
Frightening, simply frightening in it’s implications, but a valuable insight into the mindset of modern medicine nonetheless.
“ It indicates that cardiovascular disease is by no means an illness chiefly associated with modern lifestyles.”
“commonly held belief that atherosclerosis, or hardening of the arteries — the disease that causes heart attacks and strokes — is a modern plague brought on by smoking, obesity and sedentary lifestyles”
“It looks to be the case that this is an ancient condition of human population before the modern world and may in fact have been part of our species’ aging,”
“He said it is commonly thought that if modern humans could emulate pre-industrial or even pre-agricultural lifestyles, that atherosclerosis would be avoided”
Is that the plan? Is that the basis of all these lifestyle campaigns, to eventually take us back to “pre-industrial or even pre-agricultural lifestyles”?
If anyone’s interested in reading a critique of this book from the ‘other side’, try Michael Crichton’s State of Confusion, an article on http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/
(Sorry, I have no idea how you all manage to reproduce internet articles onto this blog!)
Try this:
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2004/12/michael-crichtons-state-of-confusion/
When you have a webpage displayed in your browser, right click on the address bar. This highlights the address. Click Copy from the displayed menu. (Internet Explorer.)
In your comment text do Control / V to paste in the address. I always add a space after but I don’t know that it’s necessary.
I write my comments in Microsoft Word and then copy / paste into Frank’s comment box. I assume it would work if you just pasted the link while writing text in the comment box.
After I post I comment I go back and try to test the link from Frank’s blog. Most times it works – but not always.
Additional thought. Maybe you were just copying what you see in your browser window address bar? You can Right Arrow scroll right to see more. You have to capture everything to access the specific page you want.
Gosh, thanks for that, Mike. I’m sure you’ve said it clearly enough for even a moron to follow. That remains to be seen! (Nobody ever believes how thick I am with this computer stuff – it’s a miracle I’ve learnt even the little I’ve learnt). I shall have some practice goes.
The mummies are coming in thick and fast this week.
11 March 2013
Heart disease present in ancient mummies
“Fatty arteries may not just be a curse of modern unhealthy lifestyles, say researchers who used scans to look at the heart health of mummies.
A study in The Lancet of 137 mummies up to 4,000 years old found a third had signs of atherosclerosis.
Most people associate the disease, which leads to heart attacks and strokes, with modern lifestyle factors such as smoking and obesity.
But the findings may suggest a more basic human pre-disposition.
Previous studies have uncovered atherosclerosis in a significant number of Egyptian mummies but it had been speculated that they would have come from a higher social class and may have had luxurious diets high in saturated fat.
To try and get a better picture of how prevalent the disease was in ancient populations, the researchers used CT scans to look at mummies from Egypt, Peru, southwest America, and the Aleutian Islands in Alaska.
They found that 47 or 34% showed signs of definite or probably atherosclerosis.
Where the mummies’ arterial structure had survived, the researchers were able to attribute a definite case of atherosclerosis by looking for the tell-tale signs of vascular calcification.
In some cases, the arterial structure had not survived but the calcified deposits were still present in sites where arteries would have once been.
Age-related
As with modern populations, they found that older people seemed to be more likely to show signs of the disease.
The researchers said the results were striking because they had been able to look at the disease in people living in disparate global regions, with different lifestyles and at different times.
Study leader Professor Randall Thompson, of Saint Luke’s Mid America Heart Institute in Kansas City, said: “The fact that we found similar levels of atherosclerosis in all of the different cultures we studied, all of whom had very different lifestyles and diets, suggests that atherosclerosis may have been far more common in the ancient world than previously thought.
“Furthermore, the mummies we studied from outside Egypt were produced naturally as a result of local climate conditions, meaning that it’s reasonable to assume that these mummies represent a reasonable cross-section of the population, rather than the specially selected elite group of people who were selected for mummification in ancient Egypt.”
He said it is commonly thought that if modern humans could emulate pre-industrial or even pre-agricultural lifestyles, that atherosclerosis would be avoided
“Our findings seem to cast doubt on that assumption, and at the very least, we think they suggest that our understanding of the causes of atherosclerosis is incomplete, and that it might be somehow inherent to the process of human ageing.”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-21739193
But having cast considerable doubt on what various organisations have been preaching at us for decades, the BHF, apparently doing a spot of damage limitation, is given the last word.
“Maureen Talbot, senior cardiac nurse at the British Heart Foundation, said: “This small study takes us back in time to give an insight into the heart health of people in the ancient world.
“However, we simply don’t know enough about the diet and lifestyle of the people studied to say whether behaviour or genetics lies at the root of the heart problems observed.
“We can’t change the past, but lifestyle choices can help to affect our future.
“By eating well, quitting smoking and keeping active, you can help to protect your heart.”
Yet somehow, banning smoking in public places was supposed to prevent heart attacks?
Analysis Reveals that Institute of Medicine Report Failed to Include Data that Found No Effect of Smoking Bans on Acute Coronary Events in 3 Countries
“I have analyzed the data which the Institute of Medicine included and failed to include in its report and today, I reveal that the report failed to consider data from three countries (England, Scotland, and Wales) which seem to clearly show that the smoking bans in these countries had no significant short-term effect on acute coronary events.
These data are all national data which include all hospital admissions at all hospitals in these countries. Thus, they represent a better source of data than what was used in some of the published studies (which only included a sample of hospitals).
Moreover, they cover large populations, with a sample size greater than that of all other studies combined. Thus, the data from these countries are critically important an carries much weight in the overall analysis.”
“The reasons why the report failed to consider these national data are not clear.
However, what is clear is that these data were not presented and reviewed in the report.”
http://tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/10/analysis-reveals-that-institute-of.html
Now why could that be?
VERY nice Rose!!!
Let’s condense that some and add a bit from Doll’s doctor study.
In 300 words or less, suitable for posting in comment sections.
Cigarette smoking does not ’cause’ cardiovascular disease and death.
These diseases have been around for much longer than cigarettes.
Initial Genetic Analysis Reveals Iceman Ötzi Predisposed to Cardiovascular Disease
Not only was this genetic predisposition demonstrable in the 5,000-year-old ice mummy, there was also already a symptom in the form of arteriosclerosis, or hardening of the arteries.
Heart disease present in ancient mummies:
“Fatty arteries may not just be a curse of modern unhealthy lifestyles, say researchers who used scans to look at the heart health of mummies.
A study in The Lancet of 137 mummies up to 4,000 years old found a third had signs of atherosclerosis.
The researchers used CT scans to look at mummies from Egypt, Peru, southwest America, and the Aleutian Islands in Alaska.
Doll’s doctors study found that while 41% of the current smokers’ deaths were from heart attack and stroke, 46% of the never-smokers’ deaths were from those same diseases.
I reveal that the report failed to consider data from three countries (England, Scotland, and Wales) which seem to clearly show that the smoking bans in these countries had no significant short-term effect on acute coronary events.
That’s a bit of a blow for them! They’re going to do some fancy footwork to maintain the myth of hundreds of thousands of theoretical deaths from SHS now.
That was written in 2009, anti-tobacco in the UK carried on as normal.
Mummies from different eras, places had clogged arteries
“CT scans of 137 mummies spanning four geographies and 4,000 years of history show that hardening of the arteries was commonplace, especially in older individuals, suggesting this key sign of heart disease may be a part of aging rather than the byproduct of eating too many Big Macs.
The findings, presented on Sunday at the American College of Cardiology meeting in San Francisco and published in the Lancet medical journal, challenge the commonly held belief that atherosclerosis, or hardening of the arteries — the disease that causes heart attacks and strokes — is a modern plague brought on by smoking, obesity and sedentary lifestyles
“It looks to be the case that this is an ancient condition of human population before the modern world and may in fact have been part of our species’ aging,” said Caleb Finch, a professor of gerontology at the University of Southern California and a senior author of the study.
“The latest study, however, spans a much broader swath of society, looking at individuals from different regions and societies and with very different diets.What we’ve put together in this is four cultures with very disparate lifestyles and geography. We have a more-convincing argument about the presence of this disease in ancient people,” Thompson said.”
.
“Heart disease is the leading cause of death in the United States for both men and women, killing about 600,000 people each year, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Finch said drugs that lower cholesterol, reduce blood pressure and thin the blood have been “a tremendous success story in 20th and 21st century medicine,” allowing millions of people to survive heart disease and live longer lives.
Even so, about one third of heart attacks arise in people who have no risk factors for heart disease except for their advancing age, he said.
“The question is, what can we possibly do to slow down the underlying basic process of atherosclerosis and aging in our blood vessels,” he said. “That, right now, is a blank wall.”
http://www.theoaklandpress.com/articles/2013/03/12/news/nation_and_world/doc513ec31c1217f393340605.txt
I doubt these discoveries will have any effect on the activities of the lifestyle obsessives though, I don’t think they are even capable of considering that their original theories might have been wrong.
http://www.c-r-y.org.uk/heart_attack_young_healthy_people.htm
That was me trying to do it. I couldn’t do the comment as well. Nothing would type. Don’t know why yet, but if the link works it’s a start. If it doesn’t work, I’ll go away and practise elsewhere until I can do it!
The link brought up the article fine.
Folks Id say TC is right now in the throws of collapse. They are starting to get nailed across the board with their junk science and outlandish claims. Its reached its crescendo and now we continue to fight but its much better toread about their nanny state demise. It may very well be Herr Bloomberger is the one who brought it all down!
Life is now. Don’t let the professional anti-smoking brigade ruin it
David Hockney
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/mar/15/life-now-anti-smoking-brigade-ruin-it
Who is currently getting a kicking from the blissfully ignorant.
The ignorant rant on about smoking ‘causing’ lung cancer, as tho the numbers they have been told are true.
They believe that all smoker’s lung cancer deaths are ’caused’ by smoking.
If you toss 2 coins, there is only a 25% probability that both will come up ‘heads’; because, H-H is only 1 of 4 possible combinations.
50% x 50% = 25%
(0.5 x 0.5 = 0.25)
The summary for Doll’s doctors study showed that:
1) never-smokers had a lung cancer death rate of about 1/6,000.
2) current smokers had a lung cancer death rate of about 15/6,000.
14/15 = 93%
There was a 93% chance/probability that a currents smoker’s lung cancer death was ’caused’ by smoking.
2 such deaths = 0.93 x 0.93 = 86% chance both were ’caused’ by smoking.
3 such deaths = 80% chance that all 3 were caused by smoking.
10 such deaths = 48% probability that all 10 were ’caused’ by smoking.
20 such deaths = 23% chance that all 20 were ’caused’ by smoking and a 77% chance that they all were not ’caused’ by smoking.
TC antis claim thousands of lung cancer deaths are ’caused’ by smoking.
The possibility that such numbers are correct is vanishingly small!!!!
I don’t tend to comment much on newspapers like the Guardian (or any others for that matter). But I used to inhabit the Guardian’s Where are the WMDs? forum a decade ago, and thought I’d see whether my old username and password still worked.
It did!
Im slow today I just posted it above! But then I been sick! Feel better today fever broke!
Hey! Feel better Harley! Y’gotta get yerself in good shape for Spring Fever!
Nisaki, that’s why we never worry about THEM… :> Any time I post I’m posting for the passersby.
:>
MJM
thanks Mike
Great article full of refreshing and long missed COMMON SENSE.
It is noticeable that the anti-smokers whinge and whine and drone on to the point of killing readers with boredom. Nothing new there. It’s ‘The Guardian’…
- I do remember them proudly publishing that “the people will get used to smoking bans ever so quickly”
This might have convinced the labour party when ASH et al lobbied for the dictation of this ban.
- There is also a comment to be found of someone stating the “perspective of a medic”.
The comment is rather lengthy and gives the impression of being lifted straight from the tobacco control hand book, so it came to no surprise that most of the links cited consist of the junk financed by tobacco control.
All in all, a poor show for the anti-smokers.
Very recently I read somewhere: The most dangerous hazard to health is life. It has a 100% death rate. (Perhaps we should not tell the anti-smoker that, it’ll scare them to death).
Crichton’s books have been made into some great movies, such as:
Jurassic Park
Sphere
Congo
The Great Train Robbery
Here’s a question for you nerds. Some months ago, I wrote a spoof comment on a Guardian article, on behalf of tobacco companies, thanking ASH ET AL for the wonderful publicity which their activity grants to tobacco companies. For some reason, the Guardian put me into the moderation category. IE. My comments there are not accepted straight away like everyone else, but have to await moderation. I haven’t commented there since then. Today, I tried to make a comment, and I am still in the moderation box.
Here are a couple of questions:
1. How does the Guardian know that it is me when I access the Guardian blog? (When I go to comments section, my name comes up automatically).
2. How do I remove that knowledge?
3. How do I set up a new persona?
Any ideas?
When you visit the Guardian, they leave a ‘cookie’ in your cache, which they notice the next time you try to comment. If you clear out the cache, they won’t know who you are.
@Junican…
As Frank says, they leave a ‘cookie’…
Download and run ccleaner, it does a thorough job.
http://www.piriform.com/ccleaner/download
Excellent, Frank! Done!
I take it that ccleaner is a registry cleaner, Marvin? I already have auslogic, but I’ve downloaded ccleaner as well.
Ccleaner is good, but I generally stay away from anything dealing with registry changes. Heh, you know the old saying, “If it ain’t broke, don’t try to fix it!”
It just occurred to me why they might have hit you with a block rather than a simple censoring: if your spoof was close enough to the edge it’s possible that the censor ticked you off as an “impersonator” which is a fairly serious charge for most sites (e.g. if I came on here with a screenname of a Brit MP and pretended I *was* that MP and started posting stuff that they’d clearly be unhappy with).
- MJM
Its easy to be everything to everyone! Politics…………….
That whole Guardian comments thread epitomises what the antis have achieved: The polarisation of society. It’s notable that the comments from those who are, or support smokers tend to be of the “Hey, I enjoy smoking so what’s your problem” variety, whereas the antis comments are of the “You are stupid, stinking, weak, addicted lower than low remnants of society and I hate you” type comments. It says it all really. They have no idea that they have been comprehensively brainwashed, and truly believe that what they say is original thought rather than implanted bigotry.
If you show them some white paper and tell them it’s white, they will say “No, it’s black. I know this, because research has shown, and the experts say so”.
They are a lost cause, and really not worth the effort.
Justice isnt far off,i had a vision in my fever induced mind .
Stopping prisoners from smoking is just draconian
Published on 15/03/2013 17:00
I KNOW it is deeply unfashionable to write about anything that supports our prison population, but a ban on inmates smoking in their cells, as proposed by the Prison Service, is dangerous.
Lags should continue to be allowed their fags.
Bashing those behind bars is something of a national pastime and you may feel it is outrageous that locked up criminals are allowed anything but bread and water past their lips.
I take a more enlightened approach.
The draconian smoking ban of 2007 (just one example of how our civil liberties were snatched away by the Labour government) did not apply to prisons.
As a result of a legal loophole, cells were designated as a ‘permanent or temporary home’. This meant inmates were allowed to carry on smoking.
The Prison Service is aiming to change this and plans to ban smoking in cells and exercise yards in the 123 prisons in England and Wales within the next two years.
They cite the fear of compensation claims from prison officers possibly affected by passive smoking as one reason, and the ever-handy excuse of ‘health and safety’ as another.
It is estimated more than 80 per cent of the prison population are smokers.
When the ban comes in, nicotine fans will be offered patches or electronic cigarettes to ease the pain.
But all of this is highly unnecessary and creates so many problems.
We often hear from prison officers who say that not only do they fear being attacked by prisoners, but that prisons are woefully understaffed.
Taking away the fags from the lags will just inflame the situation.
If smoking reduces stress and thus helps to maintain order, reducing the risk of rioting or a prison officer or inmate being attacked, then so be it.
Furthermore, I do not see why my taxes should be used to fund nicotine patches or electronic cigarettes.
The arguments regarding passive smoking are not conclusive (although I am sure the usual suspects will quickly draw my attention to poorly backed-up research).
I once spent a day in a Liverpool nick working as a journalist.
Being banged up for 23 hours a day is obviously not pleasant.
If a little baccy keeps the peace and doesn’t further stretch an underfunded prison system, why insist on a total stub-out?
Do you agree with Duncan? Do you think prisoners should be allowed to smoke in their cells?
http://www.chichester.co.uk/community/columnists/stopping-prisoners-from-smoking-is-just-draconian-1-4898597
It makes me want to read the book. Thanks for the inspiration. :)