Jump to content
Will it snow? 7 day forecast Weather Radar Will it be cold?
Snow?
Local
Radar
Cold?

Thundery wintry showers

Site forecast team
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    15,710

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    30

 Content Type 

Blog Entries posted by Thundery wintry showers

  1. Thundery wintry showers
    We often hear southerners talking about how the correct way to say words with "ath" is the "ar" sound, rather than the "a" sound that's common up north. E.g. barth, carstle, grarss. But is it really the correct way? The South East biased media think so, but these links suggest otherwise:

    [url="http://lairdofglencairn.spaces.live.com/Blog/cns!FA29A59CC6777652!3323.entry"]http://lairdofglencairn.spaces.live.com/Bl...!3323.entry[/url]
    [url="http://digitalspy.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=837551&page=2"]http://digitalspy.co.uk/forums/showthread....7551&page=2[/url]

    Yes, the "r" pronounciation only came into being up to a few hundred years ago as a dialect around London, which then spread to the rest of southern England.

    So if there is a "correct" way of saying it, it's actually the northern way! Although I personally prefer to think of there not being a "correct" way, but rather a difference of dialect/opinion.

    Howay man!
  2. Thundery wintry showers
    Why is it that all of the ills of society are blamed on working mothers? "Too many mothers are in work and not looking after the children, so children can't always rely upon Mum being there." say the masses. "We need to bring a return to the traditional family where the father goes out to work and the mother stays at home and looks after the children."

    Some suggest that we should have one parent stay at home irrespective of gender, but that would lead to the same result, as the mother is still expected to play the main role in bringing up the children- it would mostly be mothers who would stay at home.
    Some points:

    1. Most children who have two parents who work actually grow up to be good adults, and the ones who turn out badly-behaved, while clearly representing a major problem, are in the minority. And what about the kids brought up by single mothers who turn out reasonably behaved? As usual everyone are being made to suffer because of a minority.

    2. If a stay-at-home mum feels she is trapped, she is ruled by her husband and kids, her career sits in tatters and she has no life (which [i]can[/i] happen)- how is that going to be good for the kids? Quantity of time spent with Mum is important- but so is quality.

    3. If more employers were willing to offer flexible working patterns and chances for going part-time when bringing up young children where it was feasible, we'd get situations where parents could work, but work at different times so as to ensure that most of the time, at least one of them was available for the children.

    Giving mothers more scope to stay at home if they wish to is no problem, but I certainly don't want society to move in the direction of making mothers feel guilty if they work, as if it equates to child neglect. As per point 1 above, only in a minority of cases does this appear to be true.
  3. Thundery wintry showers
    I've complained quite a bit about the BBC recently, particularly re. their weather forecasts and dumbing down of documentaries. So, to balance the books, it's only fair that I give them credit when they do a good job.

    One example is the Formula One coverage. I think this has shown a definite improvement over the ITV coverage. The online coverage is more comprehensive, while the TV coverage is far more objective- there seems to be far less bias towards the British drivers than there was on ITV, and more interest in the rest of the field. I don't think Jonathan Leogard is as good as Murray Walker, but he's a lot better than James Allen. In addition with keeping Martin Brundle on board and adding Murray Walker to the online analysis, the BBC certainly showed it was prepared to listen to the popular consensus among fans. Brundle remains as good as ever.

    The other is the recent weather documentaries- rain, snow and then wind. I honestly can't remember a better documentary series on the weather- so far it seems to have struck the perfect balance between being informative, being unbiased, and not being too technical for those with limited knowledge of the subject.
  4. Thundery wintry showers
    There seems to be a common process when changes are proposed or go ahead. Firstly, the masses tend to be resistant to change (whether for good or bad or in between) and mass OTT over-reactions break out. Then we get the proponents latching onto the few people who support the changes, while dismissing everyone else with comments like "get used to it, it's the future". And then, in the long run, everybody does "get used to it"- regardless of whether the change is for better, worse or in between.

    As with many such issues, we tend to end up with opposing positions at the two extremes. One is that change is usually good, people only resist it because they're naturally resistant to change. The other is the general resistance to change of any kind, amounting to "change is usually bad". And what we get precious little of is objective analysis of the pros and cons of the change, to determine whether it is or isn't a good thing.

    This scenario arose with the BBC weather graphics change in 2005, which ties in with my previous blog entry. But the current examples I'm primarily thinking of are the Facebook layout changes and the F1 points/wins change, both brought in without warning and at short notice. Personally, I don't agree with either of the changes, and on N-W, there has been a pretty good discussion on the latter. But a glance at the comments on messageboards like the BBC and Facebook reveals a bucketload of OTT nonsense, giving reasons for rejecting the changes that just smack of aimless whinging. The proponents will look at those and think, "oh, just resistance to change as usual"- and miss the good reasons for rejecting said changes.

    Maybe society could do with some education from a young age on how to carry out logical deductive reasoning in order to reach well-rounded opinions, and on how to have an open mind. The seemingly inept decision-making that prevails among politicians is echoed all too strongly in many "discussions" on topics on internet messageboards among the general public... it suffices to say that if I ever think Net-Weather has its problems with discussion quality, they pale by comparison with many other internet forums/messageboards.
  5. Thundery wintry showers
    So today was my last day for a while at the Climatic Research Unit at UEA. It feels strange, as normally in this kind of situation I'm leaving a place potentially forever, but on this occasion it's only for six months, and then I'm back again for at least another year and a third (depending on when I get the PhD finished!)

    The intervening period, after the Christmas break in Geordieland, will be spent at the Met Office in Exeter. It will be quite a significant change in environment, so thoughts of both anticipation and apprehension reign. I have no regrets about choosing this tied studentship though- six months at the MetO will leave me with many important contacts and some good experience of working outside of the purely academic environment, plus as a meteorologist you can't really ask for a better company to provide this opportunity than the Met Office.

    However, be warned that I will have to be, er, quite tight lipped about certain things as the security is very high, so I'm told, because of the MetO still being part of the Ministry of Defence. Certainly the security clearance took a while.
  6. Thundery wintry showers
    On cold-related deaths, I argue that they should not be cited as a reason why people should prefer mild.

    Cold-related deaths reduce when, in isolation, we have a winter that is mild relative to the average for recent years. But when we have a succession of mild winters, people get used to a milder average, and less prepared for a given degree of cold than before. Thus, in the short term milder winters mean less deaths, but in the long term they do not.

    Interestingly it's similar with snow- snow causes a lot more disruption in London and Paris than it does in Moscow, simply because it is much rarer in those cities and so the residents are less prepared for it.

    This doesn't just have relevance to weather type preferences. It is also a strong counter to the argument that we should welcome global warming because it will reduce cold-related deaths in winter. In practice the evidence just doesn't bear this out.
  7. Thundery wintry showers
    [url="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7755641.stm"]http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7755641.stm[/url]

    I would not take that survey as gospel simply because three of its four indices only reflect the breakdown of so-called [i]family[/i] communities (marriages, people living in rented accommodation, being in it for less than a year). The one about living alone is a more complete, but still far from foolproof, measure of loneliness.

    This is strongly reflected in its point about increased student populations contributinig to loneliness. Er hello, most students are far from "lonely", in fact many students have the best social lives of anyone in the country! Most don't have families close at hand, but their networks of friendships are often much wider-ranging than is the case in traditional family units, who often socialise with a very limited circle of people.

    Social networking sites, society groups, employee lists etc. all provide communities that were relatively lacking 30 years ago. In addition it is much easier to travel to meet people than it was 30 years ago, even when the credit crunch is factored into account.

    In short, it's far from being as bleak as the article suggests because while traditional sources of communities have declined, new ones have sprung up to offset this.
  8. Thundery wintry showers
    After complaining that Norwich missed out on the remarkable October event (when even Cleadon got some excitement- lying hail overnight 30/31 October) could we be in for a spell where I make up for it big-time?

    Ever since I first came to Norwich, one of the things I most wanted to see was a full-on northerly outbreak from the Arctic in November, knowing very well that Norfolk lies right in the firing line of the showers drifting down the North Sea, and that the strong contrast between cold airmasses and the warm sea can generate very intense shower activity at this time of year.

    Unless I'm dreaming, I can see not one, but two such northerly incursions that are projected to happen within the next week by all three of the main models (ECMWF, UKMO, GFS). The first one looks like it may even give some snow with Norwich being a little bit inland, while the second looks good for a wintry mix (probably rain, hail and sleet) but with some exciting convection. There are precedents- similar setups on 17 November 1995, 17-18 November 1999 and 8 November 2001 not only brought wintry showers to Norwich, but also brought thunderstorms.

    Not surprisingly I'm getting those camera batteries charged up for the weekend. If this potential for dramatic weather is fulfilled I won't mind missing out on that remarkable October snowfall- as these November northerlies are what I've been waiting for.
  9. Thundery wintry showers
    I didn't get my weather records until today, so no post in the October stats thread.

    In any case, Cleadon's stats for October 2008, with deviation from estimated 1971-2000 averages:

    Mean Max: 13.3 (+0.2)
    Mean Min: 6.0 (-1.0)
    Mean Temp: 9.6 (-0.5)

    Highest max: 18.8 (10th)
    Lowest max: 6.1 (28th)

    Highest min: 11.6 (20th)
    Lowest min: -1.6 (30th)

    Air frosts: 2

    Days of thunder: 0
    Days of sleet or snow: 0
    Days of fog: 0
    Days of hail: 3

    Precipitation 32mm (57%)


    This was a dry sunny month- and the first dry month since May! There was a notable cold snap near the beginning of the month, with a max of just 10.3C on the 3rd, and a minimum of 1.6C on the 4th, while the weather was mostly dry with sunshine. The second week was warm with variable cloud cover, then a fairly mixed third week followed with near-average temperatures.

    The cold snap at the end of the month produced the lowest October maximum temperature in records going back to 1993- no previous October day has failed to reach 7C. Although the area missed out on the snowfalls that many other areas had on the 28th and 29th, some dramatic showers overnight 30th/31st produced large hail and a temporary covering of hail- much of this lasted through to dawn on the 31st from about the Tyne Tunnel westwards, but it melted at the coastal strip due to higher temperatures.

    Like in the 8/9 November 2001 cold snap I often refer to as a benchmark for dramatic weather in Cleadon, temperatures were all over the place. They would stabilise at 6-7C in clear intervals, but fell abruptly during hail showers, falling as low as 3.3C at one point.

    Shame I was down in Norwich and missed it all! But then again Norwich was by far the thunderiest place in the country in August, so you can't win 'em all I suppose!

    Edit on 16 November: it is also highly likely to have been the sunniest October since 2003, in common with much of the rest of the country.
  10. Thundery wintry showers
    I was pleased to see Obama get into power even though I have doubts about some of his policies. The alternatives were a continuation of the current status quo in the USA- economic liberalism and social conservatism- and in particular trying to shore up holes in the economy in the short term only to suffer greater in the long term. And I can't stand social conservative policies, so Sarah Palin was never an attractive proposition as far as I was concerned. For once, the USA are prepared to try something different, and while it may not work out very well, chances it will work out better than keeping the status quo would have.

    I have generally downplayed the significance of his skin colour, but it will certainly set a precedent that will reduce the chances of skin colour being an issue in future political battles in the USA.

    Related to my rant about authoritarianism a couple of blogs ago: it is not the fault of the "Liberal Lefties" that it is happening. Firstly, it is not the result of socialist ideologies. The idea that things that aren't work/health/safety-related are non-essential and disposable (meaning a large percentage of personal liberty) is an economics-driven view of the world, it is not left of centre by any stretch of the imagination.

    In addition, straight from the definition of authoritarianism, any policy that punishes the many because of the few is authoritarian. Not only that, some of these nanny state policies help to reinforce traditional values- which is usually branded conservative policymaking. Take the way men are unable to interact with kids these days without being accused of being sexual abusers, except if the kids are deemed to be in their families. That sort of double standard invariably has its roots in traditional family values.

    In short, this is not a "liberal lefties" problem, this is a problem stemming from conservatives- particularly social conservatives (now you see why I didn't want Sarah Palin in)
  11. Thundery wintry showers
    I have to say I've been very impressed with the recent changes to the N-W charts in the datacentre. Until recently, I have to admit, I tended to prefer the Wetterzentrale versions, but recently the team has been implementing changes to give the N-W versions the advantages that the WZ versions have.

    I particularly like the Northern Hemisphere orientation that in my view is better than the one at WZ- finally our set of charts are looking professional!

    And incidentally, some very tasty synoptics out in f1:
    [attachment=70569:f10000.jpeg]
  12. Thundery wintry showers
    Well, although there's been a pleasing absence of it on this forum this year, I see that the "ban fireworks except public displays" brigade are out in earnest among the population.

    [Disclaimer: I do not subscribe to the views below, by the way!]
    Viewing the world from the eyes of the Authoritarian, while we're on with it, we can also:
    [list]
    [*]Ban pleasure driving because of a few boy racers,
    [*]Incrementally force a slow but sure reduction of traffic speeds as close to zero as we can get away with because a few idiots drive too fast,
    [*]Ban computer games because a few idiots let them take over their lives,
    [*]Ban men from befriending children because a few idiots molest them,
    [*]Ban male-female friendships because of potential for affairs and stalking,
    [*]Ban social networking sites because men might use them to befriend women or children (see above two bans) or steal ID,
    [*]Ban personal cameras because a few idiots photograph public transport for terrorist purposes,
    [*]and so on.
    [/list]
    ...by extension of the same lines of argument as for banning fireworks. The benefits are outweighed by the downsides, given that human pleasure doesn't come into it because it's non-essential, and that only matters relating to work, health and safety are essential.

    Clearly, persecuting and demonising innocent people for daring to enjoy themselves is a sign of being hard on offenders, the issue of idiots going underground can be tackled by banning the alternative avenues of abuse (rinse and repeat until we have no recreational activities left to ban), and Ian's ridiculous suggestion of differentiating abuse from responsibility won't work because it isn't flawless (you can't always tell). Because it's not as if mass prohibition isn't flawless or anything.

    In addition we can tackle global warming by demonising the people that pollute. By making life as difficult for those evil motorists as we can (this fits in nicely with the authoritarian measures to legislate for the idiots who drive recklessly as well!) we can create a splendid balanced transport system at the lowest common denominator, alienate motorists, and achieve a 1% reduction in carbon dioxide emissions.

    Isn't authoritarianism wonderful! ... er... not?
  13. Thundery wintry showers
    At the University of East Anglia we have Wellbeing Week.

    Today, the main restaurant Zest appeared to cancel the roast dinner it normally provides on a Wednesday, providing "healthier" alternatives like rice, chicken, new potatoes etc.
    Now, since when was a roast dinner unhealthy, and burger and chips (which it had on offer yesterday, as is normal for Tuesdays) healthy?


  14. Thundery wintry showers
    It's been ages since I last updated the blog- so I will dutifully make amends!
    I had a pretty successful end to 2007, with getting the PhD underway, and getting back in touch with a large number of old schoolfriends through that notorious social networking site Facebook (a subject of heated debate at times on this forum). I even met up with some of them on 29 December, which considering that I was hardly in touch with anybody four months beforehand, was pretty amazing.
    Getting back into the swing of PhD work now- I think the real 'nitty gritty' work is upon me now, with plenty of data analysis and manipulation of UK rainfall data. However, as long as I don't have too many problems on the programming front (the main downside of PhDs generally), the work should be pretty interesting, making motivation reasonably straightforward.
    I'm also updating the weather records section of my website as it's poorly arranged at the moment and a bit cumbersome to update. Within the next month I should hopefully have all the years (1993-2007) up online again, though of course it will depend on how the PhD work goes.
    As for the weather, I enjoyed that little taster from the east on 3 January, but at the moment it's a westerly train. I quite welcome this sort of westerly weather when it first sets in, but grow tired of it when it persists for over a week, which looks likely at the moment, unfortunately for snow lovers living away from high ground in Scotland and Ireland.
  15. Thundery wintry showers
    In the current climate of negativity, I think it's worth noting that while a lot of negative things are happening and we should do something about them, there are also some very positive things happening.

    1. More recognition of environmental issues. I have to admit, I don't like the current orthodoxy of "pleasurable things are non-essential, work is essential", resulting in a risk of a general "cutting-down" causing decline of recreation and an even more work-oriented society, but at least we're understanding that the current maximum consumption isn't sustainable, and hopefully, in the future, better ways of cutting down will become accepted and implemented.

    2. More tolerance of individuality. 50 years ago, it was a lot harder to be an individual. Yes, there is still large scope for improvement, but there's a lot more scope for people- especially women- to be their own individuals, and lead their own lives, and make their own choices. The decline of things like racism, homophobia etc. are other good examples.

    3. More tolerance of friendships. These days, particularly in the younger generations, keeping in touch is becoming the norm, and forming networks of friends is also the norm. There is a greater tendency for people to support their friends and stand by them in the face of adversity, and it's less acceptable for families to control people's friendships. The rise of platonic male-female friendships also helps towards reducing the extent of sexism.

    4. A slow, but sure, move away from judging employees on the amount of time they sacrifice for work. The traditional "nine to five" culture is still going strong, but increasing numbers of employers are experimenting with things like allowing flexible working, work from home, and performance-related pay. I strongly believe that this kind of thing will reduce inefficiency and require less employee self-sacrifice to generate a given rate of productivity.

    5. England have a greater chance of qualifying for the World Cup next time around.
  16. Thundery wintry showers
    My view on the rising petrol costs is that if current trends continue, regrettably, we may miss a good opportunity.

    At the moment, a lot of people feel they "have" to drive (especially for work) primarily because there is no decent alternative. Provide a decent alternative, and many (not all, but many) of them will use it. There are also many instances of people driving around the corner just for "convenience" when they wouldn't really lose anything if they just walked or cycled. School runs can be shared or even avoided in some cases. In addition, if only there was more effort going into cleaner fuels, people would be encouraged to use them.

    Under the above kind of scenario I could see rising petrol costs helping to spearhead a mainly positive outcome. For the most part, the people who don't enjoy driving get the chance to cut down, while the people who enjoy driving get to continue doing what they enjoy, the environment benefits, and while certain people lose out (primarily people whose work or condition makes it physically near-impossible to use alternatives to the car) most people gain. More sociable use of cars, with people taking passengers with them who contribute to the cost of the petrol.

    Unfortunately, current trends are not in that direction. Instead, I can see recreational aspects of driving being marginalised. As it becomes more known that oil is becoming scarce and we need to cut down car use, in conjunction with the popular view that pleasurable things are "unnecessary", as in nobody "needs" to enjoy themselves, I can see pleasure driving becoming socially unacceptable. In addition, when an activity is frowned upon it's usually frowned upon most when it's pleasurable. The social and recreational benefits "don't come into it". So I expect little effort towards reducing the need for people to drive for work, school runs etc, leaving most people with no choice but to cut down on their recreational use of cars.

    There are other reasons for the emphasis on cutting out recreational aspects of driving. One is the policy of making driving unattractive relative to the alternatives in the hope that it might put enough people off driving to reduce traffic, which might make the alternatives more attractive (i.e. bring in the stick and hopefully the carrot will create itself). Plus the notion that restricting recreational aspects of driving is a necessary evil to legislate for the few idiots that abuse it (take current policy on speeding for example).

    The current trends might still give us more positives than negatives, but nothing like as positive as the scenario I envisaged above. Instead, it looks like it's primarily the people who most enjoy driving who will be forced to cut down, while the people who hate driving will have to continue driving because there's still no alternative. It reeks of a missed opportunity- though we aren't quite there yet. If we can somehow engineer changes to the current trend, there's still time to gravitate towards the former scenario.
  17. Thundery wintry showers
    I've had some discussions over on the environmnental thread where I argued for reducing the extent to which our society revolves around money and economics, but didn't qualify it particularly well (it may have sounded to some like I was arguing for abolishing capitalism, which is a common agenda among some environmental circles).
    I do think that in moderation, capitalism is a very good thing. But the problem at the moment is that most policymakers tend to consider only the economic perspective on issues, and ignore all other perspectives. For example:

    Developers building mass housing in the South East using supply and demand economics
    Greenfield sites and flood plains preferred over brownfield sites because it maximises short term profit
    Public transport companies providing minimum service for maximum profit
    Deliberately building appliances with a limited shelf-life to make people keep shelling out, maximising profit, consuming a lot of excess resources
    Councils reluctant to install energy saving streetlights until it will provide short term economic gain
    Pleasurable things are considered unnecessary, work is considered necessary

    What I'm thinking is that we need to see factors other than economics, including social and environmental factors, being assigned value to a much greater extent than they are nowadays. Even if money is "most important" it doesn't mean other factors should be ignored. The problem with relying upon free markets to bring this about is that, ultimately, they won't. They will continue to do whatever is most profitable. Thus, we probably need some kind of government incentivising for them to start changing emphasis away from being focused only on the one consideration.
  18. Thundery wintry showers
    I see a lot of posts, particularly in the Model Discussion, about "settled" weather. But what, specifically, is "settled" weather about? In my experience it means different things to different people- and most people's definitions don't entirely match the dictionary definition.
    Most of us, when we think of prolonged settled spells, imagine those weeks on end of clear blue skies, heat, absence of rain, and sunshine, like in the famous hot dry sunny summers, or the Mediterranean summers. But some people use "settled" as a synonym for "no rain", so perhaps a long dry spell like in August 2003, with a combination of dry sunny weather and dry cloudy weather, would qualify as a prolonged settled spell.
    Yet the dictionary definition of "settled" is, simply, not changeable. So, for instance, the two weeks of south-easterly winds, cloud and drizzle that Tyne & Wear experienced in March 1996 were a settled spell by that definition- as the weather hardly changed at all during those two weeks. Or even the week of near-continuous cloud and rain between 25 June-1 July 1997, again the weather hardly changed. Few call those "settled spells" though.
    There's also the consideration of whether you're looking at it from a weather type perspective, or synoptic perspective. From a synoptic perspective, rampant westerlies and fronts, with frequent changes in weather type, is generally regarded as a more "unsettled" pattern than a slack low or col bringing sunshine, showers and thunderstorms. Yet the daily weather is the opposite way round- the boisterous Atlantic often results in it being dull and wet, dry and sunny or dry and cloudy for several hours at a time, whereas with sunshine and showers, you often get frequent changes in the space of just one hour.
  19. Thundery wintry showers
    May Bank Holiday- and plenty of sunshine, if a bit windy. I'm coming up to having a meeting shortly with my PhD supervisor about the last batch of work I've been doing and the set of results I have, so hopefully some advances in the PhD soon!
    A bit of a drab Sunday/Monday coming up weatherwise, but there's nowt that we can do about it- it's the weather after all, and it does as it pleases. Some places do need the rain but I'd much prefer it if the rain moved through quickly and/or fell as thundery showers.
    Making some people at UEA that I could start to call 'friends' - but most of them are undergraduates!
    Also keeping tabs on the Arctic ice situation- looks pretty bleak actually, we could be in for a second consecutive year of record melt despite the fairly impressive winter recovery.
  20. Thundery wintry showers
    Okay, after a few rants, I thought it was worth redressing the balance with updates on my own life.
    PhD still continuing at a steady rate, while in the meantime I had another reunion with old schoolfriends back in March- a very satisfying experience. Then I enjoyed the storms and convection during the first half of April (I forgot to upload my subsequent photos of cumulonimbus cells and lightning- will do soon). I like to pop down to the Grad Bar on some evenings and get a game of pool in- the recent snooker championships have spurred me into a desire to play more cue-based games. (I'm particularly proud that I can play snooker/pool with both hands, though obviously not as well as Ronnie O'Sullivan).
    The current weather is quite amazing for the time of year, not exceptional in itself, but if current model runs are near the mark, its persistence will be unusual- temperatures widely into the 20s and mostly unbroken sunshine rarely lasts for more than a few days in May. I didn't feel as enthusiastic about this kind of weather in April 2007, after the abnormal warmth of the preceding half-year, but this feels different- we've had quite a varied spring so far with plenty of cold synoptics and wintry, showery weather, so a notably warm, sunny May would provide a suitable contrast with the frequent average to cool weather of March and April.
    Indeed, as I started taking weather records in 1993 (just after the remarkable May 1992), the only really summer-like May that I can vividly remember was that of 2001, although 2004 was also pretty good in Lancaster. But I really do think that May 2008 is likely to be every bit as exceptional as those of 1989 and 1992, maybe even more so.
  21. Thundery wintry showers
    We learn from an early age that life isn't fair, but learn to accept it, cope with it and be pleased that there are people out there who are much worse off than we are. But few ask the question, why isn't life fair?
    Life isn't fair partly because of random chance, unplanned events, or 'fate' or 'God' if you believe in that sort of thing, things that generally can't be helped, though their ill-effects can often be helped. However, a large proportion of unfairness is caused by human behaviour- something that generally can be helped.
    So, some perceived unfairness can be reduced in extent, but should it be?
    1. There's the "some people can have it, so why can't I?" type of unfairness. I contend that we should address some aspects of this type of unfairness- especially inequality of opportunity, by helping give the less well-off access to the same opportunities as the well-off. However, what we must be careful of is the dreaded lowest common denominator policymaking, where we address it by denying everyone access to the opportunities that only some used to have. That's a case where reducing unfairness isn't necessarily good.
    2. Then there's the "I want it, why can't I have it?" type of unfairness.
    Again, there are cases where I contend this should be addressed, and others where it shouldn't. If people want something that is likely to have harmful effects on themselves/others in the long run, or that is unrealistic, giving them it will create more injustice than it solves.
    But otherwise, why shouldn't they have it? In practice, the main reasons why they don't get it are because of the harmful behaviour of other people- or, the enforcement of unjust laws or norms that restrict responsible behaviour as well as irresponsible behaviour. Again, these issues need to be addressed, by getting the balance right between authoritarian rule vs. liberty to do what you want.
    The problem with us Brits is that we love to moan about issues, but the second someone suggests doing something about them, we get defensive, and we say "that's life, it's just the way it is" and "there are much worse things to worry about, like the starving African kids, therefore we needn't address them". Injustices don't annoy me in themselves, what annoys me is when injustices happen that can, and should, be avoided, but in practice people are resistant to the idea of avoiding them so they continue to recur.
  22. Thundery wintry showers
    So onto another topic where I have issues, the entitlement to have opinions.
    The main issue I have with letting people have their opinions, is that there's a line between letting them have opinions, and letting them force their opinions down everyone else's throats. It's like the question of how much a tolerant society should tolerate intolerance- if there's no onus on the intolerant to let people have their opinions, on the grounds that they're entitled to the opinion that nobody should be allowed an opinion but them, then what happens is that the intolerant people force their views on everyone else.
    There are circumstances where opinions are highly likely to be forced down people's throats. For instance, when people are debating laws and rules, or making committal decisions that impact upon others, by definition, a decision will often involve imposing an opinion on others. Or, when "opinions" are just beliefs that are widely accepted without question, whereupon many people will impose those beliefs on others without thinking, because they're accepted as givens. For instance, very few unjust laws or social norms are overturned by people just "letting their followers have their opinions". As an extreme case of where entitlement to opinions can be mutually exclusive, if someone's opinion is that it's okay to murder people, unless we suppress the person's opinion, the person will murder someone, thus imposing their opinion on others.
    There are all kinds of issues surrounding this. For instance, in environmental policy, it's increasingly widely accepted among environmentalists that the only way to solve global warming is to marginalise and alienate motorists, hoping to deter them from driving by making driving worse than the alternatives. If I try to challenge that view- even just with the purpose of making it known that other, potentially legitimate, opinions on the issue exist, I often get told, "let them have their opinions". Of course, if everybody just "lets them have their opinions", their opinions will be imposed on everyone through incremental changes in legislation. Then the hypocrites can come out with "yeah, but people force their opinions on others and that's life". So let's see now, I have to let others have their opinions, but have to accept it as a fact of life that their opinions will be forced on me?
    Tolerance is a great thing, but just as with freedom, it has self-limiting points- if we are too tolerant of the intolerant, the intolerant will force their views on others, by definition making the society less tolerant.
  23. Thundery wintry showers
    So, onto another of my pet rants, the idea that we should be of a two-season persuasion, one being "winter mode" where we're interested only in cold and snow, and another being "summer mode" where we're only interested in heat, sunshine and thunderstorms. So once a certain time arrives in spring, you're supposed to "move on" from "winter mode" to "summer mode", and if you show any desire for cold/snow, you are clinging onto the past instead of moving on.
    I've never agreed with the idea that moving on is about cutting old things out of one's life (for instance, the old family values saying that you need to periodically cut out old friends to make way for new ones). But this is something else, because spring is a time of year when traditionally, it can still snow, indeed in many regions snow is no less likely on Easter Day than it is on Christmas Day. So, basically, the argument runs that we should be cutting out all desire for something that still exists in the present, in order to "move on" to circumstances that don't apply for another two-three months. What part of 'living in the present' does this come under?
    Let's be fair here, people are entitled to not want cold weather or snow in spring, or indeed any time of the year. But I can't stand views like this:
    1. I don't want cold weather in spring.
    2. Therefore, all spring cold must bring miserable weather.
    3. Therefore I hope that any spring cold snap brings miserable weather, to show the stupid snow lovers who are clinging onto the past instead of moving on, that I am right, and cold weather in spring is useless. I don't care that it would ruin my ability to go outside more than sunshine and scattered wintry showers would, the most important thing is for me to be right and people who cling onto winter to realise that I'm right, and move on.
    Rant over.
  24. Thundery wintry showers
    Jan '84 was an exceptionally snowy month from the Midlands northwards, but quite mild with relatively little snow south of the Midlands. Certainly an interesting-sounding month.
    But I think January 1958 was even more interesting. It began with a rather chilly NE'ly:
    http://www.wetterzentrale.de/archive/ra/19...00119580102.gif
    Then the Atlantic came pouring in for about ten days, with some cooler NW'lys interspersed with mild SW'lys and some rough winds:
    http://www.wetterzentrale.de/archive/ra/19...00119580107.gif
    http://www.wetterzentrale.de/archive/ra/19...00119580109.gif
    Then an anticyclonic spell in the third week:
    http://www.wetterzentrale.de/archive/ra/19...00119580116.gif
    Then a remarkable northerly, assisted by a strong Greenland/Atlantic block, that persisted for a week and brought severe cold and heavy snowfalls from polar lows over much of the country:
    http://www.wetterzentrale.de/archive/ra/19...00119580121.gif
    Then an exceptional mild end:
    http://www.wetterzentrale.de/archive/ra/19...00119580127.gif
    We hear a lot about Januarys 1984 and 1987, and rightly so- those months featured some remarkable weather. But for me, the Holy Grail has to be January 1958, as it was the month that had everything.
  25. Thundery wintry showers
    I've been singing Facebook's praises over the last few months, as it's enabled me to get back in touch with a large assortment of people, some of whom I thought I'd never get in touch with again. But it's not all roses.
    Some idiots have been spamming the site recently, so they've brought in anti-spam filters. Which is all very well, but some of the spam filtering is punishing a lot of responsible behaviour. I got warned last night, presumably for one of the following:
    1. Posting twice on someone's Wall in 6 hours, in both cases in reply to their post,
    2. Posting two messages with vaguely similar content (the spam filter might have counted that under "repeated posts")
    3. Mentioning an application that I have (the other person was discussing it with me, but the spam filter may have assumed I was spamming the person's account by "advertising" it)
    I've backed up my contacts to cut my losses for if I do get banned, but it was a big scare to be threatened with a permanent ban for doing nothing wrong. However, it's perhaps more symptomatic of a general issue- you can't take any luxury for granted, because if a few idiots abuse it, blanket restrictions on it are likely to be deemed necessary because "that's life". However, I'd have to be unlucky to fall foul of this again, as it seems only a tiny percentage of legitimate users do so.
    If Facebook dies a death in the near future, chances are it will be because of an over-reaction against idiots. If it isn't through too much anti-spam control, it may happen due to idiots abusing it for identity theft (bringing about such stringent privacy control that it becomes useless for social netowrking), or it may be banned/severely restricted because a minority become addicted to it. Addiction is a genuine problem, but most people I know just use it to keep in touch with people and regain lost friendships, essentially as a more interactive/sociable alternative to just emailing them.
×
×
  • Create New...