I got a pirate copy of ‘Up’. It was by Pixarrr.
You can buy vegetarian pasties in Quornwall.
Correction, it HAD been a great year, until everyone started sharing their smug photo montages on Facebook.
On this day in 1914, for a moment, soldiers in trenches lay down weapons, and called across the battlefield, “Do you know what day it is?”
Mum just said “you treat this place like a hotel”. Which she may regret when I give a lower score on Tripadvisor for ‘rude staff’.
My girlfriend says I like cookery programmes a bit too much. I’ve taken it with a pinch of salt, a sprig of rosemary, and a balsamic glaze.
A man has invented a machine purely to steal liquorice. It takes all sorts.
Awards ceremonies should always have a ‘Best Acceptance Speech’ category, just to pile pressure on the winner.
Seems odd Greece is holding snap elections over the economic crisis, yet still sent that big wooden horse as a gift to the IMF central bank.
What if John Lennon had opened a sexy lingerie shop? Imagine all the peep-holes.
Confuse future archeologists by burying your pets in elaborate military uniforms.
According to Malcolm Gladwell, you need to do something for 10,000 hours to become an expert at it. I’m now an expert at ‘eating turkey’.
Doctor Who’s most pretentious enemy was the La-Di-Daleks.
I read Malcolm Gladwells 2008 book ‘Outliers’ over Christmas and I found this aspect particularly interesting – the idea that what we call ‘Genius’ may come mostly from Hard Work – he estimates around 10,000 hours worth of it. You need to have talent and other advantages – it is not hard work alone – but it is hard work that enables you to shine out from the rest. It has caused controversy and a ‘vigorous’ debate. This article is his 2013 response to some of the criticisms, but it also restates the ideas quite neatly. I have included some of those in the links at the bottom of the post. It isn’t discussed in the book in those terms but it did remind me of Edisons famous quote above……
Complexity and the Ten-Thousand-Hour Rule By Malcolm Gladwell August 21, 2013
Forty years ago, in a paper in American Scientist, Herbert Simon and William Chase drew one of the most famous conclusions in the study of expertise:
There are no instant experts in chess—certainly no instant masters or grandmasters. There appears not to be on record any case (including Bobby Fischer) where a person reached grandmaster level with less than about a decade’s intense preoccupation with the game. We would estimate, very roughly, that a master has spent perhaps 10,000 to 50,000 hours staring at chess positions…
In the years that followed, an entire field within psychology grew up devoted to elaborating on Simon and Chase’s observation—and researchers, time and again, reached the same conclusion: it takes a lot of practice to be good at complex tasks. After Simon and Chase’s paper, for example, the psychologist John Hayes looked at seventy-six famous classical composers and found that, in almost every case, those composers did not create their greatest work until they had been composing for at least ten years. (The sole exceptions: Shostakovich and Paganini, who took nine years, and Erik Satie, who took eight.)
I think the outbreak of humour at her expense (see links below) recently might indicate that the US Right have started to see through their totally fallible heroine….hope so…………………
by Alan Wolfe August 19, 2012
With Paul Ryan’s selection as vice-presidential candidate on the 2012 Republican ticket, Ayn Rand was back in the news. We now know that Ryan tempered his enthusiasm for Rand when he realized that her atheism might prove problematic for members of his party. It has become clear that Rand was pro-choice and, like any hater of government properly ought to be, a civil libertarian. She would be disgusted by the Republican Party’s spending on defense (let alone Ryan’s support, during the George W. Bush years, for the Medicare Part D prescription benefit and TARP).
Yet as much as I like it when intellectuals receive attention, I still find myself uninterested in Ayn Rand. I do not care what she would have thought of the current scene. That those who invoke her name treat her selectively is of almost no significance to me. I have the sense, moreover, that I am not alone, at least among those in the academic world. Despite a flutter of interest, she has been mostly ignored.
Dietary fat is not as bad as you think….By Ari LeVaux December 5, 2014
With the salad days of summer behind us, and dark, cold days approaching, fat is in season. The holidays, and the accompanying onslaught of rich feasts, present a timely opportunity to think about fat. I used to assume we ate more fat in winter because our bodies wanted to pack on some extra insulation against the cold, but the evidence in support of this seemingly obvious notion—that dietary fat leads to weight gain—is being challenged. Beyond the relationship between fat and health, it’s beginning to look like other deeply held beliefs about fat might be wrong as well.
Long considered a threat to public health, some recent books, such as Big Fat Surprise by Nina Teicholz, and before that Good Calories, Bad Calories by Gary Taubes, have challenged the idea that dietary fat is the cause of obesity, heart disease and other associated ailments. Big Fat Surprise was lauded by the Economist (among other media), which called it 2014’s “most surprising diet book.” Both Teicholz and Taubes argue that low-fat and non-fat diets, rather than fat, are behind the rise in obesity and related diseases. And Teicholz makes a strong case that fat, especially saturated fat, is actually good for you. As we speak, many government agencies, like USDA, which have long championed low-fat diets, are tip-toeing away from their anti-fat stances.
Along these lines, a study published this November found that “dietary and plasma saturated fat are not related,” after a doubling of dietary saturated fat intake showed no significant increase in blood lipids. In other words, even if there is a link between blood lipids (aka fat) and heart disease, factors other than dietary intake of fat, such as carbohydrate intake, are what determine blood lipid levels. It should be noted that this study was funded, in part, by the Dairy Research Institute, the National Cattlemen’s Association and the Egg Nutrition Center, all of which must have been pleased with the results. But other studies have shown similar results.
A sample of what the Scriptures might look like if Jesus had actually been a conservative. December 23, 2014
This story was republished from Tikkun.
Editor’s Note: This was sent to Tikkun on email from Cath News and a column called “The Not-So-Social-Gospel.” It is a powerful reminder both of how far sections of the Christian world have strayed from the teachings of Jesus, and also a reminder of the tens of millions of Catholics who are deeply dedicated to social justice, peace, generosity and love (even though unfortunately they are stuck in a church whose leadership is more interested in demonizing gays and abortions and attacking American Nuns who take Jesus’ teachings seriously than in carrying on the progressive elements in Jesus’ gospel).
The Lazy Paralytic
1. When Jesus returned to Capernaum after some days, it was reported that he was at his home.
2. So many gathered around that there was no longer room for them, not even in front of the door; and he was speaking the word to them. 3. Then some people came, bringing to him a paralyzed man, carried by four of them.
4. And when they could not bring him to Jesus because of the crowd, they removed the roof above him; and after having dug through it, they let down the mat on which the paralytic lay.
5. When Jesus saw this he grew angry, “Why did you wreck my roof? Do you have any idea how much that cost to install? Do you know how many tables and chairs I had to make in my carpentry shop to pay for that roof? The reeds alone cost five talents. I had them carted in from Bethany.”