Just dreaming

Nothing much to write about today. I've just been working at home at letting my mind wander to more important things. Take a look at this to know what I'm talking about.

Yes, I do have one more thing, my bibliography should be up and running from tomorrow, and so should the details page (where I talk about or explain some of the issues I've mentioned, but with more detail and research)

Scrubbing

Here's some environmental thoughts from an article in National Geographic.

Scrubbing the skies to remove CO₂ seems to be one of the next great ideas currently being promoted in relation to climate change. It seems to make sense. If CO₂ as a major green-house gas and being direclty linked with human activity is one of the reasons for global warming, then it seems reasonable that finding a way to remove the excess of CO₂ from the atmosphere must surely be a good thing. The Nat Geo article in the August 2010 issue explains some of the ideas behind the proposed technology and shows a method currently being considered. Now while I agree with the idea a few alarm bells began to ring while reading this article and one of my biggest fears became reality in the final paragraph. I shall explain further.

The whole proposal seemed to be an excellent idea but my one big fear was that we would view this technology as a solution rather than part of a cure, and that because we could remove the CO₂, then we would not need to change our bad habits. I believed that surely somebody intelligent enough to come up with this technology would not be so short-sighted as to believe their ideas were sufficient, but I was wrong. In the final paragraph of the article are the words “jet travel would become guilt free again. We could keep our cars and gas stations - no need for a whole new hydrogen- or electric powered infrastructure. Subversive thought: We could keep our lifestyles. That’s historically what we’ve done”. Surely we should be looking to the future and making all the changes necessary, not looking to the past, or simply fixing each problem as it arises. Have greater vision and consider many possibilities, even consider how our actions may cause new problems in the future and do something about it now. Just because historically we have always taken one course of action, it does not make it right.

If you read the article you will note that they talk about removing the CO₂ and then we can do this with it, or put it there, or store it. Never at any point to they suggest that consideration has been given to the consequences of storing it in one place or another. What would be the long term consequences, would we be passing on new problems. The options they offer may well be viable, they may well be the only ones we have at present, but at the very least show that you are aware that we may be passing on problems for the future by solving our own current ones

Talking of National Geographic, here's another photograph.

And just for any surfers who haven't been surfing recently, i.e. me

Finally:

Look around the day, I’m alive on being around where waves come sailing with curls all flying, yeah I spend a lot of time inside the world of delightful rain and the whirling wind blows its song around the bay, and the wind knows my name.

Peter Howe “I’m alive”

Surf forecast

I have added a surf forecast for Cayton bay at the bottom of the page. This comes from the excellent Magicseaweed site, a site I suggest you take a look at, especially if you want any surf gear as their products and service are second to none. Plug over, now enjoy

My path

The surfer’s path is the path that I try to follow, not so much by choice but more through need. Read this statement and you may understand.

Surfers are dreamers. We ride waves through the day, then we re-ride them in our sleep and mind-surf  them in our daydreams. These little flashbacks keep us going through the flat spells and dry times inevitably encountered in “real life”

Fuelling these dreams are visions of perfection. Perfect waves are what we all want, and so we travel - monthly, twice a year, annually or whenever we can afford it. One thing is for certain, regular surf missions are essential.

However we do it, we surfers are doing what so many others can’t seem to achieve in their lives - we’re making daydreams happen - we’re hunting for our own kinds of perfection, and sometimes we actually find it.

Our paths might just be local, or they might take us across the world, but either way there’s no doubt we are some of the luckiest people around in a world full of beauty, diversity and maybe endless perfect waves.

Who knows what it means to be a surfer? Perhaps it’s something in our exposure and connection to the passions of nature that makes our lives wildly different from those of the uninitiated. One thing we know for sure: we want those perfect waves ... and those perfect moments we find along the way. Like the pilgrim or the holy man,we follow our own roads to our perfection. Call it what you will, it is known as the surfer’s path.

For those of you in the know, it is also a very good magazine, one that is based on sound environmental/sustainable principles, with some fabulous images.

Most surfers are very environmentally aware, maybe because of our close link to the movements and cycles of nature, and as such we all try to do all that we can. It is a great source of angst to many of us that the passion we have also happens to be a bad example of sound environmental principles i.e. travel (especially by air), surf board & wet-suit manufacture. But it goes beyond individual needs and many surfers passionately support environmental organisations such as Surfrider Foundation, Surfer’s Against Sewage and Save Our Surf

And just because

Finally an inspirational thought:

There is great happiness in not wanting, in not being something, in not going somewhere.

What sceptic?

Following on from my previous observations about deniers here is a quick look at some well known denial subjects and consideration of how much influence they may have. Again taken from the same Michael Shermer article.

Climate denial - when considering global warming the deniers tend to claim i) It isn’t real ii) It isn’t caused by human activity iii) It doesn’t matter. These people tend to call themselves climate sceptics, even when the majority of evidence suggest they are wrong. Unfortunately they can have a great deal of influence, especially when dealing with the non-scientific community (this will be discussed at a later date)

Evolution denial - the basis of this denial is that the theory of evolution is an atheist conspiracy to undermine religion. Again these deniers (creationists or intelligent design advocates) can be a  strong and active lobbyists group and exert a great deal of influence.

As an environmental scientist and atheist these are the two groups of denial that are of most interest to me. While I find their stance on such issues puzzling I must state that I have no problem with them having different views to my own. However I do have a problem with the fact that no amount of evidence or argument will ever change their view. Generally when dealing with such groups it is important to consider their starting point and what they are trying to achieve or protect.   Often denial is driven by an overtly political agenda. As an atheist I believe each person should be free to believe whatever they chose, and if a religious person came to me with proof of God then I would be forced to reconsider my position - until that time an atheist I shall stay.

One of the points made in this special report in an article by Debora Mackenzie suggests that many instances of denialism comes from people fighting a sense of loss of control and as a means to stand up to “experts”. She goes on to note that denials most futile ground is in areas where scientific knowledge must be taken on trust. This knowledge is often delivered by scientists, doctors or technical experts who can often appear to be arrogant to the lay-man. In the end however, the denialists will use the language of science to give their arguments more credence, but closer examination shows that the denialist has no solid foundation for such arguments, just anecdotal evidence and emotional appeal.

And now for something completely different:

Though we travel the world over to find the beautiful we must carry it with us, or we find it not

And talking of beautiful, how about this image (Nat. Geo.)

Invisible cats

Here's a quote from C.S. Lewis which helps to explain why I have so much problem with people who argue for religion.

C.S.Lewis noted that some arguments are impossible to refute. “A belief in invisible cats cannot be logically disproved.” he said, although it does “tell us a good deal about those who hold it”.

Now for something which requires no belief in religion or science to appreciate.

A superb image from Nat. Geo. (Go to the website for full credits)

Substitute

Not surfing today, too busy repairing my board, so I have found something to take away the pain.

video 1

Video 2

More thoughts later

Just in case you may be interested I am currently reading the Greatest show on Earth by Richard Dawkins

Yet more to read

I think the new offering from Stephen Hawking may well be worth a look and will offer enlightenment and provoke a lively debate. Talking of books I would also like to read: - Why belief matters: Reflections on the nature of science. E.Brian Davies. I suppose it will have to go on the list for the future

Well that's probable

Following on from the previous interesting question about the probability of the second child being a boy and the importance of specifying a day, here is the solution.

 First if you start from the assumption that you know I have two children and what is the probability that I have two boys.

I can therefore have - B/B, B/G, G/B, G/G

Since the question is about the probability of two boys the G/G option can be eliminated. That leaves three scenarios of which one is B/B, so the probability of two boys is 1/3

Now looking at the original scenario using the same technique. Lets call a boy born on Tuesday BTu. and list all the scenarios.

1)BTu + Girl on any day of the week = seven possibilities

2)Girl born on any day of the week + BTu = seven possibilities

3)BTu + boy born on any day of the week = seven possibilities

4)Boy born on any day of the week + BTu = six possibilities (the situation where both boys were born on a Tuesday was counted in scenario 3 and must be discounted as we are looking for equally likely possibilities).

Adding all probabilities gives 27 in total ((7 x 3) + 6), which represents all equally likely combinations of children with specified gender and birth day. Of these combinations 13 are two boys . Therefore the probability is 13/27.

Consider that 13/27 is very different from 1/3 where the key point about day of the week is not considered. This seems quite remarkable and apparently the rarer the trait specified the closer the probability approaches to 1/2

Quite interesting, especially if your a mathematician.

That has got to hurt

Some great wipeouts (well as long as it's not you).

And an equally amazing ride

Just in case you missed this

Hope these keep you amused for a few minutes. Remember, keep the stoke and pass it on.

Science and nature

In an earlier posting I mentioned the National Geographic and how good it is and just to illustrate that statement I have included a few photographs taken from their site. Here I urge you to remember that these images come from their publication and their photographers, they are not mine (for full credits visit the site).

Here's something else, While at work I came across a recent article in a national newspaper by Professor Brian Cox, which I found quite interesting. The nature of this newspaper tends to mean that the articles are a very distilled view of any subject, but interesting none the less.

Article titled - SCIENCE OUR REAL SAVIOUR

The article is intended to show that in our current century we need science to help provide solutions to some very real problems i.e. climate change, health needs of our ageing population and security of our energy supply. The problem that Brian Cox highlights is that in the US there is a very strong anti-science biblical literalist movement. As a result of this movement religious belief is being confused with science teaching in the classroom, giving an odd view of our planets history, science and the ability to solve our problems.

As an example of how this group impacts our views consider the following.

30 percent of Texans agreed with this statement “ humans and dinosaurs lived at the same time” and greater than half disagreed with this statement “ human beings, as we know them today developed from earlier species of animals”. This highlights the battleground between science and religion in the US with regard to evolution. In case you were wondering, and it should be something that crosses your mind, the survey was conducted by Texas University.

Now it seems that these ideas are beginning to find their way into teaching in UK schools.

The reason science should be embraced is that “it is not a belief system with an agenda”. It is a system of learning about our world, the problems we encounter and methods to overcome our problems. It is also the best system we have for exploration of our environment and as a result when it provides evidence or solutions it is the system we should listen too.

Gallery

For those of you who have looked at the gallery page sorry there are only a few pictures there at the moment. I shall put more on as soon as I have managed to scan them in, probably a week or two from now.

The other new pages added today are basically to provide more details for anybody wishing to take a more in depth look at things. The bibliography will cover items I have discussed as well as books/articles I have read or am currently reading.

Finally here are two more surfing moments 1) billabong pro. 2) longboard riding from Joel Tudor

Sceptical of New Scientists?

There was a good series of articles in a recent edition of The New scientist (15/05/10) looking at the idea of deniers (who often believe they are sceptics but generally are not). As someone who is trained in environmental science I believe in the rigures and processes of good analytical and theoretical science and that it can find answers - not all answers, certainly not with absolute truth and that element of doubt means we must be alert to the possibility of changing our ideas. I’m not saying science doesn’t get things wrong, or that sometimes it is mislead, but a good scientist (sceptic) will follow the evidence to find the truth, even if it means it contradicts their initial position. As there’s a great deal to consider on this topic I shall probably look at it over a period of time, otherwise this piece could be too long and boring for one reading.

To start with lets look at the broad definition given in the first article (by Michael Shermer).

Sceptic - carefully considers the evidence for each (idea/claim) and is willing to follow the facts wherever they lead.

Denier - has a tendency to look for and find confirmatory evidence for pre-existing beliefs and ignore or dismiss the rest.

Clearly the definition given here of a sceptic must include all scientific investigation and the good scientist. I’m sure that there are scientists who are so entrenched in their ideas that they fall into the category of denier, and it is those scientists that can be considered “bad” and who can find themselves inadvertently useful to other deniers.

Michael Shermer suggests that “denial is typically driven by ideology or religious belief where the belief takes precedence over evidence”. You could use the phrase “what I believe is true and everything else is a lie” In this case a sceptic would add “... is a lie, until proven otherwise”

I could carry on along these lines but I’m sure you see the point. If you don’t could it be that you are a denier, or is it that I haven’t made a very good argument to persuade you (such a sceptic)

Calling all water users

For those of you who regularly use the beaches, sea and other coastal locations, there is really no excuse for not supporting these guys

Mission SAS

Surfers Against Sewage (SAS) campaign for clean, safe recreational water free from sewage effluents, toxic chemicals, nuclear waste and marine litter. SAS also campaign to protect surf spots from environmental damage, negative impacts on wave quality and to safeguard recreational water users right of access

The chances are that if you make use of any of this countries superb coastal facilities, be they natural or man-made, then you have probably benefited from the work of these committed people

Check out their website and help out any way you can. Remember it's not just surfers and it's not just sewage

On a different note

I have recently subscribed to National Geographic magazine and I must say that I can only urge everyone else to do the same, if for no other reason than to view some of the stunning photography. Although I don’t necessarily like all the subjects of each photo, every one always seems to be vibrant, full of atmosphere and emotion - just stunning. The articles are pretty good also, there’s always a couple of gripping articles in every issue.

Finally here's something for fun. Mike Parsons on an extremely large wave, enjoy

Two boys, well how likely is that?

Here’s a little something I found intriquing in The New Scientist 29 May 2010.

“I have two children. One is a boy born on a Tuesday. What is the probability I have two boys?”

Initially you think “What has Tuesday got to do with it”

I will now tell you that Tuesday has everything to do with it.

I shall leave you to ponder this for a while and return to it at a later date.

Much admired Rugby great

I thought I'd include here a quote made by a man I met a few times and who was greatly admired by myself and many others. A great rugby player, a great all around athlete and a great man, someone who really lived every moment of life. It was very sad to read of his death recently.

I know that my dad met Andy Ripley at his beloved Roslyn Park rugby club and thought highly off him. My dad was the manager of our local Under 19 Rugby team at the time and after a match against Roslyn Park Andy came over to sit with the lads. He spent a lot of time with them offering advice and telling tales of his time playing for England and the British Lions in South Africa.

“Dare we hope? We dare. Can we hope? We can. Should we hope? We must, because to do otherwise is to waste the most precious of gifts, given so freely by God to all of us. So when we do die, it will be with hope and it will be easy and our hearts will not be broken.”

Andy Ripley

An inspirational quote most of which I agree with. The one part that I do have an issue with I shall talk about another time.

Todays surfing taster

Just a short piece of film to keep the dream alive until the next surf session. This is Laird Hamilton surfing some large waves. Yippeeeeeeeeee

Started me thinking

I have been really captivated by a book by Ron McLarty called Traveller recently. It is a library book that I picked up by chance and is not the sort of book I would normally read. I’m not saying it’s the greatest book ever, or even that the story is brilliant, but there is something about it that has made me think about the issues involved, especially about my own childhood, the place I grew up and the people I knew.

While I am talking about books take a look at my lists which represents books I really enjoy and others I wish to read. Some of these I will probably refer back to at some point as they have sparked some thought or idea that is worthy of discussion, or at least I believe so.

Anticipating good swell

Since this is my first entry I feel it necessary to give you one important piece of information about me - I am a surfer and if you must label me, I am a soul surfer. However I am also a surfer who currently resides inland and surfs on a limited basis. If you’re a non-surfer and wish to begin to understand how that feels then read this short transcript taken from the excellent movie Riding Giants, of a statement made by Stacey Perlata (Director). If you are a surfer then you’ll know exactly how it feels.

"If you applied the same amount of devotion to a religious pursuit do you think anyone would call you a religious bum?, probably not. When you consider that surfing is really more than anything else a faith, and devotion to that faith becomes paramount in your life, then there’s no such thing as a surf bum.

Think about everything that comes together to make a rare vintage wine. Think of the soil, the different fruits they mix, the wood they build the casks from for the ageing, all of that combines to make this rare vintage. Think about what it’s like for a surfer, he’s looking for that rare vintage as anything that comes out of burgundy, but he has to find it in the wild. Can you imagine if wine tasters had to hunt down their vintage? Imagine if they had to search the world and that the vintage existed for a mere few seconds and they had to be there at that moment to get the grape, squash it up to get it into that glass and drink it, that’s what surfing is like. When you’re looking for that vintage it may only exist for a few seconds at a time. So what does that do to even the lowliest surfer that surfs on the weekend when he gets the chance? It puts you in a constant state of anticipation. You are always anticipating the next swell, the next ride, the next wave".

Most of the time when I cannot surf I spend my time looking at surf reports, weather charts, DVD’s and books, or in my mind. More of this at a later date. That’s it for now, yours in constant anticipation JOHN