(1232)(1303)
13. Moosh corner
12. The sad case of Casual Navigation
This follows on from Bach: Chaconne below … it’s about the relationship between content provider and viewer/reader, with me being both, so maybe I’m in a position to write on this.
Essentially, this chap whom I’ve occasionally posted, with animations of maritime issues, is calling it a day and has “sold his soul” er “channel” and here are some reactions:
(1123) Afternoon all => (1211)
11. And especially appalled at this
10. Appalled at this downunder
A real body blow … what a complete and utter *&£#£&* down there … what an appalling national atmosphere. She was the brightest light downunder … now gone from a mainstream journal … ditto with the pretend antiWoke GB News here.
9. Kathy Gyngell on grandparenting
… in her newsletter for TCW:
“Well, it was half term and, like lots of grandparents around the country, I’m the main helping hand. More than that, I wouldn’t give up time with my little grandchildren for all the tea in China. Working late into the night to get TCW ‘done’ after they’ve gone to bed is one thing; joining Jordan Peterson et al striding up and down the stage, telling me what I suspect I know already, is another.
I’ve been living out what my late husband called ‘tri-generational unity’, which is what conservatism means to me. Giving and creating that sense of belonging we all need which Roger Scruton identified as at the root of what it meant; intrinsic to that all important family identity which Richard Morrissey wrote about so brilliantly last week.
His analysis of the catastrophic impact of family collapse is spot on. If you haven’t read it, please do. It’s one of the most important articles we have published on TCW. It’s why children, left rootless and vulnerable, seek ‘that belonging in artificial digital communities’. It’s also the prime reason for the frightening deterioration of civil society. You wouldn’t think it needed explaining, but after the onslaught on family perpetrated by three decades of Conservative and Labour administrations, it does.”
There’s more to running this today than meets the eye. I’d just finished looking at the Casual Navigation vlog coming up in the next polit-post … more on that soon … but what is apparent is that some content has a shelf life.
Not politics itself, which changes day by day, hour by hour … there’s always material … but in, say, baroque music or jazz. When you take extant recordings, vinyls for example, then reduce them to those making it to youtube, then further reduce the number to “good” youtubes, then post the good ones regularly … it’s not so much the law of diminishing returns that kicks in but that we were going strong … then suddenly it all stopped, except in fits and starts, like girls on bicycles or ladies at lunchtime.
And what do we, the demanding public … demanding constant free entertainment … do once it dries up? We move on … I’m including myself in that, so feel the criticism is fair … but so is this thing we do fair … moving on. Rapacious locusts is too colourful a criticism … perhaps it’s more that there are only so many times I can run Zefiro Torna or in rock … Sultans of Swing. And in running posts, I’ve also been combing through content providers, poor sods, using their output and growling if it’s embedding disabled.
This predicament for content presenters is particularly pointed in the vlog Casual Navigation’s farewell in our next post here. There are two ways to look at it … his view v his readers … or maybe mutual understanding.
More soon.
(0944) Morning all. (1016)
8. Stop Press
7. DAD at 976
a) There was an “All$hu Akh£ar” moment today in the French city of Mulhouse during a demonstration in support of the Congo, where an Algerian mujahid went on a stabbing rampage…..
b) Using a Nazi salute (?) made by Steve Bannon at the CPAC convention as a pretext, Jordan Bardella [Head of Marine LePen’s party in Parliament}decided to give up on speaking…..
c) The French Council of State has just confirmed its closure of the right-wing TV channel C8, setting a dangerous precedent of state censorship…..
d) Deprived of power and majority for many months, Macron is trying to rebuild his image and regain his political legitimacy by taking centre stage…..
6. Steve at 976
Four: Allies Bluff, They Cannot Make It Without the US … Zelensky folds … Apple encryption … much more…..
Three: Patel … Hegseth … “CQ” Brown … much more…..
Two: Uke sit-rep … Duda dumps on Zelensky … much more…..
One: Pfizer and Moderna committed fraud … NZ Cv inquiry … silence doctors … much more…..
5. IYE
a. On archiving:
You can also save this way e.g. as I have just done.
http://web.archive.org/web/20250223093322/https://unherdablecats.com/bookmarking/
b. Ursula bin lyin’ related to Bozza Johnson? Who knew….
Makes sense….
https://mileswmathis.com/ursula.pdf
She could’ve passed for a Vril maiden when she was younger, jmo. 🙂
c. Uh huh
In the url
https://www.helleniscope.com/2025/02/21/pfizer-ceo-albert-bourla-is-booed-at-the-white-house-trump-smiles/
JH: If I miss any, chaps and chapesses, please just remind me … not as sharp as I once was.
(0810)… plus last day of my birthday fortnight. (0918)
4. Isilme’s birth fortnight card pour moi
3. A climate report
There are, imho, quite a few problems with this article in TDS:
… and the first is summed up in an old quote from the OUP:
”We believe a scientist because he can substantate his remarks, not because he is elegant and forcible in his enunciation. In fact we distrust him when he seems to be influencing us by his manner.”
-I.A.Richards, Science and Poetry, 1926, in the Oxford Quick Reference Quotations, Ed. Susan Ratcliffe, OUP, 1999.
The problems then continue in the linked article where the author, Chris Morrison, writes:
“Needless to say, there has been no mention of these finding(s) in narrative-driven mainstream media. In fact one Nature pre-publication peer-reviewer commented on the clear danger the paper presented to this important climate scares promoting the Net Zero fantasy. “I see this paper as potentially being used by deniers of climate change impacts,” the reviewer notes. “Consider if possible some rephrasing to put even more emphasis on impact rather than on burned area,” is the suggestion. In other words, concentrate on the emotional impact of individual fires, allowing legacy media, aided by junk computer modelled attribution studies, to concentrate on speculation and fearmongering rather than the facts. Another clear example of what might be termed Ultra Processed News, designed to make the individual consumer sick with worry and induce mass climate psychosis.”
The problem with that piece of prose, aside from being unclear on the goodies and baddies unless Chris defines which are which … is that he himself opened with similar:
“Sensational Findings Published in Nature Blow Politicised Wildfire Climate Scam Out of the Water”
He redeems himself to a point, quoting Anthony Watts, but the Milliband “fanatics” are simply going to trot out their own “scientists” …. hundreds of them … in less fanatical language, projecting “junk” stats as Chris writes and thus the classic adversarial camps scenario is set up, where only one side’s “stats” are used and no mention is made of false meteorological station readings, for example, which were widely reported in soc-med in the past two years.
On a different topic but the methodology by the “Demonrats” v ICE is similar … there’s always straight projection onto the whistleblowing side by the called-out side, as Vox Day mentioned long ago … to the extent that the key Deep State miscreants actually call themselves The Resistance … really? Resistance to what, pray tell? To “far-right, racist disinformation crims” (us), whilst the Deep State apparatchiks occupy the “middle ground” through the MSM, “defending our Democracy”?
An example of this use of the calling-out side’s, the whistleblowing side’s, own vocab store of expressions and projecting it back, was in a Gladstone quote in the OUP book quoted near the top:
”I absorb the vapour and return it as a flood.”
-W.A.Gladstone, on public speaking, in Lord Riddell, Some Things that Matter (1927 Ed.)
The methodology we prefer … but it takes huge wallops of ethics, a lack of fear of what we’ll find, plus a willingness to concede some points but then cite others counter to that … is to see the snippets of data and opinion all laid out on a large table after a brainstorming session by those of all persuasions … with varying theories of interpretation also laid out on said table …
… but I fear that that model is a product of wishful thinking … how long in that room before the headbutting starts between the orators of the two camps? Always two, note, on any given bone of contention, as if it must be, by definition, a zero sum argument, one side “demolishing” the other as Badenough and the Llama-Harmer imagine they do at PMQs, to the headshaking of Reform.