Comments for Polonius http://polonius.wordpress.com To thine own self be true Wed, 11 Nov 2009 15:16:58 +0000 http://wordpress.com/ hourly 1 Comment on About by Al http://polonius.wordpress.com/about/#comment-485 Al Wed, 11 Nov 2009 15:16:58 +0000 #comment-485 Hiya ... I stumbled on this oage by mistake. I was searching in Bing for Registry software that I had already bought when I came upon your site, I must say your website is pretty informative, I just love the theme, its amazing!. I don't have the time at the moment to fully read your entire site but I bookmarked it and also signed up for your RSS feed. I'll back in a day or two. Thanks again for a awesome site. Hiya … I stumbled on this oage by mistake. I was searching in Bing for Registry software that I had already bought when I came upon your site, I must say your website is pretty informative, I just love the theme, its amazing!. I don’t have the time at the moment to fully read your entire site but I bookmarked it and also signed up for your RSS feed. I’ll back in a day or two. Thanks again for a awesome site.

]]> Comment on Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi by A matter of semantics « Polonius http://polonius.wordpress.com/2009/08/20/abdelbaset-ali-al-megrahi/#comment-484 A matter of semantics « Polonius Wed, 02 Sep 2009 07:44:01 +0000 http://polonius.wordpress.com/?p=134#comment-484 [...] to distance itself from the Scottish government’s decision. If there is any truth to the conspiracy theory, the UK government almost certainly colluded in that decision, and I’m sure the US government [...] [...] to distance itself from the Scottish government’s decision. If there is any truth to the conspiracy theory, the UK government almost certainly colluded in that decision, and I’m sure the US government [...]

]]> Comment on Andrew Wakefield made it all up? by Polonius http://polonius.wordpress.com/2009/02/08/andrew-wakefield-made-it-all-up/#comment-477 Polonius Wed, 25 Feb 2009 13:33:27 +0000 http://polonius.wordpress.com/?p=109#comment-477 At best, Wakefield alleged a causal link where there was only evidence of coincidence. The only doubt is whether he was incompetent or a fraud. At best, Wakefield alleged a causal link where there was only evidence of coincidence. The only doubt is whether he was incompetent or a fraud.

]]> Comment on Andrew Wakefield made it all up? by childhealthsafety http://polonius.wordpress.com/2009/02/08/andrew-wakefield-made-it-all-up/#comment-476 childhealthsafety Fri, 20 Feb 2009 09:18:44 +0000 http://polonius.wordpress.com/?p=109#comment-476 It turns out journalist Brian Deer made it up:- "Sunday Times Journalist Made Up Wakefield MMR Data Fixing Allegation": http://tinyurl.com/djbtzq And he was helping the US Justice Dept sink 4500 US kids claims for vaccine damage compensation - what kind of normal journalist does that? Ans: none. "US Federal Court, US Justice Dept & The Sunday Times - More Questions Than Answers" http://tinyurl.com/ac5xkt It turns out journalist Brian Deer made it up:-
“Sunday Times Journalist Made Up Wakefield MMR Data Fixing Allegation”:
http://tinyurl.com/djbtzq

And he was helping the US Justice Dept sink 4500 US kids claims for vaccine damage compensation – what kind of normal journalist does that? Ans: none.
“US Federal Court, US Justice Dept & The Sunday Times – More Questions Than Answers”
http://tinyurl.com/ac5xkt

]]> Comment on Andrew Wakefield made it all up? by Liz Ditz http://polonius.wordpress.com/2009/02/08/andrew-wakefield-made-it-all-up/#comment-475 Liz Ditz Mon, 09 Feb 2009 04:22:58 +0000 http://polonius.wordpress.com/?p=109#comment-475 I've done another round-up post -- who is saying what about the Deer articles on Wakefield in the London Times. I've included this post. <a href="http://lizditz.typepad.com/i_speak_of_dreams/2009/02/11-years-on-wakefield-manufactured-data-showing-mmrautism-link.html" rel="nofollow">11 years on, Wakefield Manufactured Data showing MMR-Autism Link?</a> I’ve done another round-up post — who is saying what about the Deer articles on Wakefield in the London Times. I’ve included this post.

11 years on, Wakefield Manufactured Data showing MMR-Autism Link?

]]> Comment on Andrew Wakefield made it all up? by custom college papers http://polonius.wordpress.com/2009/02/08/andrew-wakefield-made-it-all-up/#comment-474 custom college papers Mon, 09 Feb 2009 00:45:47 +0000 http://polonius.wordpress.com/?p=109#comment-474 Informative essay. Informative essay.

]]> Comment on Andrew Wakefield made it all up? by Brian Deer Discusses Andrew Wakefield in the Sunday Times: Many Updates « Holford Watch: Patrick Holford, nutritionism and bad science http://polonius.wordpress.com/2009/02/08/andrew-wakefield-made-it-all-up/#comment-473 Brian Deer Discusses Andrew Wakefield in the Sunday Times: Many Updates « Holford Watch: Patrick Holford, nutritionism and bad science Sun, 08 Feb 2009 22:56:17 +0000 http://polonius.wordpress.com/?p=109#comment-473 [...] Polonius, however, sounds a note of caution about accepting the story, albeit this caution is grounded in former gaffes by the Sunday Times rather than a lack of confidence in Brian Deer: Andrew Wakefield Made It All Up? [...] [...] Polonius, however, sounds a note of caution about accepting the story, albeit this caution is grounded in former gaffes by the Sunday Times rather than a lack of confidence in Brian Deer: Andrew Wakefield Made It All Up? [...]

]]> Comment on On the buses by Assentia http://polonius.wordpress.com/2008/11/16/on-the-buses/#comment-472 Assentia Sun, 16 Nov 2008 22:18:50 +0000 http://polonius.wordpress.com/?p=97#comment-472 I envy you that reading. I've done an impressive amount of reading on trains to and from work, although my commutes were much shorter (2x7 minutes). Perversely, it's the part I miss most now that I'm not working. And the looks on other passengers' faces on seeing me read Forbidden History magazine at 6 AM. I envy you that reading. I’ve done an impressive amount of reading on trains to and from work, although my commutes were much shorter (2×7 minutes). Perversely, it’s the part I miss most now that I’m not working. And the looks on other passengers’ faces on seeing me read Forbidden History magazine at 6 AM.

]]> Comment on Briefly by Polonius http://polonius.wordpress.com/2007/12/03/briefly/#comment-455 Polonius Sun, 13 Jan 2008 09:13:45 +0000 http://polonius.wordpress.com/2007/12/03/briefly/#comment-455 Language is not mathematics, but when it uses numbers, it should be in an unambiguous way. (a) Does "half as much" mean the same as "a half more"? (b) Does "one and a half times as much" mean the same as "one and a half times more"? (c) Does "three times as much" mean the same as "three times more"? Gowers is clear that it does not. I'm sure I've seen one of Chris Maslanka's puzzles in the Grauniad in the past year or two that relied on understanding the distinction. Ambiguity is risky. In advertising, it could be fraudulent. Or it would except that nowadays it seems there is little ambiguity. Those who are aware of the distinction simply avoid the "more than" construction altogether. Only the ignorant use it. In case (a) above, I think most people would answer "no". In case (c), the ignorant would answer "yes". In case (b), I honestly couldn't guess what most people would say. If I read "one and a half times more", I wouldn't know what the writer intended. Language is not mathematics, but when it uses numbers, it should be in an unambiguous way.

(a) Does “half as much” mean the same as “a half more”?
(b) Does “one and a half times as much” mean the same as “one and a half times more”?
(c) Does “three times as much” mean the same as “three times more”?

Gowers is clear that it does not. I’m sure I’ve seen one of Chris Maslanka’s puzzles in the Grauniad in the past year or two that relied on understanding the distinction.

Ambiguity is risky. In advertising, it could be fraudulent. Or it would except that nowadays it seems there is little ambiguity. Those who are aware of the distinction simply avoid the “more than” construction altogether. Only the ignorant use it. In case (a) above, I think most people would answer “no”. In case (c), the ignorant would answer “yes”. In case (b), I honestly couldn’t guess what most people would say. If I read “one and a half times more”, I wouldn’t know what the writer intended.

]]> Comment on Religion in politics by Edward the Bonobo http://polonius.wordpress.com/2007/12/30/religion-in-politics/#comment-452 Edward the Bonobo Mon, 07 Jan 2008 16:45:07 +0000 http://polonius.wordpress.com/2007/12/30/religion-in-politics/#comment-452 One minor pedantic cavill...we can be reasonably certain that Blair's conversion was not 'Damascene'. It was widely rumoured that he had already converted years ago. As I've often said (and likely to you in person ;-) ), the scariest Blair moment was when he displayed religious-type thinking in his famous: <i>"Look...you can criticise me for being wrong [on WMDs], but you can't criticise me for believing I was right."</i> Sorry, but that's precisely the reason we <i>should</i> criticise him - for not making sure he was acting on the best possible evidence. One minor pedantic cavill…we can be reasonably certain that Blair’s conversion was not ‘Damascene’. It was widely rumoured that he had already converted years ago.

As I’ve often said (and likely to you in person ;-) ), the scariest Blair moment was when he displayed religious-type thinking in his famous:
“Look…you can criticise me for being wrong [on WMDs], but you can’t criticise me for believing I was right.”

Sorry, but that’s precisely the reason we should criticise him – for not making sure he was acting on the best possible evidence.

]]>