Tuesday, April 28, 2009

[merthyr tydfil] does it take the prize


I wonder how true this is:
I've just looked at a number of lists and the most consistently bad was Merthyr Tydfil. I can't see this, actually. The place seems to be a hotbed of discovery:

While testing a new angina treatment, researchers in Merthyr Tydfil discovered (purely by accident) that the new drug had erection-stimulating side effects. This discovery would go on to form the basis for Viagra.

Monday, April 27, 2009

[alaric] and the joy of visigothdom


Who can honestly say that at some time or other, he hasn't wanted to be a Visigoth? What a career move. Which one would you be - Alaric?

Alaric was the first barbarian to successfully capture the city Rome in 410 A.D. Although his troops spared most of the residents and the architecture (Alaric was a known lover of beauty and literature) they pretty well looted the place.

Interestingly enough, a vision of his some 15 years before had predicted that he would successfully capture Rome. After the capture, he traveled south with the intention of crossing over into Africa, but was hindered by storms along the Mediterranean coast.


His descendants, the Visigoths, migrated to the Iberian peninsula, and eventually became the Spaniards; an indication of their heritage lies in the fair hair and blue eyes of the Northern Spaniards. See also Stilicho below.

Now those guys really knew how to kick butt.

[alien abduction] and john e mack



BBC Magazine said this of Professor John E Mack:

[He] was an eminent Harvard psychiatrist, psychoanalyst and Pulitzer Prize winner whose clinical work focused on dreams, nightmares and adolescent suicide. In 1990, he turned the academic community upside down because he wanted to publish research in which he said that people who claimed they had been abducted by aliens, were not crazy at all. Their experiences were genuine.

Actually, what he said was: 'I have no way to account for them.'

Mack initially suspected that such persons were suffering from mental illness, but when no obvious pathologies were present in the persons he interviewed, Mack's interest was piqued.

As BBC mag quoted Mack:

"What are the other possibilities?" asked Mack. "I would never say, yes, there are aliens taking people. [But] I would say there is a compelling powerful phenomenon here that I can't account for in any other way. It seems to me that it invites a deeper, further inquiry."

One of the supposed abductees, Peter Faust said:

"Do I question my own sanity? Absolutely, every day, because the world says you're crazy for having these experiences. But if it was only me who had had intimate experience with female aliens, producing hybrid offspring, I would say I'm certifiable, put me away, I'm crazy. And that's how I felt when I initially had these experiences.

My wife thought I'd lost it. But then I began to look at the experience outside myself and realised that hundreds, if not thousands, of people reported that exact same experience. And that gave me sanity. That gave me hope. I knew I couldn't be fantasising about this."

Three things followed Mack's investigation of 200 claimed abductees:

1. He was sent a letter informing him that there was to be an inquiry into his research. It was the first time in Harvard's history that a tenured professor was subjected to such an investigation.
John Mack decided to fight back and hired a lawyer, Eric MacLeish. There followed 14 months of stressful and bitter negotiations.

Eventually Harvard dropped the case and a statement was issued reaffirming Mack's academic freedom to study what he wished and concluding that he "remains a member in good standing of the Harvard Faculty of Medicine".

2. He was killed by a car in 2004, in north London, shortly after leaving a Tube station. At the time he was visiting the city to deliver a lecture on his Pulitzer Prize research in 1977.

3. [He had] the support of Laurance Rockefeller, who also funded Mack's Center for four consecutive years at $250,000 per year.

Whatever one thinks about the alien issue, the problem Mack poses is that he was one of the most highly regarded tenured professors, his style was empirical and straightforward and his conclusions mildly stated.

His character can also be gleaned from one of his statements:

The extension of a new world view that derives from our experience of the interdependence and interconnectedness of all living things, together with a recognition of the fragility of the earth's ecosystems, will be an important step in the preservation of the planet.

But blowing the traditional Western mind is not enough. Leadership and action on behalf of life and the environment will be required. We will need to take risks and expose our vulnerabilities. Perhaps it has always been so, but I am struck by how many of the political and intellectual leaders I admire for their efforts on behalf of human life have spent time in prison.

Facing up to the established order, taking a stand with one's whole being, exposing one's vulnerability, and risking the loss of personal freedom all seem to inspire both leaders and their followers.

With a world view like that, no wonder his conclusions have sat uncomfortably with certain sections of society.

Friday, April 24, 2009

[barbarians] prepare thyselves, my friends

Herodotus of Greece wrote:

"Barbarians can neither think nor act rationally, theological controversies are Greek to them...Under the assault of their horrible songs the classic meter of the ancient poet goes to pieces...Barbarians are driven by evil spirits; "possessed by demons", who force them to commit the most terrible acts...incapable of living according to written laws and only reluctantly tolerating kings...

Their lust for gold is immense, their love of drink boundless. Barbarians are without restraint...Although generally they are considered good-looking, they are given to gross personal hygiene...They run dirty and barefoot, even in the winter...They grease their blond hair with butter and care not that it smells rancid...

Their reproductive energy is inexhaustible; the Northern climate of their native land, with its long winter nights favors their fantastic urge to procreate...If a barbarian people is driven back or destroyed, another already emerges from the marshes and forests of Germany...Indeed, there are no new barbarian peoples--descendents of the same tribes keep appearing."

(Herwig Wolfram, The History of the Goths, p. 6-7).

Thursday, April 23, 2009

[hr] and the mania for box ticking


There are certain occupations which are intrinsically unpopular.

Below was a typical summary of the prevailing attitude to HR around mid-2007, so I thought it might be time to revisit and see if it has improved any today.

1. They think you are a resource

Petroleum, water, lumber, and humans. One of these things is not like the others—unless, that is, you consult the HR department. They view you as a resource, and they are not shy about it.

2. Talking to them accomplishes nothing

While your meeting with the HR rep may be the closest you get to being heard, the fact of the matter is, he or she is probably someone who can’t change the landscape very much, if at all. The people who could do something about, the ultimate decision-makers, do not want to be bothered by a sea of personal stories.

3. No real understanding of you or your job

With a professed disinterest in the details of your job or your life and the complete lack of ability to do anything about either anyway, it’s not really surprising that the HR department makes little to no effort to really understand what’s going on in the trenches.

4. Inflexible policies and red tape

The policies of the HR department are designed to cover a ridiculously broad range of circumstances with one fell swoop. Making blanket statements about how much of a raise you can give someone, how quickly you can promote someone, and how to move an employee from one role to another laterally is just another step toward oversimplification and homogenization of human dynamics down into human resources.

5. They pretend to be on your team

“Our people are our key asset, everything we do is informed by our constant vision of teamwork and shared opportunity…” Well, it doesn’t take long to realize how far that is from the truth in most cases.

Jacquelyn Thorp Kinworthy, a professor at Cal State-Fullerton and CEO/founder of HR-Coach Products and Services found, in 2006:

1) Companies hire inexperienced and unqualified people to handle HR, but expect them to perform at higher levels than they are qualified.

2) Companies do not invest in HR as they do in other departments.

3) Many small to medium size companies have HR people that are strategic partners.

Comments included:

When looking for a top-notch program that would prepare me to be an HR leader, I found that there weren't many programs that were forward-looking. [Bob Filipczak]

Many HR people I know (and I am an HR person so I know a lot of them) have a very narrow perspective - they know HR but they do not know business. I believe HR people are better off with a business degree than an HR degree.


If HR can demonstrate and take ownership for the aggregate human capital investment of the business and show how the productivity and ROI of the investment can be improved...they'll have a lot of influence in the management of the company and be "at the table." [mahendrakumardash]


The majority of people in HR are so wrapped up in politics and diversity programs they have no interest or time for activities that add value to the company's bottom line. They are "policemen" and view employees with contempt … I follow the works of Jeff Pfeffer, Dr. John Sullivan and David Ulrich, but I see no evidence of their theories in practice in Canadian business. [Frank DiBernardino]

That was then, so has it improved? In the UK, with the Rise of the NVQ, requiring you to have a specialist qualification to even clean the floor or sweep the street, certain jobseekers I know have complained that HR is a closed club of box tickers.

This is understandable, as every guild in history has tried to guard its esoteric language and list of prerequisites for admission; in one of my own fields of work, education, Special Needs teachers are the most open manifestation of that little game. I don’t know about HR and can only go on what I read.

What this post needs is some input from the HR professionals themselves, putting us straight about the current state of play. Most people I know in the corporate world continue to undervalue this department, even seeing it as obstructionist and irrelevant, so it would be nice to read the other side of the story.

[england] this day is for you

Re-running last year's post, with some changes:



"In the early years of the last century socialists in England used to sing a hymn about their liberation from exploitation and under-representation: its title and opening line serves as the perfect envoi today. "England, arise! The long, long night is over!"

Labour might never govern in England again, which would serve it right, given the contempt it has shown for the English. It might well precipitate the end of the Union itself.

That was a process started in 1997 by Labour; and it has a logical conclusion of separation which would, once an English parliament were created, be clearly in sight.

The Conservative Party has its head in the sand on this issue, as on so much else: which is odd, given the sheer misery such a process would cause for Labour.

The Tories' prevalent and infantile cast of mind associates English nationalism with racism and other forms of evil.

Since the creation of an English nation would create an English citizenship equal to all who legally reside in that country, whatever their origins, such fears are groundless.

At the moment, the word "English" when applied to people is a badge of ethnicity; after independence it would become a badge of nationhood."


Some history


George was probably first made well known in England by Arculpus and Adamnan in the early eighth century.

The Acts of St George, which recounted his visits to Caerleon and
Glastonbury while on service in England, were translated into Anglo-Saxon.

Among churches dedicated to St George was one at Doncaster in 1061.


George was adopted as the patron saint of soldiers after he was said to have appeared to the Crusader army at the Battle of Antioch in 1098.

Many similar stories were transmitted to the West by Crusaders who had heard them from Byzantine troops, and were circulated further by the troubadours.

When Richard 1 was campaigning in Palestine in 1191-92 he put the army under the protection of St George.

The European Union is the new enemy


England has fought off aggressors for centuries - the Bonny Bunch of Roses was always a plum target, to Napoleon and Hitler and now to the EU Monster which appears certain to succeed. Let there be no doubts in anyone's mind that they are the new enemy.

As Robert Winnett, at the Telegraph says:

England has been wiped off a map of Europe drawn up by Brussels bureaucrats as part of a scheme that the Tories claim threatens to undermine the country's national identity.

Check the map for yourself:



This will not stand.

Last year's referendum call.


Today is the day the EU is defied and eventually the monster will be mortally skewered, as he always has been in the past.

England will once more rise to nationhood, the ancient counties resuming their rightful subordinate places in the whole.

England rattles no sabres and offers no hostility to other home nations as long as they take care of their affairs and leave England to take care of its own.

St Andrew's, St Patrick's, St David's and St Piran's days are also important in the calendar and are respected, just as ours is. [I personally am a friend of Cornish independence.]


Thank you again, Ginro

This below is, of course, Beowulf rather than St George


Nu sceall billes ecg,
hond ond heard sweord ymb hord wigan.'
Beowulf maðelode, beotwordum spræc
niehstan siðe: `Ic geneðde fela
guða on geogoðe; gyt ic wylle,
frod folces weard fæhðe secan,
mærðu fremman, gif mec se mansceaða
of eorðsele ut geseceð.'



A sweeter note

To leave you with, the Nature of being English, according to Tiberius Gracchus:

The story really isn't the point here though - its the individuality, its the eccentricity (in England's that's a virtue) - there is a line in the Lord of the Rings when Gandalf tells Frodo that what's worth fighting for is all the absurd Bolgers and Boffins and Bagginses- that's the same sense you get from Wallace and Gromit.

These two characters are crackers, they are mad, their lives revolve around inventions, cheese (particularly Wensleydale) and tea- but in some sense they are the essense of the whole of Western civilisation. Civilisation isn't just Michelangelo and Machiavelli, its Wallace and his efforts to get to the moon, its loving Wensleydale and its a dog knitting in a chair and rats with shades over their eyes, its merry eccentricity which is a value all to itself.

The absurdity of life is in many ways its essence - when we talk about freedom often we lose sight of the fact that freedom isn't just a political issue - its a personal issue as well.


To all English at home and abroad - greetings to you and may it be a happy day to remember. To our other friends - back soon.