Now on ScienceBlogs: A study that oversells massage therapy

ScienceBlogs Book Club: Inside the Outbreaks

Stoat

Taking science by the throat... climate, rowing, and misc.

Profile

Me My family and me. More...

Make sure you're familiar with the Comment Policy

Confused by my constant use of abbreviations? Then you need the Glossary

Search

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Archives

Blogroll

Other Information

Co-moderator of globalchange mailing list Subscribe to globalchange
Email:
Browse at groups.google.com
I've been using Google Reader recently, following the lamented death of Planet Fleck, and I suppose I have to admit its better. Here are some "shared items" if, for some reason, you want to read what I read.

« A child's garden of wikipedia, part I | Main | Cold and Dark again »

Cold and Dark

Category: misc
Posted on: January 8, 2010 8:47 AM, by William M. Connolley

Cold, isn't it? And quite dark too (is that the [[Equation of time]]?).

DSC_3880-snowy-path

But I'm rather enjoying this snow - it is clear and crisp, so far. I've only fallen off once.

[Update: Looks cold but lovely from above [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_depth/8447023.stm

]. Mind you, it is warm elsewhere]

DSC_3883-snowy-foot

There are sandals underneath that, in case you'd missed how hard I am :-)

Share on Facebook
Share on StumbleUpon
Share on Facebook

TrackBacks

TrackBack URL for this entry: http://scienceblogs.com/mt/pings/128775

Comments

1

Run into any freaked-out stoats? or how about this http://www.azstarnet.com/sn/fromcomments/324243.php?

[Hey that's... cool :-). No stoats but I did see a teensy little shrew run across the path. Hope it had warm boots on -W]

Posted by: thomas hine | January 8, 2010 10:55 AM

2

I'm staying at my parent's house, Easton's Castle, in South Dakota. It's a bright and sunny 26 degrees below zero (F) this morning, and we have had around 8 inches of snow. Like when I was a kid, I scooped out their 300-foot driveway by hand, and I'm sore as heck. The house in is in 20 acres of woods, so it's a beautiful Doctor Zhivago-like scene. No blonde, though. My poetry ain't good enough.

Posted by: JCH | January 8, 2010 10:57 AM

3

Most people would ski, but to each his own.

Posted by: carrot eater | January 8, 2010 12:09 PM

4

I've been seeing a lot of voles scurrying across the roads. (No obvious stoats in pursuit.) I've never seen them do this in warmer weather. Perhaps the salted tarmac warms them up.

Posted by: Vinny Burgoo | January 8, 2010 3:36 PM

5

Clive just fell once, and so did Stan :-(

Posted by: James Annan | January 9, 2010 5:47 AM

6

Hey, I figured out how to use
septic TM Stoat
with appropriate credit.
Now to see if it'll work at RC and Eli's and other blogs.

[I'm glad to see it - I insist on my trademarks being recognised. Don't forget I own "gone emeritus" too -W]

Posted by: Hank Roberts | January 9, 2010 2:48 PM

7

What with Gavin's inexplicable surge of politesse re Lindzen (noting that it moved Tom Wigley to post a refuting comment), you may find yourself censored at RC, Hank. But do try!

Posted by: Steve Bloom | January 9, 2010 3:44 PM

8

Lovely picture.

Posted by: george.w | January 10, 2010 10:32 AM

9

Speaking of cold and dark, who's this BBC guy?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/the_daily_politics/8443687.stm

[Looks like some ratehr crap guy in a suit :-). Hopefully this will stop them pushing their seasonal forecasts, which aren't suitable for public consumption (though they are useful for expert consumption) as they full well know -W]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/dailypolitics/andrewneil/2010/01/i_did_warn_you.html

Posted by: Hank Roberts | January 10, 2010 9:05 PM

10

They used to hide their seasonal forecasts away and label them as "Experimental". They don't do that any more, though the reliability hasn't improved AFAICS, and the forecasts are of the same type - eg beyond the ken of anyone in the media and, as you say, not really suitable for general public consumption. So why they pushed them more is a bit of a mystery.

[Alas, I think the answer is "because it is in someone's career interest". It gets you noticed, and if its all f*ck*d up, well, you can blame someone else -W]

Posted by: Adam | January 11, 2010 6:08 AM

11

"[Alas, I think the answer is "because it is in someone's career interest". It gets you noticed, and if its all f*ck*d up, well, you can blame someone else -W]"

Well, despite their short term forecasting having been largely very good this last month, in very difficult conditions, they're going to be remembered for the LRF - so something will probably change.

TBH, I reckon they should ban the press office from mentioning them, and also remove the link from the short term forecast pages. Then the press can't just churnalise them and would actually have to do a bit of work to report on them - thus removing any media mentions completely.

[I think they should just disband the press office :-) -W]

Posted by: Adam | January 11, 2010 9:51 AM

12

"[I think they should just disband the press office :-) -W]"

Well yeah, but let's try and keep our wishes somewhere close to reality, here. ;)

Posted by: Adam | January 12, 2010 5:47 AM

13

[i]"Hopefully this will stop them pushing their seasonal forecasts, which aren't suitable for public consumption (though they are useful for expert consumption) as they full well know"[/i]

I'm intrigued - please elaborate

Posted by: PeteB | January 15, 2010 7:26 AM

Post a Comment

(Email is required for authentication purposes only. On some blogs, comments are moderated for spam, so your comment may not appear immediately.)





ScienceBlogs

Search ScienceBlogs:

Go to:

Advertisement
Follow ScienceBlogs on Twitter

© 2006-2011 ScienceBlogs LLC. ScienceBlogs is a registered trademark of ScienceBlogs LLC. All rights reserved.