[BLML] They won't believe you [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]

richard.hills at immi.gov.au richard.hills at immi.gov.au
Wed Jul 11 04:32:55 CEST 2012


Adam Wildavsky, 8th February 2010:

>>I agree, Lord Monckton is an immensely
>>entertaining speaker. I think you will find in
>>due course that his views on climate change
>>are dead on.

Sydney Morning Herald editorial, 6 June 2012:

[snip]

>various media spruikers have encouraged the
>public not to "believe in" climate change - as if
>climate science were some kind of religious
>dogma, a matter of faith or fashion or personal
>taste and not a rational appraisal of a large
>body of objective evidence.

[snip]

Richard Hills, 11th July 2012:

Merely because one is highly rational in one
field (e.g. Adam Wildavsky is a highly rational
bridge expert) does not necessarily imply that
one will rationally approach a different field for
which one lacks qualifications. For example,
one of my highly rational boardgaming friends
Won't Believe in the "large body of objective
evidence" supporting Darwinian evolution.

Adam Wildavsky, 8th February 2010:

>>BLML is not the place to discuss this, though.

Richard Hills, 10th February 2010:

I disagree with Adam's excessively narrow
parameters for debate on Blml.

One purpose of Blml is evidence-based
discussion of the Laws.

Zone 7 Law 70C example:

Declarer is in 7S with thirteen tricks so long
as spades (trumps) are not 5-0. He cashes
one round and says 'All mine' when both
players follow. He clearly has not forgotten
the outstanding three trumps and the claim
is good.

Richard Hills, 10th February 2010:

There is a significant difference between
three unmentioned trumps, as in the
above example, and only one un-
mentioned trump.

[snip of a blmler's unintentional cherry-
picking belief that for Law 70C claims 3 = 1]

Declarer "discovering the good lie of
trumps" after drawing two rounds may
normally (carelessly or inferiorly) believe in
a really good lie of the opponents' trumps
having broken 2-2, when in fact the trumps
have the less good lie of broken 3-2.

Lord Monckton, however, is an example of
intentional cherry-picking, one-eyed in his
entertaining but fallacious presentations. So
Lord Monckton therefore serves as a
relevant Awful Warning to those blmlers
who might be inclined to research only
evidence in favour of their arguments, but
completely ignore evidence against their
arguments.

Aldous Huxley, "Note on Dogma" (1927):

Facts do not cease to exist because they
are ignored.

--------------------------------------------------------------------
Important Notice: If you have received this email by mistake, please advise
the sender and delete the message and attachments immediately.  This email,
including attachments, may contain confidential, sensitive, legally privileged
and/or copyright information.  Any review, retransmission, dissemination
or other use of this information by persons or entities other than the
intended recipient is prohibited.  DIAC respects your privacy and has
obligations under the Privacy Act 1988.  The official departmental privacy
policy can be viewed on the department's website at www.immi.gov.au.  See:
http://www.immi.gov.au/functional/privacy.htm


---------------------------------------------------------------------

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.rtflb.org/pipermail/blml/attachments/20120711/3a0695ce/attachment.html 


More information about the Blml mailing list