text:
What Mendel tells us about thinking

Find quietude. Observe whatever is around you. If it seems banal, discover it to be fascinating and mysterious. Ignore distractions, otherwise known as ‘everybody else’. Ask simple questions that puzzle you. Be patient in pondering them.

That is how I imagine Gregor Mendel might answer us today if we asked him: How  — I mean how! — did you achieve your stunning intellectual breakthroughs, on which we today base our understanding of biology?

Put differently: Let’s pretend that Gregor Mendel were alive today instead of in the 19th century, and that he were not an Augustinian monk in the former Austrian Empire but a wired and connected, über-productive modern man with an iPhone, a Twitter account, cable television, a job with bosses who email him on the weekend, etc etc.

Would this modern Mendel be able to achieve his own breakthrough in those circumstances?

So far in my rather long-running thread about the greatest thinkers in history, I’ve featured mostly philosophers and historians, with the odd scientist and even one yogi. But it occurred to me that Mendel belongs into that pantheon — not only for his thought but also for his thinking. I think he offers us a timely life-style lesson, an insight that fits the Zeitgeist of our hectic age.

So: First, a brief recap of his breakthrough. Then my interpretation how his life style and thought process made that breakthrough possible (and why ours might make such breakthroughs harder).

1) Mendelian genetics

Mendel was an Augustinian monk in what used to the Austrian Empire (and what is now the Czech Republic). He had an open and inquisitive mind and, as a monk, wasn’t all that busy, so he had plenty of spare time. He liked to breed bees. Then he began breeding peas. That’s right. Peas.

Peas intrigued him. (Would they intrigue you? What else does not intrigue you?) He found peas interesting because they had flowers that were either white or purple and never anything else. (Would you find that interesting?)

Mendel contemplated what peas could therefore teach him about how parents pass on traits to their offspring, ie what we would call genetics.

At the time, conventional wisdom held that the traits of parents are somehow mixed in their children. If parents were paint buckets, say, then a yellow dad and a blue mom would make a green baby bucket, and so on. (It’s interesting that nobody spotted how implausible this was: After several generations every bucket, ie every living thing, would have to end up mud-brown. Every creature would look the same. Instead, nature is constantly getting more colorfol, more diverse, with more and stranger new species.)

So Mendel, in the late 1850s and early 1860s, started playing with his peas. Pea plants fertilize themselves, so Mendel cut off the stamens of some so that they could no longer do that. Then he used a little brush and fertilized the castrated pea plant with pollen from some other pea plant. He thereby had total control over who was dad and who was mom.

He was now able to cross-breed the peas with purple flowers and the peas with white flowers. So he did. Then he waited.

Surprise #1:

Already in the next generation, Mendel could rule out the prevailing “paint-bucket-mixing” theory. No baby pea plants had lighter purple (or striped or dotted) flowers. Instead they all had purple flowers.

So he took those new purple-flowered pea plants and cross-bred them again. And again, he waited.

Surprise #2:

In the next generation, most pea plants again had purple flowers. But some now had white flowers. Wow! How did that happen?

Moreover, the ratio in this generation between purple and white flowers was exactly 3:1. Hmm.

Mendel kept doing these experiments, and kept thinking, and then inferred the simple but shocking conclusion:

  1. Each parent had to be contributing its version of a given trait (white vs purple, say) to the offspring.
  2. Each baby thus had to have both versions of every trait, but showed in its own appearance only one version, which had to be dominant.
  3. The other (“recessive“) version, however, did not go away, and when these pea plants had sex again, they shuffled the two versions and randomly passed one on to their offspring (with the other coming from the other parent), so that their baby again had two versions.

This looks as follows:

In the second generation, every pea plant has a purple (red, in this picture) and a white version, one from each parent, but since the purple is dominant, every flower looks purple.

In the next generation,

  • one fourth will have a purple from dad and a purple from mom (and look purple),
  • one fourth will have a purple from dad and a white from mom (and still look purple),
  • one fourth will have a white from dad and a purple from mom (and still look purple), and
  • one fourth will have a white from dad and a white from mom (and look white).

The rest, you might say, is history. With all our amazing breakthroughs in biology in the 20th century, we merely elaborated on his insights, in the process explaining the mechanism of evolution (Darwin, coming up with that idea at the same exact time, had no knowledge of Mendel’s breakthrough.)

In today’s language, Mendel

  • showed the difference between genotype and phenotype. (Your genotype might be white/purple, for example, but your phenotype would be purple.)
  • understood the basic idea of meiosis (the division of a cell into two haploid gametes — a sperm cell or egg with half of the mother cell’s chromosomes, randomly chosen),
  • described how two gametes then merge sexually to form a diploid zygote (ie, a cell with all chromosome paired up again, one member of each pair coming from each parent),
  • explained how some versions of the gene pairs, called alleles (such as purple or white), are expressed and some not, even as those not expressed can re-emerge in the phenotype in the next generation.

DNA, RNA, ribosomes and all that were merely detail.

2) How was it possible?

Let’s make ourselves aware, first, of what it must have been like for Mendel during these years (this is purely conjecture):

  • He got up.
  • He prayed.
  • Had breakfast.
  • Went into the garden.
  • Looked at the pea flowers for a long time.
  • Watered them.
  • Took a break.
  • Watched the peas some more.
  • Thought about them.
  • Dozed off for a nap.
  • Woke up and had an idea, still inchoate in his mind.
  • Went to bed.
  • Thought about it some more….

You get the idea. Not exactly stressful. Few interruptions. Lots of waiting (how long is one generation of peas anyway?).

He was, we would say, switched off. He was not multi-tasking, he did not have adrenaline coursing through his veins as he answered a text message while watching a video stream while writing a Powerpoint …

Compare his time with his pea plants to Einstein‘s time at the Bern patent office, where he was utterly underemployed and could easily have been bored, but instead did thought experiments and had his “miracle year”.

Or compare it to Isaac Newton‘s time after had to leave the action of Cambridge (because plague broke out) and returned to the isolation of his family farm with nothing to do except watch apples drop from trees….

Or compare it to the time when Gautama Siddhartha (aka the Buddha) withdrew from all action and sat, just sat, under a tree, with the birds pooping on his head until there was a pile of guano on his hair, with his flesh melting from his bones because he was too deep in concentration to eat…..

Lesson #1:

Good stuff can happen during downtime (even if you didn’t volunteer for it).

Corollary: Can good stuff happen during uptime? You may have to take time out to be creative.

Lesson #2:

Be amazed.

Corollary: Don’t assume the things and people in your daily life are boring.

Lesson #3:

Turn the devices off.

Corollary: Distraction not only kills people, it also kills thought.

Lesson #4:

Be patient.

Corollary: You can’t breed peas in internet time. Nor novels, scripts, songs, paintings…

Lesson #5:

Look for the simple.

Corollary: The more bewildering the complexity observed, the simpler the solution.

(See also: Gordian knot.)

Lesson #6:

It doesn’t have to be complete to be original.

Corollary: It took us a century to explain the process Mendel grasped; an idea is good even if it “merely” starts something.

(See also: Incompleteness theorem. Mr Crotchety’s favorite — need I say more?)

Lesson #7:

Don’t expect the world to get it right away.

Corollary: If it took us a century to understand Mendel’s breakthrough, we might take a while even for yours. 😉

56 thoughts on “What Mendel tells us about thinking

  1. What a timely post. As I watched the halftime show, I was wondering what would happen if someone crossed the Black Eyed Peas with the Red Hot Chili Peppers. How many generation would it take to get Red Eyed Chili Peas?

  2. WOW!!! and what!!!! Wow!!! I am confused at first.
    I am confused with thought vs thinking and bees vs peas. Not to mention ‘the more bewildering the complexity observed’….. I don’t know about the solution being simple!!! Well I guess it should 
    Hmmmm!!!! Would peas intrigue me? Let me think….!!! Sure…not just because they have flowers but those are hidden in a pea pod is what would intrigue me.
    Oh yes…!! I really am intrigued by the paint bucket family!!
    Aaah!!! Those were the good old days…(I am sure I was there), so carefree and plenty of time to think….(about what….have no idea) with no multitasking just thinking, watching apples fall and just thinking, let the birds poop on the head while thinking….
    What did we achieve so far…bottom line… we still need to think more.
    Don’t you think?

    Excellent post!!. It really made me think 

    Thank you Andreas.

    • “…I don’t know about the solution being simple!!!”

      Crikey. Did I make it sound complex? It takes a lot of words, but the basic idea is elegant and simple. (Not “easy”, necessarily, just simple.)

      Thanks for … thinking! 😉

    • Hi Andreas,
      Yep…thinking…that is one thing I rarely do. As the lesson #3 states…”Distraction not only kills people, it also kills the thought.” too many distractions, hence no thinking due to dying of the thought.
      Talking about simplicity from complexity or vice versa……
      As someone once put it, “A man who does not think for himself does not think at all.” This sentence may seem complex but in reality it does not make sense to make it complicated. It is way too simple. Yet we make it complicated. Just because we can. 🙂

      If a man does not think, then he does not think for himself.
      If he does not think for himself then he does not think at all…
      If a man cannot think for himself, can he think for someone else?
      If he can think for someone else does that count as thinking?

      Why do people think too much?

      Alright, my brain is getting heated right now with all this thinking.
      As Buddha once said “What we think…we become”!!
      I am afraid I have become senseless.

      I look forward to your next amazing post. I love this one 

    • @Aruna

      Regarding “A man who does not think for himself does not think at all.”

      Is simply (you did want “simply”, didn’t you?) “Don’t let others think for you.”

      Or, as my mother often said “If Jimmy jumps off a cliff, would you do it too?”

  3. Alexander Pushkin (really, really great Russian poet) was quarantined in Boldino (not a happening place) for three months in the fall of 1830 during a cholera epidemic. He wrote. A lot.

    A poor man’s Macdowell.

    • Andreas, the long Russian winters necessary downtime explain most of great Russian novels imo: Tolstoy, Dostoevsky, Pasternak, Solzhenitsyn etc.. They took Russian winters to be written (and unfortunately Russian winters to be read.)

  4. Mr. C’s ears must be burning.
    it’s the third time today his name has been invoked. perhaps you already knew that.

    as for your topic, my mother has often said the reason for so many actors and singers coming from the midwest (specifically Akron) is because there was nothing else to do but create.

    lesson #6 deserves a “track back” to richard’s most recent post “time” – a thought experiment.

    • Poor Akron. I don’t even know it (isn’t that where tires come from?), but now I want to not go there.

      Gotta ask my wife about your mom’s midwest theory. She’s from there….

  5. Very interesting but a little disconcerting when you think about typical behavior today. Lessons 1-6 are somewhat out of favor and possibly downright frowned up on some circles, i.e., your competition will come up with the next killer app if you aren’t working 24×7 to beat them. Some people would view Lesson 3 as heresy and the entire system has engineered Lesson 4 out of existence. Every investment of time, money, resources needs a payback and the payback has to be now.

    And I love Lesson 7. If the world doesn’t get it, it’s not marketable, so forget about it.

    Sorry if I appear cynical.

    • I like your cynicism. Maybe that was my point, actually. We frown upon the conditions that used to make us human and creative. In my previous beat, I used to have to hang around the Googleplex and places like that. Allegedly, it was meant to be a creativity factory, with bean bags and foozball and this and that — oh, and Google’s 20% time (ie, you can spend 20% of your time working on anything you want). But they’re all busy distracting one another and “brainstorming” (Mendel did fine without brainstorming), and conference calling, and what not. And, I can’t help but notice, Google has NOT been terribly creative of late.

      (By contrast, the story of how Larry and Sergey STARTED is actually rather similar to being a pea garden…)

    • Fitting. I quite like the image of MPs walking to the House of Commons to vote.

      Oh, and up pops an alternative image: The Magna Carta … being tweeted to King John….

  6. This post fascinates me at various levels. I’m often upset about modern fast pace or harsh competition in companies that can kill concentration (problem being, once you compete you’ve got to keep dancing.)

    Allow me some reflections.

    When in 1989 the Berlin wall crumbled down West Europeans were literally invaded by East-Europe musicians who were better, cost much less & were profound in ways we had forgotten and which reminded us of 19th century slow-paced life. Basically, they had lived in a sort of hibernated, stuck society where ‘downtime’ was kind of a norm.

    If someone loves classical music pls listen to Konstantin Scherbakov’s piano playing (he’s from Barnaul, Siberia): you’ll get a ‘feel’ of how depth and calm may be expressed in music. I can well imagine what a small town life in today’s Siberia can be (!): more boring a place possibly than Mendel’s laboratory, which after all was located in Vienna, the centre of the Austrian Empire.

    On the whole, I believe there must be some link between relaxation and creativity.

    There’s been a lot of studies on the scientific discovery process. I’m sure you know about the three Bs law: Bed, Bath and Bus, which appear to be those idle-mind situations where great discoveries are favoured. I’ll build-up on this with an anecdote.

    I remember this Roman top advertising agency where, at the end of the 80s, extremely well-paid copywriters and art directors were walking around in robes or catching the sun on a very elegant terrace overlooking Parioli-district-haute-bourgeoisie Rome. I was puzzled at the time but I later reflected on how ideas actually may come out brighter this way since, as it has been observed, they are often presented ‘suddenly’ to us when we are relaxed (Eureka!) and not when we are actively striving for them (true for remembering things as well btw: the more we strive to remember, the less we succeed: don’t TELL me this lol).

    Probably Buddhist meditation (or any meditation) with its proven effect upon creativity works much in the same way.

    • With your recommendation, I’m listening to Mr. Scherbakov right now (while making dinner and drinking wine and looking at the mail and blogging…). Thanks for the tip. The cats are feeling it.

    • Re the three Bs: In America they don’t have buses. Bath, bed and bumper-to-bumper would work.

      Archimedes was in a bath when he Eureka’ed.

      Now you got me thinking: when do I ahve my ideas? Do I even know that I’m having an idea when I’m having one?

      Relaxation: Utterly crucial to creativity, I would think. At a brain chemistry level. You need different neurotransmitters (vis a vis the glucocorticoids beings poured out during stress) to make new synaptic patterns, otherwise known as “ideas”.

    • Mr C, you were quick. I advice also Beethoven’s symphonies played by him (via Liszt’s excellent transcriptions): it may sound weird, I know, but they are excellent, like totally new musical adventures. Also Godowsky’s Bach’s piano transcriptions: excellent also.

      Andreas, I wondered if you knew anything about the Buddhist meditation / creativity relationship. I only read a few things here and there.

    • @MoR: Re Buddhist meditation and creativity: I saw a spate of studies a few years ago showing that meditation does cause the brain to “fire” at lower frequencies. So it changes the brain physically. But I’ve not seen any studies as to whether that then makes these relaxed brains more creative. “Creative”, of course, is a slippery term to construct an experiment around….

      Anecdotally, though: I usually write better after I do yoga.

    • @Andreas

      That you write better after doing yoga is fascinating. I asked because some time ago I read about some experiments and dialogues scientists had with the Dalai Lama. I guess it was the Mind & Life Institute, where scientists together with the Dalai Lama explored the effects of contemplative training on human behaviour. But I didn’t have time to proceed any further.

      It should be here, although I don’t know if it is serious research or not: http://www.mindandlife.org/

  7. I think the comments (and your own analysis, Andreas) are as interesting as the results Mendel found. But I also think the story says something about focus. Let’s call it an “art” because we have not yet clearly defined it, analyzed it, and labeled it a “science” or a “discipline” by itself. Even though Mendel did his prayers, studied a couple of other things (I am sure more than just “a couple”), and advanced up the hierarchy of his order he kept returning to the peas.

    Mendel shows us that the human brain is quite capable of multi-tasking over an extended period of time. That one can take a bit of curiosity and follow that to a conclusion even while following other bits of curiosity as well.

    For some reason, I was reminded of the Desiderata poem. Or the admonitions to “be still and listen” I have heard throughout my life. The stillness allows one to contemplate.

    I am also reminded of a habit of some writers to keep a pad and pen/pencil by their bed so that they would be able to write down a thought that came to them during sleep (or, more likely, as they awoke).

    • Focus: yes, the habit or discipline of staying on a chosen course long enough to see whether it leads somewhere interesting. Focus and patience might belong together. We today want results too quickly, so we “switch” focus, which is a euphemism for losing it.

      Pen by the bedside: Doesn’t work for me. I decided a while ago that any idea I might have is worthy my attention only if it reappears spontaneously.

  8. Did Mendel just have his hierarchy of needs truncated? Maybe he didn’t have the slightest desire to make little Mendels. Because of this, ironically, he could think clearly about gene propagation. That’s why he didn’t skip breakfast, too.

    So, let’s suppose Mendel did NOT have those wandering-mind desires. This would have done two things; (1) free up A LOT of brain power, (2) make being a monk MUCH easier.

    So he became a monk.

    Because he was a monk, he probably had great (eternal?) job security and no commute. He never had to drive to soccer practice. So add three more things; (3) he didn’t need a mortgage, (4) he didn’t have to spend time talking to Bank of America, (5) he didn’t need a car.

    You get the idea. All the trouble starts with wanting a little pea of your own. If people stopped procreating, we could make some real progress.

    Do you think Olivia Judson still loves me?

    • First of all — and I admit I cannot prove this — I have a hunch that Olivia Judson yearns for you at a deep and unacknowledged level. In a dark, lower-chakra kind of way.

      Second — and I explicitly exclude Mendel from this comment — are monks known for truncated hierarchies of needs? As I recall — and I don’t just mean the superb breweries they left behind — they lived quite proactively through their lower chakras.

      Maybe Mendel was just breeding peas to catch a break….

  9. Monks were very busy from medieval times onward. They were quite the horse breeders and did a brisk business in 12th-century France. Today, a number of monasteries also raise and sell dogs. I am wondering if our notions of monastic life are accurate–that is, that being a monk is like being a yogi. Do you know?

    Just finished reading The Ash Wednesday Supper by Giordano Bruno, who as you may know, left the monastery in Nola to become (in his own mind) “the Nolan,” his alter ego who promoted Hermeticism in Italy and Europe. Bruno’s ideas germinated in the monastery. Bruno was burned at the stake in Rome in 1600, though.

    • Oops, I meant that comment to be yet another reply to Cheri.

      On a completely different note, I recently figured out the guy who wrote that Nietzsche intellectual biography you read (Julian Young) happens to teach philosophy at the university I attend. I’m a philosophy (and economics) double major, so now I feel a little extra motivation to take one of his classes. I hear he’s a Pantheist.

  10. Francis Crick, in his autobiographical “What Mad Pursuit,” tells this story about his former Nobel-winning boss’s need for gardening downtime:

    “The current Cavendish Professor was Sir Lawrence Bragg (known to his close friends as Willie), the formulator of Bragg’s law for X-ray diffraction … Bragg was one of those scientists with a boyish enthusiasm for research, which he never lost. He also was a keen gardener. When he moved in 1954 from his large house and garden in West Road, Cambridge, to London, to head the Royal Institution in Albemarle Street, he lived in the official apartment at the top of the building. Missing his garden, he arranged that for one afternoon each week he would hire himself out as a gardener to an unknown lady living in The Boltons, a select inner-London suburb. He respectfully tipped his hat to her and told her his name was Willie. For several months all went well till one day a visitor, glancing out of the window, said to her hostess, ‘My dear, what is Sir Lawrence Bragg doing in your garden?’ ”

    Notwithstanding all of the instances of thinkers doing their best work while enjoying a respite from intellectual society—Heisenberg at Heligoland, Schrodinger on a romantic getaway, Alfred Wallace in the Malay Archipelago, Thoreau ruminating at The Pond—thinkers generally crave connectedness, gravitate towards centers of learning, and prefer, at most, to alternate between isolated and stimulating environments.

    Nor was Einstein intellectually isolated in Berne. He sought the company of fellow students, was married to one, was a member of his derisively-named “Olympia Academy,” worked on both Special and General relativity with Michelangelo Besso, who he lured to the patent office, and Einstein credited for making “several valuable suggestions” regarding Special Relativity.

    So why was Einstein uniquely creative during his Berne years? Perhaps in part because, as a non-academic, he felt that he had little to lose? His career at the Swiss Patent Office would not likely be derailed by some errant idea he might publish in the Annalen der Physik. Mendel similarly had little to lose, but his genuine isolation ultimately worked against him: it wasn’t until sixteen years after his death that his plant experiments became instantly iconic.

    • “‘My dear, what is Sir Lawrence Bragg doing in your garden?’ ”

      I love that story.

      You make two great points: To be creative, we ALSO need to feel connected (not in the digital or gadgety but in the human way). And perhaps we need to feel we “have nothing to lose”, ie we need to be accepting of failure.

      I guess my meditation on mendel was more simple: let’s eliminate distraction in order to “go deep”, to “get into the zone”. I don’t imagine that Mendel was socially cut off.

      Regarding your story about Sir Lawrence: It reminded me of antoher great story I heard somewhere about an eminent black judge in the South.

      One day he was gardening in his own yard. A white lady in a big car pulled up and asked out of her window how much he charges for this kind of work.

      Oh nothing, said the judge. I just get to sleep with the lady of the house.

      The white woman sped off.

  11. Andreas, isn’t all this quietness sort of disquieting? Are we to believe that Mr Mendel really has been as quiet a character as you’re picturing him? Praying, pondering, watching peas grow and taking a nap? Can’t you imagine him feverishly walking up and down the path between his pea lots figuring out some unexpected outcome; laughing heartily during supper with his brethren; quickening his pace to his shed in the morning to inspect his seedlings?
    He must have been young and eager, once, and he must have been simply human, as well.

    • Well, you’re reminding me that I should probably try to find out what he was really like. I don’t know if there is a good biography of him.

      In short, we don’t know. Which is why I said “conjecture”.

      But “feverishly walking up and down the path between his pea lots”? I cannot imagine that. He was at it for so many years, after all.

    • I believe I can speak with some authority on the topic of Austrian character in general, and the description of Mr. Mendel as taking turns between pondering, watching his peas grow, and taking naps rinks perfectly authentic to my eyrs.

      Austrians are laid back, patient, and they love to cross stuff. As you can see, I just crossed rings with looks and eyes with ears, and within only one generation I got rinks and eyrs.

      A few years ago, I inserted two batteries of different brands into my remote to see how this would alter my TV-viewing experience over time, relative to the years before where my remote had been powered by two batteries of the same brand. Even though, thus far, I haven’t been able to detect any difference, I’m not exactly “feverishly walking up and down” my living room. When the change comes, it’ll come. Or maybe it won’t. All I can do is wait and see.

      Nothing unusual about such attitude. Just very Austrian.

    • Andreas, I just read wikipedia on Mendel. His portrait shows a proud and ambitious man, a man of authority.
      Gregor Mendel
      I see he became abbott of his monastery and kept this position for over a decade, until his death. He had an argument with the secular branch of authority about taxation. He didn’t budge for all those years. He must have been of a rather stubborn character.
      As an abbott, he can’t have been taking naps when it pleased him. I think he had neither the time, nor the inclination for taking naps, nor would he have been sitting by quietly watching peas grow. As the master of the House, the man of ideas, he would have instructed his brethren to tend his precious peas and do as he saw fit.
      I grant you, it’s quite a bit of Hineininterpretierung, but I also noticed he – as a boy at his ancestral farm – had to cope with an older and a younger sister, so he must have developed a strong personality. 😉

    • Cyberquill
      I bet you’re right on the typically Austrian disposition, but Mendel wasn’t of Austrian stock, though the place of his birth was situated in the then Austrian Empire.
      From Wikipedia:
      Mendel was born into an ethnic German family in Heinzendorf bei Odrau, Austrian Silesia, Austrian Empire (now Hynčice, Czech Republic), and was baptized two days later.
      Now, a German from Silesia, that’s quite a different cup of tea. Don’t you think so?

    • You mentioned stock, so you probably mean a different cup of soup, not tea.

      Anyhow, the very same Wikipedia defines “ethnic Germans” as those who are considered, by themselves or others, to be of German origin ethnically, not necessarily born or living within the present-day Federal Republic of Germany, holding its citizenship or speaking the German language.

      Since Austrians speak the German language, they fall under Wikipedia’s definition of ethnic Germans. And Silesia, at the time, used to be located within the Austrian empire.

      Case closed. I must get back to my batteries now.

  12. @lagedargent:

    I now read the same Wikipedia article on Mendel (how sad that we should be using it as our main source). And I came to a very different conclusion:

    Mendel did his pea experiments between the ages of 34 and 41.

    He was promoted to abbott later, at the age of 44.

    The sentence in the Wikipedia piece that gives it away is the following:

    “After he was elevated as abbot in 1868, his scientific work largely ended as Mendel became consumed with his increased administrative responsibilities, especially a dispute with the civil government over their attempt to impose special taxes on religious institutions.”

    This would prove my point: He made his breakthroughs while he was (relatively) undistracted and unstressed.

    Once he had responsibility, his creativity was suffocated under what we would today call a mountain of paperwork. Death by conference call, as it were.

    • Look, I had no intention of spoiling the party. Your list of seven stands unchallenged. I only had an inkling of Mr Mendel not being the dopey monk you suppose him to have been. I’m still unconvinced by the points you bring up.
      I think he was a man of vigorous disposition and with a German “Tüchtigkeit”. Why was he made an abbot in the first place? Those were difficult times for the Austrian Empire. It kind of disintegrated after its defeat by Bismarck in 1866. Was Silesia annexed by the Prussians? Four years later, Bismarck defeated the French Empire as well and stood at the cradle of das Reich in Versailles. Rome, and the archbishop of Silesia(?), must have looked for a strong character to run the affairs of the monastery of Brunn, some one who wouldn’t bow to the new Prussian, i.e. Lutheran, administration. And Mendel didn’t disappoint them. He kept haggling for over ten years.
      But in the meantime, did that make him less creative? I doubt it. Look at that ironic smirk around his lips. He had these Prussians raw for dinner, and having finished with his peas, apparently, he started a new project: bees, which had intrigued him from childhood.
      This man was thirsty for knowledge, he couldn’t desist from learning. Certainly not a ‘Biedermeier’, he was a 19th century scientist, full of optimism and endeavor. His position as an abbot suited him well under the circumstances.

      By the way, Bismarck, wouldn’t he be a fitting candidate for your hero list? Only a “Junker”, he steered the fate of Europe for half a century, and kicked off the welfare state.

    • Ah yes, that’s the character in “Human Stain” with a white phenotype but a black genotype who gets into trouble for etc etc.

      I would add, though: “Race” is not a trait like a pea plant’s flower color. We don’t even know what it is. Probably thounsands, or millions, of proteins interacting to give slightly different characteristics along a broad spectrum. Each protein is coded for by one gene, so we’re talking about unspeakably many alleles interacting in unspeakably many permutations….

  13. Richard Feynman on Teaching (from “‘Surely You’re Joking Mr. Feynman!’ Adventures of a Curious Character” by Richard Feynman):

    I don’t believe I can really do without teaching. The reason is, I have to have something so that when I don’t have any ideas and I’m not getting anywhere I can say to myself, “At least I’m living; at least I’m doing something; I am making some contribution” — it’s just psychological.

    When I was at Princeton in the 1940s I could see what happened to those great minds at the Institute for Advanced Study, who had been specially selected for their tremendous brains and were now given this opportunity to sit in this lovely house by the woods there, with no classes to teach, with no obligations whatsoever. These poor bastards could now sit and think clearly all by themselves, OK? So they don’t get any ideas for a while: They have every opportunity to do something, and they are not getting any ideas. I believe that in a situation like this a kind of guilt or depression worms inside of you, and you begin to worry about not getting any ideas. And nothing happens. Still no ideas come.

    Nothing happens because there’s not enough real activity and challenge: You’re not in contact with the experimental guys. You don’t have to think how to answer questions from the students. Nothing!

    In any thinking process there are moments when everything is going good and you’ve got wonderful ideas. Teaching is an interruption, and so it’s the greatest pain in the neck in the world. And then there are the longer periods of time when not much is coming to you. You’re not getting any ideas, and if you’re doing nothing at all, it drives you nuts! You can’t even say “I’m teaching my class.”

    If you’re teaching a class, you can think about the elementary things that you know very well. These things are kind of fun and delightful. It doesn’t do any harm to think them over again. Is there a better way to present them? The elementary things are easy to think about; if you can’t think of a new thought, no harm done; what you thought about it before is good enough for the class. If you do think of something new, you’re rather pleased that you have a new way of looking at it.

    The questions of the students are often the source of new research. They often ask profound questions that I’ve thought about at times and then given up on, so to speak, for a while. It wouldn’t do me any harm to think about them again and see if I can go any further now. The students may not be able to see the thing I want to answer, or the subtleties I want to think about, but they remind me of a problem by asking questions in the neighborhood of that problem. It’s not so easy to remind yourself of these things.

    So I find that teaching and the students keep life going, and I would never accept any position in which somebody has invented a happy situation for me where I don’t have to teach. Never.

    • Wonderful passage from a wonderful man, Jim M.

      (As an aside, somebody burned a DVD for me with grainy old lectures of Feynman on it. A masterwork of humor and insight. Insight is best delivered in a bun of humor. That’s another big topic, I guess.)

      I totally agree with Feynman’s sentiment above. My guess is even Mendel would agree. (I don’t know what sort of interaction he had during the pea years).

      There seems to be a key distinction between the dumb distractions we have today (“Where r u? LOL”) and the simple but unconsciously profound “distractions” by Feynman’s students:

      One sort takes you away from deep thought and serendipitous insight, the other sort leads you toward it. How might the latter do that? There were articles on that recently. Apparently, we learn and ideate through memory. And students’s questions demand the teacher’s recall in different permutations. As the teacher’s memory works to deliver the answer, the teacher himself understands something new….

  14. Monastic leisure well spent with the ratio of attention to effort well in favor of attention.

    His respectful presence with his eye and his own thought makes me like him intensely.

    The article was like a piece of cake with cream and a strawberry on top. Thank you.

Leave a Reply to Luke Carlson Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s


Content-Type: application/http; msgtype=response

WARC-Identified-Payload-Type: text/html

WARC-Type: response

text:
HallowLink! Scary puzzle game!

HallowLink! Scary puzzle game! APK

HallowLink! Scary puzzle game! APK

1.26 FreeSimone Mapelli ⇣ Download APK (44.66 MB)

Halloween puzzle game for the Dark Night!! FREE!! Great graphics and music!!

What's HallowLink! Scary puzzle game! APK?

HallowLink! Scary puzzle game! is a app for Android, It's developed by Simone Mapelli author.
First released on google play in 5 years ago and latest version released in 6 months ago.
This app has 289 download times on Google play and rated as 4.44 stars with 9 rated times.
This product is an app in Casual category. More infomartion of HallowLink! Scary puzzle game! on google play
Halloween!! Are you frightened by the dark?!? No ?!? Cool !!
Because this Halloween night is the night where all the monsters are around, and deads come out from tombs !! Enjoy in your Halloween frightening night challenging your friends in this creepy monsters puzzle game !

Clear the grid before time runs out , matching the same monsters and scary Halloween things together.
Link up along a free path with 3 straight lines maximum.
Use hints and shuffles buttons on the top left when you are stuck.
Very easy !!

And more :
* Astonishing Halloween graphics and creepy Halloween music for the best scary mood and involvement !

* Fun gameplay with 3 challenging levels : easy, normal, hard Halloween night!

* Share your score through social app and challenge your friends!

* Suitable both for kids and adults

Remember, to blast monsters, linking is possible only where the path is free, and with no more than 3 lines.
This a match 2, connect 2 type of game, link the same Halloween card and you delete them from board.
Connect monsters and other scary things lurking around Halloween nights, in scary and abandoned courtyard or ghost house!!

So play ...and survive to the dark Halloween night !

Enjoy and have fun!
insta :
fb :
web :
tw :
mail : [email protected]

warcinfo:
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2022-33
publisher: Common Crawl
description: Wide crawl of the web for August 2022
operator: Common Crawl Admin (info@commoncrawl.org)
hostname: ip-10-67-67-91
software: Apache Nutch 1.18 (modified, https://github.com/commoncrawl/nutch/)
robots: checked via crawler-commons 1.4-SNAPSHOT (https://github.com/crawler-commons/crawler-commons)
format: WARC File Format 1.1
conformsTo: https://iipc.github.io/warc-specifications/specifications/warc-format/warc-1.1/


text:
a room with a view

This may well be one of the first posts that I have ever posted anywhere that does not include a photograph. Which is strange because that is what I do, I photograph things incessantly and then post them. Oh, and when I talk, and write, I sometimes ramble a lot before getting to the point.

More recently, I decided that I would like to write more.

And to write better.

My first concerted effort to do so was taking part in Writing 201 Poetry. And now, here I am taking on what feels like a more intimidating challenge, Writing 101.

So this, my first contribution, is a response to Day Two, written and posted on Day Three and featuring “a room with a view”.

The room, the view, in question, was so special to me that I not only photographed it several times, I took out pencil and paper and sketched it.

The use of the room was the gift of a friend at a turning point in my life. So, for that reason alone the room acquired substance beyond the confines of its walls.

And what walls they were, a building of whitewashed stone. Approached by climbing a short flight of stone steps from a cobbled square in the centre of a small village on a rocky promontory overlooking the sea. The sea over which the sun set each night.

A simple room, two chairs by the window. Stone floor. Stone walls.

A window flung open to allow the sea breeze and the sounds of voices in the bar below to drift up and swirl softly around the small space.

A room in which, each day, I ate simply and well. Fresh crusty bread, ham, tomatoes, local grown olives and a glass or two of red wine.

A room with little in the way of furnishings. But what there was, functional, clean and comforting.

A room from which I first glimpsed a precious view.

Not the sea, not the sunset, not the villagers at the bar, not the coffee shop, not the model being photographed on the stone steps, not the tourists passing through.

The view from this room was far more precious.

This room, gave me a glimpse into my heart, my life.

A room with a view.

(for wordpress writing 101 – day two)

26 thoughts on “a room with a view

  1. I loved this post. Your description of the room and your drawing made me want to step into that world. It is exactly the kind of room I have imagined going to to write. Amazing 🙂

    Liked by 1 person

  2. Can I tell you I love this!? Simple drawing and simple words combined to present a most wonderful color image in my mind. Andy Townend: photographer, poet, writer. Yes, that sounds right.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply to loisajay Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s


text:
Creating goals for 2019 and reflecting on those from 2018:

Looking back on my goals for 2018, I can say that I didn’t knock them all off my list, but that’s how it always goes, isn’t it? Maybe not, maybe you’re much better at this than I am. But I’m still proud of my half finished list, because a lot happened this year that wasn’t on my list, so I still feel like I came out ahead.

  • More time on hobbies, less time online: Check! But could use to do even better at this. I still spend too much time online.
  • Read the entire bible: Opps. I started strong and then faded out.
  • Be more aware of what I’m eating: Check! My diet has been so great this last year, really unrecognizable from 2017.
  • Being a better friend: Half check? I did better some months than others.
  • Read more than 30 books: I read about ten, but to be fair they were all over 600 pages. That counts, right??
  • Finish writing two novels: I finished one! Still not bad!
  • Wean myself off sleeping pills: Check, haven’t taken one in months!

Now for my upcoming goals for 2019:

  • Plan a wonderful wedding fit for my upcoming marriage: There is going to be a whole lot of wedding planning this coming year, because we’re getting married the first weekend in September! I know this is going to happen, so maybe it shouldn’t go into my goals, but having as little stress as possible throughout the process is a big enough goal in itself.
  • More time of hobbies, less time online: Let’s add it right back on to the list. There is a lot of room for improvement even though I’ve already improved on this a lot!
  • Start barrel racing again: Getting back into the sport I loved has always been something I’ve talked about, now that I’m no longer in school and finally well enough I think this spring would be perfect to get back into it!
  • Read more than 20 books: I lowered my number a bit, maybe this one is a little more realistic for a busy year.
  • Buy a house: I’ve been saving for this over the years, but I still have a lot more to do to prepare for buying a home and making it my own. Also, we have to find one!
  • Send birthday cards to everyone: I sent out Christmas cards this year (which I haven’t been the best at in the past) and I wrote paragraphs in each one of them. Getting mail with a sweet letter is always the best feeling. I want to do that more often. One of my close friends is sending all her friends cards this year so I thought I would join her!
  • Pray more: I was doing really good before things got so busy. I need to make more time for God.
  • Finish a novel: Or two, I’m not picky, but at least another one. One of the hobbies I want to spend more time on is writing.

9 thoughts on “Creating goals for 2019 and reflecting on those from 2018:

  1. live_a_life_less_ordinary says:

    Interesting! Are you willing to share? I’ve recently started a second blog of episodic fiction, even though I put my first blog on hold. It seems like I get my best creative ideas when I’m the busiest. I’m not really sure how much I’m going to do with this, though. We’ll see.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s


text:
4 Explanations Why a little Business Needs the expertise of Management Consultants

Many small business proprietors are skilled multitaskers. They’re so involved in doing everything on their own they aren’t seeing the necessity to generate management consultants.

Small business proprietors might be passing up on lots of advantages of getting an administration consultant available. Listed here are the 4 why you should employ a business management consulting firm.

1) Accessibility right expertise in the proper time

While you might be skilled enough to handle the operational problems of the business, sometimes getting an expert’s guidance can definitely ease your stress threshold. Instead of tackle the operational issues alone, you are able to depend on handling proper issues with support. Concentrating on the daily tasks of running your business can obstruct of enhancing your business and growing the consumer base.

An administration consultant functions as the management support team. Your internal managers tend to check out their business challenges subjectively. Getting another-party talking to firm brings a brand new perceptive and objectivity for your business challenges. You may expect a goal look at your business needs and key regions of immediate focus while eliminating most of the distractions. Many business proprietors take advantage of the aid of consultants to assist to produce methods to proper issues. Outdoors consultants can frequently be less expensive than making use of your internal staff.

2) Support existing teams through growth

When planning, an issue that business proprietors and managers should ask themselves is, “Have i got the required sources and capacity easily available to handle business growth? Could I deliver at that time?” Should you don’t have the proper systems to provide the services you provide to support new business, then you definitely risk the chance upsetting new clients and worse, you may also ruin your status by disappointing existing customers.

Hiring new internal staff for proper initiatives might not be optimal. The price connected with onboarding, training and managing full-time employees could be extensive. For this reason companies hire business talking to teams to navigate the elevated workloads to aid your requirements throughout the volatility of demand and supply. The choice to integrate management consultants as part of your team could be the best decision you may make to effectively manage business growth.

3) Save time and money

A little business consultant will help you develop relevant techniques for improving efficiency and controlling cost. Management consultants will help you find methods to lower your expenses, explore technology and discover vendors that may best suit your business needs. Whenever your business is on the steps for success to growth, the requirement for a business consultant is frequently indisputable. Consultants empower companies to capture new possibilities for business growth and improvement. Your time and effort is better spent managing your business not performing research.

4) Learn techniques for business growth

You would like your organization to achieve the lengthy term. Are you able to begin to see the obvious road to growth? With management consultants, your business is going to be outfitted with data driven techniques for growth. By using business analytics and insights, you’ll be empowered knowing that you’re on the right track to some prosperous future.

As far as consulting and accounting services providers are concerned, one should choose them with absolute care and attention as they can make or break the whole experience. You can check out the List of Management Consulting Companies in Singapore to know more.

Comments are closed.


WARC-Identified-Payload-Type: application/xhtml+xml

text:
Ah, to be young and. . .working

Posted: 16 February 2016 in Uncategorized
Tags: , , , , , , , ,

A new report from the UCLA Labor Center [ht: ja], “I am a #YOUNGWORKER,” challenges the prevailing cliché of “young people as self-indulgent millennials who live with their parents, idly wait for the perfect job, and collect paychecks mostly for shopping and weekend leisure.”

In reality, many employers rely on youth to supply “cheap, surplus, temporary and easy-to-discipline labor” that can be recruited or disposed of according to the whims of the business cycle. Adults often portray these early jobs as brief interludes or rites of passage to justify the precarious conditions of “youth” forms of work.

The study focuses on workers between the ages of 18 and 29 in retail and food service, the two largest employers of young people in Los Angeles. Together, they employ a quarter-million young workers—almost half (42.6%) their workforce.

work status

The authors of the report discovered that young workers are often employed in part-time jobs, they play an integral role in supporting their families, and one in ten live below the poverty line.

In addition, young workers struggle to balance work and school (“They need to work in order to afford school, and they need to attend school so they can get ahead at work”) and owe increasing amounts of educational debt (more than $19 thousand on average).

On the job, most (90 percent) do not have a set schedule, since they are forced to “depend on schedule assignments that are staggered weekly and build an intricate web of overlapping shifts that ensure that workers are constantly present on the store floor or stockrooms.” They are also vulnerable to various forms of wage threat (not getting paid for overtime or working off the clock), are often harassed by both bosses and customers, and do not receive the benefits (such as sick days, vacation, and health insurance) other workers have managed to secure.

As if that were not bad enough, the youth unemployment rate (11.2 percent) is more than twice the official rate (5 percent).

In other words, young workers today are often living on a “dead end street.”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s


text:
Thursday, July 10, 2014

High quality NOAA Data Show U.S. in Decade-Long Cooling

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s most accurate, up-to-date temperature data confirm the United States has been cooling for at least the past decade. The NOAA temperature data are driving a stake through the heart of alarmists claiming accelerating global warming.

Responding to widespread criticism that its temperature station readings were corrupted by poor siting issues and suspect adjustments, NOAA established a network of 114 pristinely sited temperature stations spread out fairly uniformly throughout the United States. Because the network, known as the U.S. Climate Reference Network (USCRN), is so uniformly and pristinely situated, the temperature data require no adjustments to provide an accurate nationwide temperature record. USCRN began compiling temperature data in January 2005. Now, nearly a decade later, NOAA has finally made the USCRN temperature readings available.

According to the USCRN temperature readings, U.S. temperatures are not rising at all – at least not since the network became operational 10 years ago. Instead, the United States has cooled by approximately 0.4 degrees Celsius, which is more than half of the claimed global warming of the twentieth century.

Of course, 10 years is hardly enough to establish a long-term trend. Nevertheless, the 10-year cooling period does present some interesting facts.

First, global warming is not so dramatic and uniform as alarmists claim. For example, prominent alarmist James Hansen claimed in 2010, “Global warming on decadal time scales is continuing without letup … effectively illustrat[ing] the monotonic and substantial warming that is occurring on decadal time scales.” The word “monotonic” means, according to Merriam-Webster Online, “having the property either of never increasing or of never decreasing as the values of the independent variable or the subscripts of the terms increase.” Well, either temperatures are decreasing by 0.4 degrees Celsius every decade or they are not monotonic.

Second, for those who may point out U.S. temperatures do not equate to global temperatures, the USCRN data are entirely consistent with – and indeed lend additional evidentiary support for – the global warming stagnation of the past 17-plus years. While objective temperature data show there has been no global warming since sometime last century, the USCRN data confirm this ongoing stagnation in the United States, also.

Third, the USCRN data debunk claims that rising U.S. temperatures caused wildfires, droughts, or other extreme weather events during the past year. The objective data show droughts, wildfires, and other extreme weather events have become less frequent and severe in recent decades as our planet modestly warms. But even ignoring such objective data, it is difficult to claim global warming is causing recent U.S. droughts and wildfires when U.S. temperatures are a full 0.4 degrees Celsius colder than they were in 2005.

Even more importantly than the facts above, the USCRN provides the promise of reliable nationwide temperature data for years to come. No longer will global warming alarmists be able to hide behind thinly veiled excuses to doctor the U.S. temperature record. Now, thanks to the USCRN, the data are what the data are.

Expect global warming alarmists, now and for the foreseeable future, to howl in desperation claiming the USCRN temperature data are irrelevant.

Of course, to global warming alarmists, all real-world data are irrelevant.

Less than Half of Americans Say Humans Causing Global Warming

A newly released poll by the Pew Research Center reveals a majority of Americans believe either there is no solid evidence of recent global warming or recent global warming is caused by nature rather than human activity. According to the poll, merely 40 percent of Americans believe there is solid evidence of recent global warming and such warming is caused primarily by humans.

Looking more closely at the numbers, 61 percent say there is solid evidence the Earth is warming while 35 percent say there is no such solid evidence. Within the 61 percent saying there is solid evidence of warming, 40 percent say humans are likely the cause, while 18 percent say nature is the cause and 3 percent are unsure.

According to Pew, political liberals constitute the only group saying global warming is occurring and humans are the primary cause. The poll’s results show those same political liberals believe by overwhelming margins that politicians should “do whatever it takes to protect the environment.”

The same poll shows Americans support building the Keystone XL pipeline by a margin of 61 percent to 27 percent.

Salvation and Conservation, or Ruination and Confiscation?

“I’ve preserved more than 3 million acres of public lands for future generations, and I am not finished,” President Obama proudly declared before signing a proclamation newly designating the 500,000-acre Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks National Monument in New Mexico in mid-May. “I’m searching for more opportunities to preserve federal lands where communities are speaking up, because wherever I see an opening to get things done for the American people, I’m going to take it.”

In the perfect centrally-planned fantasy world inhabited by Obama and his fellow Big-Government progressives, politicized and top-down bureaucratic control really is the smartest and most effective means for ensuring proficient environmental stewardship and preserving our natural heritage for future generations.

But back here in the real world, Big Government simply isn’t getting the job done.

Passed at the height of the progressive movement in 1905, the Antiquities Act empowers the executive to unilaterally declare public landmarks and assign the federal government with the seemingly simple and innocuous task of environmental preservation.

Back in March, the president used the act to designate more than 1,600 acres along the Northern California coast as the Point Arena-Stornetta Public Lands. And in March of last year, he used the act to “protect” more than 240,000 acres as the Rio Grande del Norte National Monument, also in New Mexico. And all of this despite the fact that the National Park Service (which only directly manages about 15 percent of all federal lands) already has an estimated deferred maintenance backlog of at least $12 billion.

Deferred maintenance projects include repairs for roads, bridges, hiking trails, sewer systems, and pollution controls which go unaddressed while the fate of our national parks and natural resources are often left to await the mercy of political and fiscal decisions in Washington, D.C.

The federal government already owns almost a third of the entire surface area of the United States, but is constantly in a position to acquire more through the Land and Water Conservation Fund, a funding mechanism derived mostly from offshore oil and gas leases and used as a means for the federal government to grab more land without having to also provide for the funds to steward its existing lands. Obama’s 2014 budget asked that Congress fully fund the LWCF to the tune of $900 million, never mind that it is egregiously irresponsible for the federal government to be in the business of growing the federal estate when it cannot even properly manage the land that it already owns.

It can be quite politically difficult for opponents to argue against any executive action that gets to use something as apparently innocuous as environmental conservation as its ostensible mission statement, and don’t progressive environmentalist know it!

For decades, litigious environmentalist groups have used the growing reams of regulations governing the federal estate to go to court to steer public-land management and policy decisions in the direction that they prefer. That direction reliably means pushing land-use policies away from the sort of dynamism and innovation that allows for diversified, productive uses like cattle grazing, timber harvesting, energy development, and even recreation, and usually toward shutting off entire areas from human use on the supposed behalf of the desert tortoise or the sage grouse or some other almost-approaching- endangered species.

Clinton-era U.S. Forest Service chief Jack Ward Thomas once noted that court battles have tied the agency into a

“Gordian knot” that creates a “vicious cycle of increasing costs, time delays, and inability to carry out management actions.” As a result, the Forest Service is severely limited in their forest- thinning and other fire-suppression activities. This has led to catastrophic wildfires that have ravaged the arid West.

Instead of bringing still more lands under the inept umbrella of top-down management, the federal government needs to start selling off federal lands, both for the sake of the environment and the budget (and if that seems a bridge too far for too many, then the Obama administration can at least open up the federal estate to innovative, more free-market techniques like commercial leasing or public-private park partnerships that can actually generate revenue and court management decision from the people on-the-ground with the most complete knowledge).

Big-Government-loving environmentalist types are all too happy to accept on faith that the federal government is the best possible steward of environmental quality across the American landscape, rather than the hotbed of inefficiency, incompetence, and increasing costliness that ruins ecosystems, restricts access, dampers rural economies, and runs up the national deficit that it actually is

The corporation now seems to take its orders from the green lobby and is generating alarm over the environment

The BBC’s behaviour grows ever more bizarre. Committed by charter to balanced reporting, it has now decided formally that it was wrong to allow balance in a debate between rival guesses about the future. In rebuking itself for having had the gall to interview Nigel Lawson on the Today programme about climate change earlier this year, it issued a statement containing this gem: “Lord Lawson’s views are not supported by the evidence from computer modelling and scientific research.”

The evidence from computer modelling? The phrase is an oxymoron. A model cannot, by definition, provide evidence: it can provide a prediction to test against real evidence. In the debate in question, Lord Lawson said two things: it was not possible to attribute last winter’s heavy rain to climate change with any certainty, and the global surface temperature has not warmed in the past 15 to 17 years. He was right about both, as his debate opponent, Sir Brian Hoskins, confirmed.

As for the models, here is what Dr Vicky Pope of the Met Office said in 2007 about what their models predicted: “By 2014, we’re predicting that we’ll be 0.3 degrees warmer than 2004. Now just to put that into context, the warming over the past century and a half has only been 0.7 degrees, globally . . . So 0.3 degrees, over the next ten years, is pretty significant . . . These are very strong statements about what will happen over the next ten years.”

In fact, global surface temperature, far from accelerating upwards, has cooled slightly in the ten years since 2004 on most measures. The Met Office model was out by a country mile. But the BBC thinks that it was wrong even to allow somebody to challenge the models, even somebody who has written a bestselling book on climate policy, held one of the highest offices of state and founded a think-tank devoted to climate change policy. The BBC regrets even staging a live debate between him and somebody who disagrees with him, in which he was robustly challenged by the excellent Justin Webb (of these pages).

And why, pray, does the BBC think this? Because it had a complaint from a man it coyly describes as a “low-energy expert”, Mr Chit Chong, who accused Lord Lawson of saying on the programme that climate change was “all a conspiracy”.

Lawson said nothing of the kind, as a transcript shows. Mr Chong’s own curriculum vitae boasts that he “has been active in the Green party for 25 years and was the first Green councillor to be elected in London”, and that he “has a draught-proofing and insulation business in Dorset and also works as an environmental consultant”.

So let’s recap. On the inaccurate word of an activist politician with a vested financial and party interest, the BBC has decided that henceforth nobody must be allowed to criticise predictions of the future on which costly policies are based. No more appearances for Ed Balls, then, because George Osborne’s models must go unchallenged.

By the way, don’t bother to write and tell me that Lord Lawson is not a scientist. The BBC also rebuked itself last week for allowing an earth scientist with dissenting views on to Radio 4. Professor Bob Carter was head of the department of earth sciences at James Cook University in Australia for 17 years. He’s published more than 100 papers mainly in the field of paleoclimatology. So bang goes that theory.

The background to this is that the BBC recently spent five years fighting a pensioner named Tony Newbery, including four days in court with six lawyers, to prevent Mr Newbery seeing the list of 28 participants at a BBC seminar in 2006 of what it called “the best scientific experts” on climate change.

This was the seminar that persuaded the BBC it should no longer be balanced in its coverage of climate change. A blogger named Maurizio Morabito then found the list on the internet anyway. Far from consisting of the “best scientific experts” it included just three scientists, the rest being green activists, with a smattering of Dave Spart types from the church, the government and the insurance industry.

Following that debacle, the BBC commissioned a report from a geneticist, Steve Jones, which it revisited in a further report to the BBC Trust last week. The Jones report justified a policy of banning sceptics under the term “false balance”. This takes the entirely sensible proposition that reporters do not have to, say, interview a member of the Flat Earth Society every time they mention a round-the-world yacht race, and stretches it to the climate debate.

Which is barmy for two blindingly obvious reasons: first, the UN’s own climate projections contain a range of outcomes from harmless to catastrophic, so there is clearly room for debate; and second, this is an argument about the future not the present, and you cannot have certainty about the future.

The BBC bends over backwards to give air time to minority campaigners on matters such as fracking, genetically modified crops, and alternative medicine. Biologists who thinks GM crops are dangerous, doctors who thinks homeopathy works and engineers who think fracking has contaminated aquifers are far rarer than climate sceptics. Yet Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth spokesmen are seldom out of Broadcasting House.

So the real reason for the BBC’s double standard becomes clear: dissent in the direction of more alarm is always encouraged; dissent in the direction of less alarm is to be suppressed.

I sense that some presenters are growing irritated by their bosses’ willingness to take orders from the green movement.

Liberal Mega-Donor Wants to ‘Penalize People’ Who Add to ‘Climate Risk’

Speaking in New York City last week, Wall Street billionaire Tom Steyer outlined his vision for penalizing people whose actions may contribute to climate change.

“We need to reward people whose behavior reduces climate risk and penalize people who add to it,” Steyer said. “If we can get this right, I think there’s no doubt that our economy is going to continue to do very well.”

Steyer’s comments came at an event with several wealthy businessmen—such as former New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg and former bankers and government officials Hank Paulson and Robert Reich—to unveil a report from Risky Business, an economic analysis of the financial impact to be caused by climate change.

Deemed the “liberal answer to the Koch Brothers,” Steyer is one of the richest businessman in America and played a key part in raising millions of dollars to elect President Obama in 2008 once Hillary Clinton lost the Democratic nomination.

Steyer met with Obama this week to discuss what the White House could do to tackle climate change, and the “insurance industry’s role in helping American communities prepare for extreme weather and other impacts of climate change,” according to Reuters.

That points to a plan to allow insurance companies to begin assessing for “climate risk” in certain industries, a more market-focused approach to discourage industries from emitting large amounts of carbon dioxide.

Some of the people who may be “penalized” for adding to climate risks, however, are workers in plants and factories all over the rust belt of the United States. Although they recognize the need to mitigate the effects of climate change, some believe this shouldn’t come to the detriment of industries and traditional blue-collar workers.

“It is a fact that global warming threatens our planet. Scientists are as certain of this as they are of the dangers of smoking or riding in a car without a seatbelt,” said Tony Montana, spokesman for the local United Steelworkers union in Pittsburgh. “Declaring ‘war’ on entire industries, such as coal, oil, or natural gas, however, is not the answer. These industries created and supported a way of life for workers and their communities for generations.”

If the idea of penalizing carbon emitters eventually makes it to the political process, Steyer has assured he will have allies in the fight.

NextGen Climate Action, a multi-million dollar political action committee funded by Steyer, has already beefed up the Democratic Senate Majority PAC with more than $5 million in hopes of guaranteeing the issue of climate change remains a political issue in many key states. Key union groups have similarly received funding by Steyer.

More taxpayer dollars for green energy?

There is an intentional tension in Washington. Our founding fathers planned that opposing views would balance each other out — a push-pull takes place. Spend. Don’t spend.

This tug-of-war is seen, perhaps most obviously, in the so-called renewable energy field. After Solyndra, and the more than fifty other stimulus-funded green energy projects that have failed or are circling the drain, the public has grown weary, and wary, of any more spending on green energy. The money isn’t there to spend and the motive behind the 2009 rush to push billions of taxpayer dollars out through the Department of Energy has been tainted by corruption and illegal activity.

The green-energy emphasis was sold as a job creator for unemployed Americans, as a cure for global warming, and a way to slow a perceived energy shortage. It sounded so positive in the many speeches President Obama gave as a sales pitch to the American public.

Today, Americans know better.

They knew about Solyndra — which took millions and then folded. Thanks, in large part to my exposé, many now know about Abengoa and the Solana solar project—which took billions of tax-payer dollars and is now functioning and producing electricity but does so by breaking immigration and labor laws, giving foreigners hiring preference, and stiffing American suppliers.

Watching multiple predictions fail and proponents get rich, Americans instinctively know that the whole global warming agenda doesn’t add up — as evidenced by this week’s International Conference on Climate Change where more than 600 “skeptics” from around the world gather to discuss real science and policy.

With headlines heralding: “North Dakota has joined the ranks of the few places in the world that produce more than a million barrels of oil per day,” people know there isn’t an energy shortage. And America’s new energy abundance is on top of our rich reserves of coal and uranium that can provide for our electrical needs for centuries to come.

Yet, the White House keeps pushing the green-energy narrative and, on July 3, 2014, “The Energy Department Just Announced $4 Billion For Projects That Fight Global Warming,” as the headline reads at

Wind Energy and the Production Tax Credit

Simmering just below the headlines is the push-pull over the Production Tax Credit (PTC) for Wind energy that expired at the end of 2013.

A recent study from the Institute for Energy Research (IER) that examined the state-by-state burden of the PTC, called the PTC “an amazing subsidy” because it can “effectively give a utility a bigger subsidy than the actual market price. It would be as if Uncle Sam allowed car dealers to knock off $60,000 from their tax bill for every $50,000 car they sold. Indeed, the PTC is so generous that it can result in negative wholesale electricity prices.” The “Sharing the Burden of the Wind PTC” report shows which states benefit most from the federal subsidy and which lose—with Texas being the biggest winner having received $394 million in the form of PTC credits.

Texans might be elated at their good fortune, however the IER study points out that individual consumers “still lose from the existence of the wind subsidies.” It states: “it’s not as if the IRS takes the population of Texas and divides $394 million among them, evenly. Rather, the wind subsidies are concentrated in the hands of a small group of wind producers.” As a result, wind serves as a tax shelter for large corporations.

On June 26, wind energy proponents — including pages of signatories who benefit financially from the tax credit — sent a letter to the top Congressional leaders urging them to “support the immediate passage of the Expiring Provisions Improvement Reform and Efficiency (EXPIRE) Act.”

On the other side, citizens, like Mary Kay Barton of New York, are sending their elected federal representatives letters asking them not to support a PTC extension as proposed in EXPIRE. She sent a letter to Senator Charles Schumer (D-NY) and he sent one back to her.

Schumer opens: “Thank you for writing to express your opposition to tax credits, and subsidies for alternative energy. I share your opposition to unsuccessful and unnecessary subsides.”

He then goes into a long paragraph about his effort to put an “end to subsidies for huge oil companies” and brags about being a “cosponsor of S.940, the Close Big Oil Tax Loopholes Act, which would roll back huge subsidies and tax credit for large oil companies.” Green energy supporters, such as Schumer, like to mix the terms “subsidies” and “tax credits” with “tax deductions” — when they are completely different. A subsidy, or loan guarantee, and tax credit involves taxpayer dollars being doled out—or taxes not collected — to incentivize a favored activity. This is not how America’s oil-and-gas producers are treated. They do, however, receive tax deductions — like any other business — that allow them to write of losses and the cost of doing business against income. Additionally, as the New York Times, in a story about corporate tax rates, reported last year: “Large oil companies typically pay high rates.”  It shows that the average tax rate among companies is roughly 29 percent, while “large oil companies” are paying 37 percent and utility companies that “benefited from the 2009 stimulus bill, which included tax breaks,” have an “overall” rate of 12 percent.

In response to Barton’s letter about ending the PTC for industrial wind, Schumer continues: “I believe that it is necessary to balance our country’s increasing energy needs with the need to protect the environment. We must also focus on renewable energy and energy conservation in order to meet our growing energy demands. According to one study, if the U.S. increases its efficiency by 2.2 percent per year, it could reduce foreign oil imports by more than 50 percent. Such actions would not only reduce our dependence on foreign oil but would also safeguard the environment.”

Barton told me: “You’ll note that Senator Schumer still seems to think that subsidies for wind energy (electricity) will somehow ‘reduce foreign imports,’ and then references increasing ‘efficiency’ in response to a letter about inefficient, unreliable wind?” She’s picked up on one of my favorite soapboxes: we could cover every available acre with wind turbines and solar panels and it would do nothing to “reduce our dependence on foreign oil” or increase America’s energy independence. Wind and solar produce electricity and, through our coal, natural gas, and uranium supplies, we are already electricity independent. We import oil to fuel our transportation fleet.

As the fight over the PTC points out, wind energy cannot survive without the tax credits.

High Cost, Low Benefit

Wind energy is also more expensive than almost all other electricity sources — only solar is higher. A new study from the Brookings Institute on the “best path to a low-carbon future,” assumes that CO2 emissions are causing climate change and therefore must be reduced. It analyzes the costs and benefits of the most common solutions. The study found: “Adding up the net energy cost and the net capacity cost of the five low-carbon alternatives, far and away the most expensive is solar. It costs almost 19 cents more per KWH than power from the coal or gas plants that it displaces. Wind power is the second most expensive. It costs nearly 6 cents more per KWH.” The study puts these additional costs in context: “The average cost of electricity to U.S. consumers in 2012 was 9.84 cents per KWH, including the cost of transmission and distribution of electricity. This means a new wind plant could at least cost 50 percent more per KWH to produce electricity, and a new solar plant at least 200 percent more per KWH, than using coal and gas technologies.” The study concludes: “renewable incentives that are biased in favor of wind and solar and biased against large-scale hydro, nuclear and gas combined cycle are a very expensive and inefficient way to reduce carbon dioxide emissions.”

Wind energy proponents cling to the idea that we must reduce fossil fuel use and believe, therefore, that the extra cost is worth it. However, because of the intermittency issues with wind and the reliability demand from the consumer, it requires fully dispatchable back-up power generation. Natural gas is the best form of back up because it can be easily adjusted to produce more or less electricity — however the constant adjustment results in less efficient use and more CO2 emissions.

I like to explain the preference for natural-gas back ups this way. Suppose you are going to cook a hamburger. You can cook it over charcoal or natural gas/propane. To use charcoal, you mound up the charcoal in the grill, soak it in lighter fluid, and toss in a match. You then wait 30 minutes for the coals to get nice and hot. Once hot, you put on your burger and cook it for 5-8 minutes. You remove your burger and leave the coals to die down — which could take several hours. On natural gas/propane, you simply turn it on and light the grill. After giving it 5 minutes to heat up, you toss on your burger. When your burger is cooked, you turn off the grill, and it is cool in minutes.

Natural gas is the preferred back up for wind (and solar) energy because, as in the burger example, its production can more easily be increased and decreased to follow the needed output — even though it operates most efficiently at a consistent level. Coal-fueled electricity generation cannot be simply turned up and down.

By way of answering the question: “Why are the costs of wind and solar so much higher, and the benefits not much different from other low-carbon alternatives?” the Brookings study states: “The benefits of reduced emissions from wind and solar are limited because they operate at peak capacity only a fraction of the time.”

It’s Not Just About the Money

If cost issues weren’t enough to make you a wind energy opponent, think of the health issues.

In late June, the American Bird Conservancy (ABC) took President Obama up on his “so sue me” challenge and filed a lawsuit over his administration’s modification of the 1940 Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act that now allows wind energy producers a thirty year permit to kill the majestic birds. According to ABC spokesman Bob Johns, “the Obama administration has gone too far with incentives for the wind industry.” The Washington Times quotes Johns: “Since the 1980s, wind turbines have killed an estimated 2,000-3,000 eagles, but the industry has paid only one fine.”

Wind turbines hurt more than birds. On June 16, a Michigan judge agreed with residents who live near the 56-turbine Lake Winds facility and who complained of health problems that began just after the turbines began operating. A lawsuit filed on April 1, 2013 argued that noise, vibrations, and flickering lights emanating from Lake Winds were adversely affecting their health.

Cape Wind

Despite these, and other harmful impacts — which include a loss of property values when wind turbines are installed in a neighborhood — and opposition from environmental groups and local fisherman, the Department of Energy has just approved a stimulus-funded $150 million loan guarantee for the controversial Cape Wind project planned to be built in the Nantucket Sound. Cape Wind, scheduled to begin construction in 2015, will be the first utility-scale wind facility in U.S. waters.

Addressing the loan guarantee announcement, the Boston Globe states: “Now, with a large portion of financing in place, regulatory approvals in hand, and most legal challenges resolved, the project has finally reached a threshold where it is likely to get done.” Validating my earlier point of higher cost, the Globe says the two largest utilities in Massachusetts “agreed to purchase a total of 77.5 percent of the power generated by Cape Wind at a starting price of 18.7 cents per kilowatt hour—well above typical wholesale prices.”

Like other wind energy projects, Cape Wind is dependent on the PTC extension. It is time for everyone who opposes government intervention in markets to contact his or her representatives — as Mary Kay Barton did — and voice opposition to the PTC extension. Call and say: “Stop supporting wind energy. It is an inefficient system that leads to perverse outcomes. The massive expansion of wind energy that we’ve seen in the past six years would not survive on a level playing field.”

For more postings from me, see  DISSECTING LEFTISM, TONGUE-TIED, EDUCATION WATCH INTERNATIONAL, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, FOOD & HEALTH SKEPTIC and AUSTRALIAN POLITICS. Home Pages are   here or   here or   here.  Email me (John Ray) here.

Preserving the graphics:  Most graphics on this site are hotlinked from elsewhere.  But hotlinked graphics sometimes have only a short life -- as little as a week in some cases.  After that they no longer come up.  From January 2011 on, therefore, I have posted a monthly copy of everything on this blog to a separate site where I can host text and graphics together -- which should make the graphics available even if they are no longer coming up on this site.  See  here or here

No comments:


text:
APK APPS & Games Store For Android

Download Moe House Story MOD APK v1.36 [Unlimited Currency] for Android

Name Moe House Story
Category Casual
Size 110.6MB
Popularity 4129
Publisher HyperBeard
Score 6.0
Publish Date 29/06/2022
Download Download Mod Apk
Google play Moe House Story Google Play

Mod Info:

Moe House Story Unlimited Currency
When you buy something with enough love in the store, the more love you use, click \”Register Now\” to enter

Moe House Story Game Introduction ：

Want to live in a lovely house with the person you like, and raise so many cats and dogs? Cute House Story can help you achieve it!
When you run the game in your spare time every day, you can create the life you want little by little!

[Make a lunch box for lovers]
Buy different types of food in the store,
put three different types of food in the lovers\’ lunch box
and wait for the lovers to return home from work to reap the love that TA gives you!
The perfect combination will bring more love!

[Take care of your cats]
Remember to take care of your cats every day , pet them through fun games
, cut their nails, and bathe them.
Pass the game smoothly, and the cats will give you love!

[Cute home
furnishing ] Use love to buy your favorite furniture, decorations and cats. Arrange
the furniture in the room and garden as
you like . The cats will play in your home, and the different objects in the garden will attract different little ones. Animals

[little guests’ love]
When you have a garden, different objects in the garden will attract different \”guests\” to visit
. The \”little guests\” attracted by the garden will also send you love! ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
Go collect all the \”little guests\”!

[Moments not to be missed]
After you have a cat and meet different small animals, you
will have the opportunity to capture their incomparably cute moments and
quickly take these beautiful moments with your camera!

Use rich furniture and decoration to create a wonderful world for two people,
and the company of many cute little guys
will bring you a little happiness and warmth when you are empty and lonely!

Moe House Story Game screenshot ：

Moe House Story (110.6MB)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


text:
WhirlpoolSKU: WFW9620HW

Energy Star Logo
Colour: White

Top 3 Features

Load & Go™ XL Plus Dispenser

Skip steps with the Load & Go™ XL Plus dispenser. Simply add detergent and fabric softener once and skip refills for 40 loads. You'll even get notifications when it's time to refill.

Remote control with the Whirlpool® app

Stay in control and connected from anywhere. The Whirlpool® app lets you set, start or pause the wash cycle and track progress when you're away.

Our Largest Capacity Front Load Washer at 5.8 Cu. Ft

Fit more in a single load with Our Largest Capacity Front Load Washer at 5.8 Cu. Ft.

Additional Features

Intuitive Controls

Let the washer guide you to the right cycle combinations or customize up to 35 of your own to get the right type of fabric care for whatever you're washing.

Get instant access to the settings you use most with a full-color Touchscreen display.

Wash and Dry Option

Let the washer keep laundry moving for you by adding this option to select wash cycles. After washing ends, it uses hot air to tumble dry clothes right in the washer.

12-Hour FanFresh® Option

Keep clothes fresh for up to 12 hours after the wash cycle has ended. A built-in fan activates after the wash cycle is over, tumbling clothes for up to 12 hours so you can finish laundry when you're ready.

Steam Clean Option

Get help removing everyday stains with the Steam Clean option, which gets deep into fabrics with increased wash action and heat.

Sanitize Cycle

The Sanitize Cycle uses increased water temperature to eliminate 99.9% of common household bacteria.* *Bacteria tested were K. pneumoniae, P. aeruginosa, S. aureus.

Quick Wash Cycle

Your small, lightly soiled loads will be clean in as little as 15 minutes with the Quick Wash cycle.

Cold Wash Cycle

Give your most vibrant colors the care they need with the Cold Wash Cycle that adjusts wash actions and time, combined with gentle temperatures, to provide optimal fabric care.

Presoak Option

The Presoak Option lets you skip soaking outside of the washer. Extra time is added in the washer before the wash cycle, which starts automatically when the option is complete.

Single Load Dispenser

Use the Single Load Dispenser when you want to wash with a different detergent than the one currently in the Load & Go™ XL Dispenser. Additional compartments for bleach and fabric softener make sure any additives get dispensed at just the right time during the cycle.

Smart Appliance

Care for your family from your smartphone or tablet.

Scan-to-Connect Technology

You don't need to be a tech expert to connect your new appliance. Simply open the Whirlpool® app, add your appliance and follow the guided experience to get up and running quickly.

Coming soon: Voice control with a compatible voice-enabled device

Coming soon: Automatically reorder your favorite laundry supplies so you never run out by connecting the Whirlpool® app with your Amazon account. Your device can track how much inventory you have on hand and ship you a replacement order when you're running low. Your family will always have the supplies they need when they need them.

Coming soon: Amazon Dash Replenishment (U.S. Only)

Coming soon: Automatically reorder your favorite laundry supplies so you never run out by connecting the Whirlpool® app with your Amazon account. Your device can track how much inventory you have on hand and ship you a replacement order when you're running low. Your family will always have the supplies they need when they need them.

Match Washer cycle with Dryer cycle

Get the right kind of dry for your load. The Whirlpool® app will suggest the dry cycle that matches the wash cycle you used.

Enhanced Troubleshooting

Get immediate support for quick solutions by using your smartphone or tablet to access troubleshooting videos.

Control Lock Mode

Use your smartphone or tablet to remotely disable the control panel to avoid unintended use.

Download & Go™ Option

Get the right clean for your clothes by downloading specialty cycles for items like activewear, swimwear, sleeping bags and more with the Download & Go™ option.

Nest Learning Thermostat® Integration (U.S. Only)

(U.S. Only)

Smooth Wave Stainless Steel Wash Basket

Give clothes the care they need with the sleek pattern of the stainless steel wash basket that gently guides them.

Clean Washer with Affresh® Cycle

Get a notification to run the Clean Washer with affresh® cycle every 30 washes. Use an affresh® Washer Cleaner tablet or liquid chlorine bleach to thoroughly clean the inside of your washer.

Laundry Pedestals

Raise your washer for easier loading and unloading. Optional laundry pedestals also provide space-saving storage for detergent, fabric softener and other supplies.

An American Company for Over 100 Years

Whirlpool Corporation started in 1911 as a small company in Benton Harbor, Michigan. Today we are a global home appliance business selling products around the world. We are proud of our American heritage and ingenuity that have driven innovation for over 100 years.

Expanded Finishes

Choose from a traditional finish like White or elevate your laundry space with the modern Chrome Shadow (coming soon). Both finishes feature updated aesthetics with a high contrast console and sleek door design.

Lid/Door LockYes

Lid/Door SwingLeft

Prop 65Standard

Energy Star® QualifiedNo

Automatic Temperature ControlsYes

Control LocationFront

Control TypeTap Touch

Electronic Display TypeLCD Screen

End of Cycle SignalYes

Feedback-Status IndicatorsAdd Garment,Control Lock,Detergent Low,Door Lock,End,Estimated Time Remaining,Fabric Softener Low,Sensing,Washing

LCD Touch ScreenYes

Advanced Vibration Control™Yes

Automated DispenserLoad&Go™

Automatic Load Size Sensing TechnologyYes

Dispense SystemDetergent, Fabric Softener & Bleach

Internal HeaterYes

Eco Monitor/Efficiency MonitorNo

Fan TypeFan Fresh®

Out of Balance SensingYes

Drum MaterialStainless Steel

Hoses Included4ft 4in Drain Hose Included

Motor Drive TypeDirect Drive

Water Factor4.70

Maximum Spin Speed (RPM)1160

Interior LightLED

Accessory RelationshipsYes

Amps15 or 20

Power Cord IncludedYes

Number of Wash Cycles35

Washer Cycle SelectionsBulky Items,Clean Washer with affresh,Cold Wash,Colors,Delicates,Drain & Spin,Heavy Duty,Normal,Quick,Regular,Sanitize,Towels,Whites,Wrinkle Control

Number of Washer Options12

Number of Wash/Rinse Temperatures5

Number of Soil Levels3

Soil SelectionsLight,Normal,Heavy

Temperature SelectionsHot,Extra Hot,Cold,Cool,Warm

Number of Rinse Options2

Number of Spin Speeds5

Spin Speed SelectionsExtra Fast,Fast,Medium,Off,Slow

Delay StartYes

Pre SoakYes

Pedestal OptionsWFP2715HBK,WFP2715HC,WFP2715HW

Water FaucetNo

Works WithWiFi,App,Remote Access

ConnectivityAmazon Alexa,Android,Google Assistant,iOS

WHR WasherLarge Capacity Washers,Load & Go™ Dispenser,Sanitize Cycle,Smart/WiFi Enabled

Depth84.46 cm (33 1/4 in.)

Width68.58 cm (27 in.)

Capacity (cubic feet)5.00

Capacity IEC CAN (cubic feet)5.8

Carton Depth87.63 cm (34 1/2 in.)

Carton Height99.06 cm (39 in.)

Carton Width73.66 cm (29 in.)

Gross Weight250 Kg.

Minimum Height98.11 cm (38 5/8 in.)

Net Weight240.0 Kg.

Payment & Security

American Express Apple Pay Google Pay Mastercard Shop Pay Visa

Your payment information is processed securely. We do not store credit card details nor have access to your credit card information.

You may also like

Recently viewed


text:
This job has expired

IT Team Lead / Deputy IT Manager

Deerfoot I.T. Resources Limited
Marston, Oxford
Closing date
2 Jul 2022

View more

Job Function
General Manager
IT & Telecoms
Position Type
You need to sign in or create an account to save a job.
IT Team Lead / Deputy IT Manager
£400-£450pd DOE (Inside IR35 Contract)
Initial 3 Months + Monthly Rolling
Central Oxford - Hybrid Working Available

As a preferred recruitment partner to one of the most prestigious institutions in the world, we have been asked to assist in the hire of a contract Deputy Head of IT to act as both a senior, but technically hands-on Lead for a small team, as well as deputising for the overall management of everything IT in the department.

The Role
-Assist with the management of a small team, including mentoring and development
-Take responsibility for the IT Help Desk and 1st Line Support Engineers
-Act as the escalation point for the Help Desk by providing advanced knowledge at a 2nd-3rd Line Support capacity, ensuring complex issues are troubleshooted and resolved promptly
-Deputise for overall responsibility of the IT provision within the department as/when required
-Support the Head of IT with information governance and risk management processes.
-Take a lead role in the design, selection, provisioning, installation and configuration of systems, software, and infrastructure within the department.

Experience / Skills Needed
-Desktop and Server Computing - Windows, MacOS, Linux
-Networking - TCP/IP Networks, VPNs, Firewall Solutions, DevOps Processes
-Experience with Version Control Systems to support system management
-Experience of Systems Security and Data Protection
-IT Systems Design, Implementation and Management
-Experienced with virtualised computing infrastructure and private clouds
-Prior experience of IT Service Provision in educational sector beneficial
-Experience of scripting in Bash, Perl, or Python beneficial
-Web application hosting, development, and database experience (MariaDB, PostgreSQL) desirable
-Knowledge of methodologies for project management and IT Service Delivery desirable

Hybrid/Flex Working: There is some flexibility around working location, and applications from candidates seeking hybrid working are welcome.

Inside IR35: This contract is offered on a PAYE basis (via an umbrella company). The day rate offered is DOE (circa £400 - £450pd) and this is the total amount we would pay your nominated umbrella. It is inclusive of holiday accrual and employer pension contributions. All statutory deductions (both Employers and Employee NI, Income Tax, Apprenticeship Levy, etc.) will be deducted from this figure.

This position may be suitable for individuals who have held positions including; IT Support Manager, IT Team Lead, Deputy IT Manager, Deputy Head of IT, IT Manager, IT Systems Manager, IT Support Team Lead, 3rd Line Support Engineer, Senior IT Support Engineer, IT Support Analyst or similar.

Deerfoot IT Resources Ltd is one of the UK's leading IT Recruitment Agencies. Established in 1997, we have over twenty years of experience as IT Recruitment Specialists and practice a meticulous recruitment service for our clients. We will never send your CV anywhere without your full email authorisation and only after you have seen the full and complete details on this opportunity. Deerfoot is acting as an employment agency in relation to this vacancy.

Each time Deerfoot sends a CV to a recruiting client we donate £1 to The Born Free Foundation (1070906).
You need to sign in or create an account to save a job.

Get job alerts

Create a job alert and receive personalised job recommendations straight to your inbox.

Create alert