Disqus - Latest Comments for kallan

Re: Ramaphosa vows faster land redistribution

kallan — Tue, 20 Mar 2018 02:28:00 -0000

I see that these comments are being heavily vetted by the organisation.

Re: Jordan Peterson protesters break window at Grant Hall, barricade exits

kallan — Tue, 13 Mar 2018 04:35:59 -0000

I guess it may well be non-PC to suggest this, but what-the-heck . . .

. . . I get the sense that the protesters are of an alien class of non-thinkers, people who have an IQ deficiency of some sort or are so bigoted and full of themselves that they can't be bothered finding out information on what they suddenly decide to protest against. At the beginning of his Queen's University talk, Peterson called the protesters' action "pure narcissism". Given that he might very well be right with that - after all, he is a qualified and extremely experienced clinical psychologist - it puts the protesters into a defined group of people who have a mental disorder. I believe that's not the only thing wrong with them.

Re: Jordan Peterson protesters break window at Grant Hall, barricade exits

kallan — Tue, 13 Mar 2018 03:02:23 -0000

These protesters are deranged, for they do not know what they are protesting against. They protest against someone who has principles that they simply do not understand and they will not take the time to listen to him, which is obvious from the way they conducted themselves. If they genuinely disagreed with him, they would have attended his talk and asked pertinent questions. Peterson answered all of the questions proffered to him at the end of his talk and these were well received by those who attended. The body of people who made up the protesters are obviously not interested in even thinking about ideas that have never entered their heads. They are twice ignorant – once for not knowing what it is that Peterson has to say and once for thinking they know better than to listen to what he has to say. It is an age-old failing of humankind that we have people who follow cultures that do this.

Re: Philosophy and the Illusion of Explanatory Depth ~ Stephen Downes

kallan — Sat, 25 Feb 2017 17:50:50 -0000

Rozenblit and Keil studied this effect in 2002, Stephen. Confidence in the understanding of everyday phenomena diminished after attempts were made by participants to explain them. Their findings relate directly to the adage, "You never fully understand something until you teach it." But, having met many good teachers who are capable of teaching particular topics very well, but who also did not understand these topics very well and admitted to this, it made me wonder about how the mind (brain) understands things. Is understanding simply an illusion? At least for some of us?

http: // www.psy.cmu.edu / ~siegler / RozKeil02.pdf

Re: Rangatiratanga: How Tapping Into New Zealand’s Indigenous Concepts Sparked New Educational Gains ~ Stephen Downes

kallan — Sat, 22 Oct 2016 22:05:51 -0000

The Manaiakalani method referred to in the article embraces a complex multifaceted method. I can understand your frustration in wanting to learn more about this. However, the integrated involvement of family and community in the education of the child, which is so much a part of this method, has a complexity that far outweighs the scope of the article. I think that the Manaiakalani method is what you wanted to read about.

https://cdn.auckland.ac.nz/...

Re: You are almost definitely not living in reality because your brain doesn’t want you to ~ Stephen Downes

kallan — Sat, 15 Oct 2016 21:47:23 -0000

I didn't find much mention of making assumptions, which I believe is a fifth souce of cognitive bias. Assumption making occurs often while we 'aggressively filter' but can amount to throwing the bath and baby out with the water. The adage is that there's no greater barrier to learning about something than thinking you already know all about it. Assumption making of this type is probably the most dismissive cognitive bias, for it doesn't even give the brain a chance to decide whether something might be worth knowing.

Re: Do no harm to life on Mars? Ethical limits of Prime Directive | Science Wire | EarthSky

kallan — Tue, 07 Jun 2016 18:44:40 -0000

“…we’re going to have strong indications of life beyond Earth within a
decade, and I think we’re going to have definitive evidence within 20 to
30 years.”

This is a presumptive statement. We have no more evidence today that there is life beyond Earth than we had when SETI was conceived and turned into a project in the 1960s and 70s. In fact, the more we look for the evidence of life outside Earth, the more we find evidence to suggest that there is none.

Belief is a powerful thing - we know this. It is a wonderful idea that there may be life elswhere but we should not let our hopes and beliefs muddy reality.

Re: What is the ecliptic?

kallan — Tue, 07 Jun 2016 07:33:57 -0000

I think you have been studying metaphysics.

Re: Newton’s New Law of Teaching: When Quality Instruction and Technology Intersect ~ Stephen Downes

kallan — Sat, 09 Jan 2016 20:57:33 -0000

Thank you for this, Stephen. I am sceptical of Gary's algebraic expression. Learning is not mechanical like the formula he coined from Newton's Principia. It is a complex system which means it is adaptive and exponential in its growth. We have moved into an age where lack of achievement in a teaching environment is gathering more and more blame for the quality of teaching and the tricks to do with related instruction. But there are two sides to the whole process. Learning also depends on the learner. When we stop thinking about who to blame for bad teaching or instruction, we might start understanding what education is about. Education has never been clearly defined since the time of Newton.

Re: 9/11 jet fuel debunking

kallan — Sat, 19 Dec 2015 05:42:20 -0000

I feel behoved to put my oar in here, for the third time on this post (sorry Cameron). You are right about the event being poured over, examined and scrutinised in infinite detail in comparison to any other. But you must also concede that this careful scrutiny was not carried out by The Administration. Else why was it that the debris, including the twisted steel of all three buildings, was cleared away in days, the steel exported and never seen again? Perhaps the pieces of 'real evidence' went with this huge load of steel. After all, it was a crime scene and the steel would have been primary pieces of evidence in any investigation. But they were kept from public scrutiny while they were cleared away, never to be examined.

And just for the records, I object to you tarring me and many others with the put-down term 'conspiracy theorist'. For one things, it is misleading for it suggests that there was no plan made by any conspirators to bring about the 9/11 event. So by your way of it, in theory, 9/11 never happened and the towers are still standing.

Re: 9/11 jet fuel debunking

kallan — Fri, 18 Dec 2015 05:05:34 -0000

How sad that you have completely neglected the velocity dampening effect, inevitable on each impact of the falling pancakes. This is a consequence of momentum conservation due to the increasing falling mass, each new part of which was at rest before each impact. Work that out with your slide-rule and you'll see why the time for collapse, due to gravity is so significant. I guess engineers don't know much of physics and certainly not much of Newton's laws. But, does 9/11 change all those?

Re: 9/11 jet fuel debunking

kallan — Fri, 18 Dec 2015 03:33:29 -0000

The demonstrator seems to be throwing his toys out of the cot at the idea that 9/11 was brought about through a conspiracy. There is no need to doubt that it was a conspiracy. However it was caused, it certainly wasn't through natural effects. The viewer is then left wondering what in fact he is trying to demonstrate. He talks of the melting temperature of steel (above 2000) and in the next breath mentions the maximum temperature (1500) which burning aviation fuel can attain. Yet he carries out his experiment with a piece of steel raised to 1800 and fails to draw any connection between what he said before and what he finally demonstrated with a hot piece of steel, making his whole demonstration seem quite irrelevant.

Re: LinkedIn to a New Degree ~ Stephen's Web

kallan — Sat, 26 Sep 2015 02:42:03 -0000

Stephen, you say that disruption will come from outside. I think you are right. It will be fostered by a culture that began in the 1980s and that is still prevalent today. It was recognised by Isaac Asimov as “a cult of ignorance” fostered by the then new ethic, “don’t trust the experts.”

Re: How to reuse silica gel packets

kallan — Sun, 12 Jul 2015 05:11:34 -0000

"How to reuse silica gel packets"?

So far so good, Cy, but you missed one crucial and very important fact about silica gel.

Silica gel absorbs moisture from its surroundings all the time and will quickly become useless on exposure to air. However, it can be revitalised by drying. Recycling can be successful only when several hundred grams of gel is collected. The gel spheres should really be removed from the packs before drying in an oven. However, gel can be rejuvenated while still in the packs if the method used is followed with care. Here are methods to use to do it:

1
In a standard oven: Put the silica gel in a Pyrex container with a loose fitting Pyrex lid such as a casserole dish and put it high in the oven. Set the oven for 135 degrees Celcius. It takes about an hour and a half to dry a kilogram of gel this way. Allow the oven to cool with the gel still in the covered Pyrex container.

2
In a microwave oven: Put the silica gel in a covered Pyrex dish (as for above) and set the microwave power to the medium to medium high. Heat for approximately 3 to 5 minutes. Stir the gel with a spoon and heat it for another 3 to 5 minutes. Approximate drying time is 10 to 15 minutes per kilogram of gel. Take care not to overheat the gel by this method as it can be destroyed easily. Allow the gel to cool while still in the covered Pyrex container.

Once dried and cool, your gel should be transferred quickly to an airtight container for storage before use.

Happy recycling!

Re: Roofs vs. rooves

kallan — Wed, 08 Jul 2015 22:56:12 -0000

Good grief, you can't write plain English either. By the way, you lost the whole thread of the argument from the start.

Re: ‘Killer’ Liquor Sachets Banned in Zambia

kallan — Fri, 03 Jul 2015 21:08:51 -0000

The hype over the so-called 'powdered alcohol' is a typical over-reaction brought about through ignorance of the facts: http://newmiddle-earth.blog...

Re: Roofs vs. rooves

kallan — Tue, 30 Jun 2015 06:38:47 -0000

OK I apologise for assuming you could understand plain English.

Re: Roofs vs. rooves

kallan — Tue, 30 Jun 2015 06:01:46 -0000

Good grief, Taz! "Idiot"? "(R)ewrite history"? I think if you go back far enough, but not too far, you will find that spelling, per se, only became an issue when publishers wanted to make a "standard" way of printing words. The "liberal" as you put it, would have existed way before that time. I am sure you are familiar that William Shakespeare and his near contemporary, John Donne both spelt (spelled?) their names many different ways and sometimes spelt their names differently on the same page. By the way, I'm 68, and I spell it as roofs - oh and I also write hoofs.

Re: Curiosity spots ‘artificial light source’ on Mars, but it probably isn’t alien life

kallan — Sun, 01 Mar 2015 20:00:49 -0000

About the bright object seen by Curiosity in October 2012 - why on earth (pun) do these crazy non-scientists always hit on the most unlikely possibility and say without further qualification or investigation that they know what a phenomenon is? It beats me how irrational so many of my human compatriots are, displaying not only rank ignorance at times but also sheer stupidity. It does not take a scientist to work out that, of all the possible things this light effect may be, it is extremely probable that it is an abberation, an artefact of the light conditions or a reflection off a rock as was suggested by the scientists. Sure, all things are worth investigating - and humans do this - but to even suggest without further evidence that there is a fair likelihood this phenomenon is an indication of a life form on Mars is astronomically irrational.

Re: EXCLUSIVE: NZ troops already in Iraq - Jon Stephenson

kallan — Wed, 25 Feb 2015 20:11:20 -0000

There is nothing more moronic than not learning from what has happened in the past. You need only look at the history of related violence and how it erupted almost throughout the world following the US and Britain entering of Iraq in 1990 - 1991 over the Kuwait crisis. A further feed to the fire happened after 9/11 when Afghanistan and again Iraq got a taste of US and British military. As for being gutless by learning from the past, if not being gutless means going to war in Iraq, I'd say no brain no pain.

Re: Everything You Need to Know About Becoming a Better Listener ~ Stephen's Web

kallan — Sun, 08 Feb 2015 07:10:13 -0000

I agree with Sarah Green on all points. I don't see that boredom of the listener should necessarily be the responsibility of the person delivering the talk/speech/lecture/whatever. Boredom usually occurs through lack of interest in the subject/content on the part of the listener and my experience is (and believe me I have attended probably thousands of lessons, lectures, seminars) that if the listener is genuinely interested in what is being said or displayed (and I'm talking about content here) then they are not bored.

As well, my experience is that if the listener is not interested in the (teaching/learning) content of what is delivered, then even the most engaging speech-giver will make no difference to the level of interest experienced by the listener in the content.

I am like you Stephen - when I listen to a speaker, I have lots of time to take notes, draw diagrams and even make notes on what I think of what I'm hearing (which is different from taking notes on what I'm hearing) including what I think of how poorly the speaker is attempting to put it across!

Given the most engaging speaker/display, if lectures are as ineffective as you seem to claim, then I have to proclaim that it is due to ineffective listening more often than not.

By the way Stephen - thanks for all you do in providing these abstracts with links. It is an invaluable source of useful material, all worth thinking about.

Re: The Science of Why Comment Trolls Suck

kallan — Wed, 23 Jan 2013 14:47:27 -0000

Kia ora e Chris,

You obviously have solicited a wealth of comments to this post that's for sure. I've read some but not all - normally I do not read comments. When I first started blogging I used to read the comments (and would add a comment if appropriate) for I thoroughly believed that was what blog conversation was all about. Now, not only do I not read the comments much when I read a post, but I have also more or less stopped commenting as a general rule. However, at the time that I was persuaded to blog (by other bloggers) I was also convince by them that the way to blog was to leave comments open.

I am now of the opinion that, for some bloggers, perhaps the best way to keep a blog is to write it like a diary that is publicly seen but that is not editable by the public - that's to say, have comments switched off. That way the opinion of the writer can remain intact without the hammer-anvil treatment that sometimes is given to blog posts that may well have the controversial aspect like climate change does.

Rangimarie

Re: Those Content To Lurk

kallan — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 19:29:49 -0000

Kia ora e Darren!

My take on this is that lurkers, whether learners or learned, do not contribute because they don't think that what they know and have to offer can or will make any difference to what other people know.

Nonnecke and Preece, who studied the Silent Participants believe this. Caleb Clark says that “communities grow best when there is value to being part of them”. He further elaborates that, “one of the hardest things to do in any online community is to get people to give information. One reason is that people just don't naturally think their way of doing things has value, when in fact it is the very heart of a community's value!”

Catchya later

Re: Feeling Like You Need a Recharge?

kallan — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 14:45:38 -0000

Kia ora e Ken

When I left my position as Head of Science in a secondary school in the 80s, to take up a position teaching adults how to use computers, I relinquished about 10 weeks leave per year that I was entitled to as a teacher. I had only 15 days leave per year in the corporate environment that I began working in.

After over a year working and enjoying my new job, my boss summoned me into her office and gave me a dressing down because she could not permit me to carry my accumulated leave over to the next year. I had worked for a whole year in the new job and not taken one day's leave (other than the statutory holidays which I had no choice over).

This was salutary for me. As a school teacher, I needed at least a week's leave winding down at the end of every term before I could enjoy what was left of the rest of the leave periods.

At Christmas, for instance, I would go on leave at around 15 Dec and take up to near Christmas day to come right. This, by the way, is a usual pattern for most school teachers.

So you are right to ask about the need to recharge. The trouble is when the employee has no real control over how they organise their working week. For as much as I enjoyed my job as a Head of Department, I had no real control over the quantity of work and teaching that I had to deliver, no more than was the case for any of my colleagues at that time. Changing my job was the only answer. And it worked.

Catchya later

Re: moments

kallan — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 17:18:14 -0000

Kia ora e Dave!

Thanks for the moments. This 4 minute video lasted a moment for me. In fact, I was astonished that it ran to 4 minutes. Magic!

Catchya later