Pat Condell: The Water of Life

A lot doesn’t really need saying again when it is said so well already by Pat Condell.

Here’s his latest video, The Water of Life:

BPC Radio 4

I like to listen to Radio 4 because it really the only intelligent conversation on the radio in the United Kingdom. The trouble is it is so infested with political correctness. It’s only 11.30am and already we’ve had the following:

The guest producer of The Today Programme today was Zadie Smith, the writer of mutliculturalist themed fiction. She says of her book White Teeth: “There’s sadness for the way tradition is fading away but I wanted to show people making an effort to understand each other, despite their cultural differences”. That’s great, but I wonder whose tradition she was talking about here? Undoubtedly it is that of immigrants rather than that of the host nation. But unfortunately multiculturalism doesnt work when incompatible value systems collide.

It was then announced that tomorrow’s guest editor will be none other than Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor. So they have actually handed over the editorial reins of the flagship radio news programme to a person who is proud of believing things without evidence (viz. has “faith”).

I wander into the kitchen later and turn it on again. Of course, one gap had not yet been filled: I find a transsexual on the radio being probed about his/her life.

I’m not saying these things should never be discussed, but Radio 4 is so saturated with political correctness now, you just end up controversially thinking – “Can’t we have some normal people on for a change?”.

Update: 2nd Jan 2009

Well, I wake up and – following the Iraqi-born guest editor of The Today Programme - it’s time for Desert Island Discs again. Who is it today? A “British Muslim Marxist feminist”. What a mouthful! I might have guessed! That must be tricky, being a Muslim and a feminist…

Update: 4th Jan 2009

I just heard Laurie Taylor describe evolution as a theory of accident, which is the exact opposite of the truth. Evolution is in fact a theory of rigorous selection. It’s sad how often this error is made.

I also heard a serious biological discussion of how Mary could have had a virgin birth. Hello? Isn’t it more likely this simply did not happen? Somehow I think so. Given standards of evidence at the time, and that accounts were written long after these events supposedly happened, it is astonishing what credence is given to them.

It looks like I can’t listen to Radio 4 any more. But then what do I have?

Nice quotation

“People who don’t like their beliefs being laughed at shouldn’t have such funny beliefs.”

- Brad Reddekopp

How really to cook rice

You’d think cooking rice like you have in Indian restaurants would be simple. I did. But when you look around the Net for instructions you find countless different methods, involving “absorption”, washing the rice multiple times, soaking it, straining it, frying it, all kinds of things. You try these methods and invariably end up with a big lump of rice like a rice pudding, with all the grains stuck together. You say to yourself “I followed the instructions exactly!” – but that doesn’t seem to work.

You feel cheated. It ends up seeming like some arcane special secret: how to simply cook rice that is fluffy and separate.  What are these people, geniuses? It seems like Mission Impossible.

Well, it turns out it’s not hard. Put away all those obscure recipes, close down your web browser (after printing this! ) and prepare to cook rice the easy way and get the elusive result you have been seeking.

1. Get the rice. It doesn’t need to be some special brand. Just make it basmati rice.
2. Weigh out 300 grams of it. This amount will serve two people with proper portions (not supermarket ones!).
3. Don’t bother with washing it, soaking it, rinsing out the bleach or any of that business. It’s a waste of time and unnecessary.
4. Measure out some water. 1 litre per 300 grams is about right. The point is you want plenty of water to allow the rice to fly around while it’s cooking: the exact opposite of the fabled absorption method.
5. Put the water in an empty kettle and boil it. While this is happening turn your oven on at about 175° C and turn a ring on to warm it up.
6. Water has boiled. Pour it in a fairly big steel saucepan, so the pan is about half full.
7. Let the water come to the boil on the ring.
8. Once it’s boiling well, tip the rice in and note the time. Stir it around a little, gently, to stop it sticking to the bottom on the pan. You can use a desert spoon to do that.
9. If you fancy having a subtle flavour to the rice, and having it a little yellow, you can stick a few strands of saffron in at this point. It’s expensive but nice. You just need maybe four or five small pieces.
10. Keep the rice busy. Keep the ring on high and the water boiling. Stir it around gently occasionally.
11. We come to a crucial point now: you have to get the rice out at exactly the right time. The right time is when it hasn’t gone soft but it’s no longer hard either. In Italian this is called al dente. You check the rice (I use a small desert fork) occasionally to see when it’s reaching this stage. With the measurements we’re using it happens after 7-8 minutes. You don’t want to miss this moment, so check it before then! You can actually see the rice swelling a bit at this point, but you want to get it out while it still has a bit of “bite”. This is because any longer and it will start sticking together – and it will cook more outside the pan. You’re planning for that.
12. Once the rice seems to have reached the point described above then, take the pan off the boil. Anchor a large sieve above the sink and pour the whole pan load into that.
13. Leave it there for a few minutes and prepare an oven tray or bowl with some foil covering, oiled a little. The foil is simply to protect the container and the oil to stop the rice sticking.
14. After about 3 minutes, when the rice has drained, spread it out in the container. You don’t need to be washing it through with cold water or anything like that.
15. Okay, this next stage is not even crucial, but now you put it in your pre-heated oven and leave it there for about 15 minutes. This will dry it out and fluff it up a bit.
16. After 15 mins is up, you take it out, mix it up a bit with a fork and maybe transfer it to the bowl of your choice. Then just leave it to cool. It goes more separate when it cools. (Rice freezes especially well and this helps with the separation process too. It microwaves fine.)
17. After allowing it to cool for about 10 mins, you’ve got yourself a bowl of separate, fluffy, very tasty rice of exactly the right consistency. Heat it up a little in a microwave if you like, but it’s ready to go now! I recommend a nice hot curry and a pint of something you like.

And that is how really to cook rice.

Beethoven: Mir is so wunderbar

Listen to the grace, composure, timing and perfect harmony in this sublime piece from Beethoven’s only opera, Fidelio…

Intelligent Life

Today I saw a magazine called Intelligent Life. It is produced by The Economist. It’s largely full of adverts, like most magazines, but it did contain an article called “Wising Up – the age of mass intelligence”. (Bizarrely it is also giving away its content word for word, for free on the Net.) I thought the title of this article must surely be ironic, so I took a look.

You can see from the online version that it contains a lot of photos of people with things like “Millwall, Metalicca, Mahler” tattooed on their shaven heads, “Socrates” tattoos on their knuckles, and most ridiculous of all, a great big cover image of Paris Hilton supposedly perusing War & Peace.

The fact that these image are faked is evidence enough against the contention of the article. This kind of thing – precisely – doesn’t happen (or at least extremely rarely happens). I don’t find any convincing arguments in the body of the article either, though the pictures were very nearly enough to put me off reading it at all.

As one commenter says on that page, “Postmodernism had taken its toll on academic intelligence”. There is, more than anything, inverted elitism currently in the UK, as I have recently mentioned. It is supposedly cool not to be interested in high art, to be morally laissez-faire, to regard intelligent people as “boffins”. This is in fact idiocy, but it’s the trend. For this article to suggest otherwise and that all is okay, I think only serves to exentuate the problem rather than alleviate it. The publishers, in my view, are simply being contrary and controversial in order to try to sell the magazine, and not making this statement because the they believe it to be true.

Books on etiquette and manners

Wandering around Hatchards of Piccadilly this evening, I was struck by how many books on manners and etiquette seem to have suddenly popped up. I counted no fewer than 8 different titles on prominent display. Now Hatchards is a civilised and traditional bookseller, but this nonetheless says something about the state of society.

Perhaps a lot of people are concerned about the breakdown of manners, and the “me first”, “rights before duties”, relativistic society which political correctness encourages which we all now have to suffer. We can only hope so.

Looking through the books, one wonders if they are poking fun at the admirable manners of bygone eras, which would be typical of the sneering leftist cynicism and inverted eltism that is so common nowadays. But perhaps not. They are cashing in, no doubt, but that’s the nature of the marketplace, and it is far better that people cash in by producing books such as these than idiotic “chick lit” books which promote misguided selfish values or yet more books (ghost written) by celebrities.

The advice in the books is sometimes cast in feminist terms (perhaps they couldn’t get in print at all otherwise?) as the authors try to reconcile the grace and humility valued in – and by – women in the past with the aggression and ugly egotism so vaunted today. But on the whole the advice to both sexes is good and should be taken seriously.

Can people even be taught manners? Or is an insensitive oaf destined to always remain an insensitive oaf? That’s an interesting question. But people can be taught manners. Just as a person with little innate musical ability might never play a musical instrument as well as a natural, they can in most cases at least be taught to play.

The earlier this happens, the better, of course. But if people are not taught early, as many thousands now are not (and they are hardly set a good example by the media) then they should be forced to behave with manners later, the society around them bringing any necessary sanctions to bear on them. That is called civilisation.

Sinéad O’Connor – The Emperor’s New Clothes

An odd dance by Sinéad O’Connor here, to be sure, but this is a song that brings back memories for me.

A mixture of good and bad lyrics in here, I think, the best ones being:

“They laugh because they know they’re untouchable – not because what I said was wrong.”

And of course:

“Through their own words they will be exposed: they got a solid case of the Emperor’s New Clothes.”

Because you certainly see a lot of that these days…

Nice quotation

“Organized religions in general, in my opinion, are dying forms. They were all very important when we didn’t know why the sun moved, why weather changed, why hurricanes occurred, or volcanoes happened. Modern religion is the end trail of modern mythology.”

- actor Bruce Willis

The cruelty of Kosher and Halal killing

Jews and Muslims (and Christians, for that matter) don’t decide for themselves what is moral and what is not, instead they take their instruction from their books. Or try to: they don’t always follow them (which is in some ways a fortunate thing). One thing the two faiths have in common is an extremely cruel means of killing animals – Kosher for Judaism and Halal in Islam.

Here is something from the Wikipedia about the Kosher slaughter process (which is very similar to the Halal one):

“Kashrut prohibits slaughter of an unconscious animal, and the slaughtering is done by cutting the front of the throat first. Some animal rights groups object to kosher slaughter, claiming that it can take several minutes for the animal to die and can often cause suffering. Since the spinal cord is not severed completely at the first cut, it is thought that the slaughtered animal’s nervous system continues to function during the initial moments of the slaughter, causing the animal to undergo an agonisingly slow and painful death.

In 2003 in the UK, an independent advisory group – the Farm Animal Welfare Council (FAWC) – concluded that the way Kosher (and Halal) meat is produced causes severe suffering to animals and should be banned immediately. Kosher and halal butchers deny their method of killing animals is cruel and expressed anger over the recommendation.^[40]

In April 2008, the Food and Farming minister in the UK, Lord Rooker, stated that Halal and kosher meat should be labelled when it is put on sale, so that the public can decide whether or not they want to buy food from animals that have bled to death. He was quoted as saying, “I object to the method of slaughter … my choice as a customer is that I would want to buy meat that has been looked after and slaughtered in the most humane way possible.”. The RSPCA supported Lord Rooker’s views.” ^[41]

I have seen a video of the kosher slaughter process and it was absolutely horrific. I think this is an under-represented issue in the United Kingdom (because of fear of religious reprisal, as usual). Let’s be clear: what this extract says is that these practices have already been found to be cause severe suffering to animals and should be banned immediately. Yet nothing has happened. Nothing whatsoever. What is the excuse for this? There is none, except appeasement. Well… appeasement was the United Kingdom’s early policy against Hitler. You will recall it didn’t work.

Statistics

“Lies, damned lies, and statistics.”

- attrib. Benjamin Disraeli

The readiness with which many people assert “facts” and statistics as if they are somehow knock-down arguments, when they have only ever heard them second-hand, is alarming. There should be a little humility, in order that people don’t make themselves look silly. It goes like this: “I’ve heard that…”, “Apparently…”, “It says here that…”. Because rarely do they or can they really know for sure.

Related post

Sam Harris: Losing our spines to save our necks

“The connection between the doctrine of Islam and Islamist violence is simply not open to dispute. It’s not that critics of religion like myself speculate that such a connection might exist: the point is that Islamists themselves acknowledge and demonstrate this connection at every opportunity and to deny it is to retreat within a fantasy world of political correctness and religious apology.

Many western scholars, like the much admired Karen Armstrong, appear to live in just such a place. All of their talk about how benign Islam “really” is, and about how the problem of fundamentalism exists in all religions, only obfuscates what may be the most pressing issue of our time: Islam, as it is currently understood and practiced by vast numbers of the world’s Muslims, is antithetical to civil society. A recent poll showed that thirty-six percent of British Muslims (ages 16-24) believe that a person should be killed for leaving the faith.”

- Sam Harris, The Huffington Post

And so they should if they are following the Qu’ran properly.

Marcus du Sautoy – new Simonyi Professor for the Public Understanding of Science

The person to take Richard Dawkins’ crown then, as the new Simonyi Professor for the Public Understanding of Science, is Marcus du Sautoy.

I had never heard of him, but I just awoke to Desert Island Discs on BBC Radio 4, on which he was the guest. He came across as very likable and very clever.

We had to put up with Kirsty Young’s interviewing style, however. I always feel she probes like some kind of amateur psychoanalyst – she often asks questions which have obvious answers or which the interviewee will simply flatly contradict. She also comes across to me as a little sexist and “man weary”.  She says at one point, for example, “I think you’ll find that’s called being a man”. Imagine this reversed – would it be acceptable? No, but men are expected to just laugh it off. That’s fine – then we can all laugh off this kind of comment. There just must not be any double standards. (See here, by the way, an interesting article on Jeremy Paxman’s concern over an increasingly female-dominated media, and the comments below it.) Kirsty Young also seems very much to do this dumbing down thing of them and us: you are a clever boffin, I am one of the normal (media) people – and I’m that little bit cooler. (I don’t say she says these things literally, but to me they always come across to me in tone and style.)

Well, such dumbing down is idiotic. The coolest person by far is he who has just been appointed Simonyi Professor for the Public Understanding of Science.

Prof. du Sautoy is an atheist. I felt he ran down Prof. Dawkins a little when he said he did not see it as his place to criticise religion while promoting science, because I agree with Dawkins that these are two sides of the same coin. Since religious dogma is by its nature at odds with science, criticising religion is effectively part of promoting science. It is analogous to the way that seeking to stop (or at least limit) torture is part of promoting human rights (in fact it is the same thing in some ways).

But then Prof. du Sautoy’s wife is Jewish. This would explain a slight softening on religion, especially as they have been through some very hard times indeed.

All of Prof. du Sautoy’s music choices were classical. This struck me as a little limited (though they were all good). I did agree with him though that mathematics is an excellent subject to follow evolutionary biology. It is one that few study any more, in this age of computers, and one I personally find both fascinating and difficult. I hope Prof. du Sautoy has much success promoting it to the public, but also slams it to religion at the same time, as it is the primary enemy of science and of free thought in general. (It is closely followed by apathy.)

Country music

Having just spent another month in the USA, I heard quite a lot of country music. This has an unfashionable and almost ridiculous reputation among the public of the United Kingdom. It is thought to be “uncool”. Since things that are deemed to be “cool” are often stupid, I thought I would have a closer listen to some country music and see if I like it. I discovered that I do like a lot of it.

Country music is tremendously popular in the United States. It is a part of their tradition, especially in the mid-west. Elvis Presley had his roots in Country, and according to Wikipedia, the artist Garth Brooks has alone sold more than 128 million records (he is is the top-selling solo artist in U.S. history), Alan Jackson has sold nearly as many records as the entire population of the United Kingdom, and in 2006 alone 36 million Country records were sold. So it does deserve a second look. And what do we find?

Sometimes it is a little comical, but in a good way. You’ll have people singing about their four wheel drive, celebrating the fact they are Country born and bred. You’ll get a few “hicks” in the mix, people who’ve never had a passport, and never want one. Religion is also often in evidence, unfortunately. But you will also find many tracks celebrating core family values, decency and personal integrity in the face of hardship. They sing about such things with a straight face – and why shouldn’t they?

I’m sick and tired of America-bashing. Of course the country has its faults, but ultra left-wing fascist apologists always so eager to pull it down should try living with China as the world’s leading superpower instead (it’s fast happening). I have found a politeness and sense of community in Florida which is completely and utterly missing in London, and I admire the constantly upbeat, optimistic attitude which is typical of Americans (and which you will find, of course, in Country music).

So don’t be too fast to mock this genre. Much of the music is not corny, but heartfelt, and a lot better than the stuff that fills the charts over here. Other tracks are just plain good fun!

Listen to country music for free here.