Actually, Claire Perry is pretty much a laughing stock even inside her own party.
As are several others including the minister for Health (who believes in homoeopathy) and the minister for work and pensions (who faked his own CV) and the minister for local government (who looks as though he has eaten his way through the output of a pie factory). But all of the ministers in this government simply ignore any evidence which runs counter to their ideology.
Government department + software project = total failure.
I would love to know how cheaply this same project could be done. Probably by one person. Probably a $10,000 project with the final project size 100 times smaller, run 100 times faster, 100 times more accurate. [That is what I achieved after a payroll application they tried to force on our dept. was discarded and we rolled our own.]
Not a real biggie, just a replacement for Jobseeker’s Allowance, Income-related Employment and Support Allowance, Income Support, Child Tax Credits, Working Tax Credits, Housing Benefit for the whole of the UK population. I mean how hard can it be? Given your obvious talents I am sure you could knock something together using a few Excel macros by next Tuesday.
One of the things about this is that it is being driven by an ideologue who doesn't give a toss about evidence, not quite the person who thinks all government sponsored software development but pretty close.
As an outsider, it isn't fair for me to comment on her domestic policy. For the US, the 80's seemed decadent for the upwardly mobile segment of the population while the middle class waited for the benefits to trickle down as their economic security was threatened or eliminated. I'm assume the UK experience was similar with the upwardly mobile taking advantage of the deregulated markets and the middle class feeling the pressure from the lack of job security or outright job loss.
My wife's relatives come from the Barnsley area of West Yorkshire, mine from around Castleford in the same county. Thatcher's policies were a disaster for these and many other areas of the country outside of the London metropolitan region. They were directly responsible for the increase in unemployment from around 1.5 million to 3.5 million and the loss of jobs for a generation.
Look at the reports in the press and the broadcast media, notice how few come from the North of England, Wales or Scotland.
Besides, once this law is entrenched, removing any such limitations will be trivial.
Except if you read the legislation it will take a 2/3 majority in both houses of parliament to change the law.
There were replies to this above. JPII was actually quite progressive, as far as Popes go. Judging his progressiveness based solely on the way the church has handled homosexuality or contraception is quite a narrow view. Consider that popes before JPII didn't venture outside the Vatican very often, didn't address the faithful in their own language and didn't so openly help bring about the fall of the most dangerous and destructive evil empire in history (USSR: 30M+ intentionally starved citizens + countless political murders hell-bent on eliminating the thinking classes).
You can actually provide a causal warrant to show that he openly helped bring down the USSR? Impressive.
The guy had more important things on his mind, like saving the friggin' world, where he had some ground-breaking achievements. You want to judge JPII? You must be out of your mind.
Again, I presume you can justify this. Its an assertion I have seen a number of times, but I have never seen anything that would count as justification. As for "judging" him, this is the wrong word. "Criticising" would be better.
Perhaps "all sides" means diligently pointing out flaws in the theory where behavior is observed but not adequately understood. Punctuated equilibrium, missing link, I'm looking at the two of you in particular.
Evolution is the only theory for how species came to be as they are which is both credible *and* scientific. But it isn't a very good theory. If it was a good theory then it would be *testable*. One could use it to make reliable predictions about generational change in short lived animals based on whatever the factors are that induce change.
Certainly Karl Popper didn't initially think that the theory of evolution was testable, but he later changed his mind:
I have changed my mind about the testability and logical status of the theory of natural selection; and I am glad to have an opportunity to make a recantation...
The theory of natural selection may be so formulated that it is far from tautological. In this case it is not only testable, but it turns out to be not strictly universally true. There seem to be exceptions, as with so many biological theories; and considering the random character of the variations on which natural selection operates, the occurrence of exceptions is not surprising...
1976. Unended Quest. An Intellectual Autobiography.
If you want more concrete examples of how the theory is both testable and falsifiable you could try these pages.
So I know this is Fox News we're talking about here, but where exactly does one draw the line between a failure to check your sources, and becoming a tabloid?
You become a tabloid when you couple your failure to check sources with boobs, as is done in this British Murdoch publication.
And stop creating government regulations that give them lots of loopholes to exploit.
You would prefer there was no regulation at all?
You think the deregulation that took place under both Bush administrations was a good thing?
Considering how easy it would be to set off some of those cheap Blue-Rhino propane tanks and get a similar death-toll, I hop that NYC is going to have gas control next on the agenda.
Absolutely, it would avoid the huge amount of straw in your post igniting.