TheGunnShow

Rowe's shoes might just be the most polished performance of the season.

No horseplay here.

Might work, but here's a cheap laugh of me playing five-a-side in goal for a team I used to play for. This video footage is of two games, I wasn't playing in the first one, but the game I was playing in starts from 55 seconds in. I'm the goalie in blue, nearer the camera. (1) Facebook

Not really, it merely gives an order of priorities based on the quality of substantiating evidence. Determining the quality of evidence is a different ball game. But your last sentence could be readily summarised as my phrase "god of the gaps" - used as a substitute as knowledge hasn't reached the points in question yet.

Sure, no dispute at all there regarding unsubstantiated claims being a fuel for the scientific process, but the point here is which claims/models are given more credence at the time the question is posed, and a mental tool is useful for helping sift through various models at the time. And I would say that science has the habit of eating its young (revising what was previously considered correct when new evidence comes to light) as part of its progress or indeed if previously undiscovered weaknesses in methodologies come to light (the social sciences are particularly vulnerable there). If we bring it back to religion though, as I like to jocularly put it, we've been waiting 2,000 years to watch a god walk on Doffcocker Lodge (a local beauty spot).

I like the attempted twist in there, but then it invariably brings up the question of what use is an unsubstantiated claim regardless of the field of knowledge in which it is made? You could basically say anything with no evidence and expect it to be treated as seriously as anything that is thoroughly justified, observed, and evidenced. That brings it back nolens volens to your fair point about science also needing some assumptions to function, but you'd surely agree that minimising them as far as possible (and particularly on foundational matters) is a reasonable enough starting point?

I'll just have to ask for evidence on that bit in bold. 😉 However, it's digressing away from the fundamental use of the razor, namely putting the onus of evidence back on those making the claims. For that alone, it is an extremely good tool for creating clarity and seeing which points in discussion are more informed after analysis of evidence that is proffered. EDIT: It should go without saying that this is meant not just in religious terms, but in any discussion, regardless of topic.

Agree with the second paragraph, but not the first - simply as by definition the second paragraph takes political and economic ideas that tend to exist as a form of spectrum, whereas theism is an either/or - there is either definitive evidence for a god, or there is not. You're either dead or you're not. You're either pregnant or you're not. There's either a god or there isn't. I don't think Hitchens's Razor pretends there's nothing to know at all. It merely says "where's the definitive evidence?" It puts the onus back on the person making the claim, which is exactly where it should be.

Yeah, Birdie said something about curiosity, but I think it's more about how people choose to live with uncertainty and also lack of knowledge that is currently beyond our current scope/senses. I generally suspect religious people just "need" an answer much more than the non-religious. My stance there is "we don't know at all, we're working on it, let's wait for more defined/definite answers and I can live with the uncertainty as it currently stands".

This is precisely what I like about Hitchens's Razor - it helps provide some clarity of thought by reinforcing the notion that the onus of evidence is on that person making the claim. An atheist is simply saying "where's the evidence for a god's existence?" As I said in my previous post, it's basically all about the "god of the gaps". Can't explain it - just say a god did it. And it gets particularly shaky when they try to force codes of conduct based on it across society at large. The Abrahamic religions are all notoriously bad at this although some wings are more tolerant than others.

Think I'll feel this one tomorrow. To break up long runs on the treadmill I started doing them as a slower interval session. Remember that my half-marathon PB is 1:39:23, so just over 12.7km/h. As a means of breaking things up whilst providing some tempo work, I decided I'd run a period at a faster pace, an equal period at a slower one, then reduce each period by one, until I got down to zero. In other words, just as an example, 5 minutes fast, 5 minutes slow, then 4 minutes fast, then 4 minutes slow, then 3 - 2 - 1. Usually on flat ground my slow/recovery place is about 10.5km/h to 11km/h. Decided to have the slow pace at 10.5km/h and my fast at 13.1km/h, so a bit sharper than my half-mara PB. And I started out for an 11 minute fast spell, then 11 minutes slow, then 10 - 9... etc. Got down to finishing the slow 4 minute phase and two hours had elapsed. Longest run this year, so I cut it off at that having clocked up 23.6km/h whilst feeling fresh in cardio terms. I'd only covered the half-marathon distance for the first time since the first week of this year in Norway so to be putting over 10% on the covered distance already is pleasing enough. And without really slogging it for a prolonged period of time or even treating it as any form of race, it translated into a sub 1:47 half-marathon. That said, if I want to do proper marathon training, I can probably just drop back to my slow pace after two hours of that, then try to finish off with a mile of the faster stuff. EDIT: If I'm going mara training as well, that top pace can drop a fair bit. 12.5km/h should still hold as a faster pace for at least a full 11 step, if not 12. A 12-step would put me over two-and-a-half hours of interval work, 13 would get me to about three hours. That won't be 26 miles in one shot by any means, but the changes of pace should be very good strengthening work in training that would be somewhat faster than my target marathon pace.

Heard that Einstein said "marriage is but slavery made to appear civilised". That said, the demands he made of his first wife were - if I am being charitable - possibly of a man of his time at the turn of the 20th century but would undoubtedly appear unevolved to most vaguely sensible men nowadays, and that could have flavoured his perception.

Yep, thank heavens times have evolved. Said for a long time that the traditional set-up shafted men and women equally badly. Men were reduced to basically bringing the money home and getting the money in for the household, women were financially dependent on what the man could do and if the relationship broke up, she'd very little to fall back on. And the bloke would end up taking the brunt of the flak in divorce settlements. I don't think that many stayed in relationships so long due to love. I think they were trapped.

Ginnel's more a word used by people my age (mid-40s) or older, at least in Bolton. You'd get "alley" nowadays.

I was wondering when the first cuckoo of spring would sound out. I shouldn't be surprised it was Liz Truss.

Think he's gone off the usernames to be fair as Otsemobor was a right-back. The funny thing with me is that at eleven-a-side I tend to be happier at full-back/wing-back compared to being in goal as I'm only short but I'm also fit. At five-a-side or anything small-sided, I'm much stronger in goal than outfield as I don't have the tekkers.

I think you put Birdie on the wrong wing. 😉

As an average figure that might be right, but as you said, it would be heavily skewed upwards by the top sides in the WPL. Not to mention, I suspect it would also include bonuses and all earnings from outside, but at that point I'm guessing.

I suppose I'd put Jena or Cottbus on one with Norwich, but that's because of my own living arrangements/travels.

Which is exactly why the notion of a God shouldn't be entertained without definitive proof, otherwise all you get is a "God of the gaps". Can't explain a phenomenon - just say a "God" did it. And there's that hoary old strawman of "atheists believe that the world started from nothing" when an honest representation would be "we don't know exactly how the world started", which is anything but "nothing". As for the prayer ban, if it applies to all religions then I really do not see an issue with it at all - if it means so much to that kid they can always do it in break time. There was a quote in Sophie's World, which I think was attributed to Immanuel Kant but this might be incorrect, which roughly said "even if the world were only the size of an orange, we would not be smart enough to understand it in its entirety". Like you, I should have ended up religious but ultimately I vehemently rejected it. Hitchens's Razor is an excellent mental tool for ensuring clear thought in such matters.

Preston looked leggy in the last fifteen against us after a huge effort, so it's not that surprising that a fluent passing side in good form, like Southampton, has got stuck into them early on and got their rewards.

Not sure I'm keen on legislation where further tax increases would probably be a better way around the problem. EDIT: That said, I quite admire Portugal's stance in legalising all drugs, so forbidding any strikes me as being inconsistent.

In the same spirit, if we're having a Maradona or Pele moment, I'll choose Beckenbauer. More complete player.

Yep, I was amused/bemused at the criticism of the tactics before the Southampton game. Then again, Egil Olsen and George Graham were my favourite coaches as a kid/teenager so I've always got more time for those who realise they have to focus on defence first. Against a team that were absolutely flying like Southampton were at that point, it made perfect sense to absolutely gum up the works and stink the joint out.

Yep, Croy was wanted by all of East Germany's top clubs and Erich Mielke tried getting him for perpetual champions Dynamo Berlin, but he argued that as he played for a weaker team in the then East German Oberliga in Sachsenring Zwickau, he'd get far more practice and therefore stay sharper as a goalie. Pickford is not a top-drawer international-class goalie by any means, but he's rarely let England down, unlike Joe Hart or even Rob Green. And I actually think it's because he plays for a weaker PL side in Everton that keeps him sharp / near his best when he plays internationally.