Burgess: venerean strabismus

[Marius Hancu]

Hello:

I don't think
"venerean strabismus"
is a recognized medical condition, or is it? Couldn't find it as
such.

Does it say that Venus suffered from it?:-)

---
[About Toomey's sister, Hortense]

She had a slight venerean strabismus and a strong straight French
nose.

Anthony Burgess, Earthly Powers, p. 64
----

--
Thanks.
Marius Hancu

[Cheryl]

That's a tough one. 'Venerean' and 'venereal' and similar words usually
have something to do with sex. Strabismus is sometimes called 'wandering
eye'. 'Wandering eye' can also mean being unfaithful, or at least paying
rather too much attention to members of the opposite sex other than the
one you are married to, engaged to, or otherwise committed to.

Perhaps Hortense liked sex and was always eyeing up lots of different
attractive men?
--
Cheryl

[Marius Hancu]

On Sep 3, 7:09 am, Cheryl <cperk...@mun.ca> wrote:

> Perhaps Hortense liked sex and was always eyeing up lots of different
> attractive men?

Nothing like that yet, I think. She was very young at the time.

But I'll keep an open eye to it:-)

Thanks.
Marius Hancu

[James Hogg]

Quoth Marius Hancu <marius...@gmail.com>, and I quote:

>Hello:
>
>I don't think
>"venerean strabismus"
>is a recognized medical condition, or is it? Couldn't find it as
>such.
>
>Does it say that Venus suffered from it?:-)
>
>---
>[About Toomey's sister, Hortense]
>
>She had a slight venerean strabismus and a strong straight French
>nose.

Googling suggests that it means a "lazy eye" or a slight squint.
Why that should be described as venerean escapes me.

--
James

[Leslie Danks]

James Hogg wrote:

Perhaps because it enabled her to keep a venereal bede on someone.

--
Les (BrE)

[James Hogg]

Quoth Leslie Danks <leslie...@aon.at>, and I quote:

Venomous, shirley?

--
James

[John Dean]

There are two versions of strabismus depending which way the eyes squint. I
suspect Burgess means the cross-eyed version. Hortense has a slight
cross-eyed look and this is held to be sexually attractive.
Nothing to do with Dr Strabismus of Utrecht (whom God etc ...)
--
John Dean
Oxford

[Marius Hancu]

On Sep 3, 9:45 am, "John Dean" <john-d...@fraglineone.net> wrote:
> Marius Hancu wrote:
> > On Sep 3, 7:09 am, Cheryl <cperk...@mun.ca> wrote:
>
> >> Perhaps Hortense liked sex and was always eyeing up lots of different
> >> attractive men?
>
> > Nothing like that yet, I think. She was very young at the time.
>
> > But I'll keep an open eye to it:-)
>
> There are two versions of strabismus depending which way the eyes squint. I
> suspect Burgess means the cross-eyed version. Hortense has a slight
> cross-eyed look and this is held to be sexually attractive.

Right, it is, not that I know why:-)

> Nothing to do with Dr Strabismus of Utrecht (whom God etc ...)

Thank you all.
Marius Hancu

[leothefri...@gmail.com]

Strabismus refers to having one eye turned slightly inwards. Burgess found this attractive in women (hence the venerean, referring to Venus).

Interestingly, in Japanese kabuki, turning cross-eyed signifies passion, so perhaps AB's proclivity is less idiosyncratic than one might think.

[Iain Archer]

wrote on Fri, 27 Jul 2012

I've remembered his "venerean X", in an unimpressed sort of way. It
turned up more than once in the one book of his that I've read, Earthly
Powers, and began to look a bit like a cliche, if not affectation.
--
Iain Archer

[Pablo]

leothefri...@gmail.com escribió:

> Strabismus refers to having one eye turned slightly inwards. Burgess found
> this attractive in women (hence the venerean, referring to Venus).

I think it usually means that the wearer of said eye is inbred. I've lived
in small villages and seen a lot of the effects of inbreeding. It ain't
nice.

--
Pablo

[CDB]

On Jul 27, 5:08 am, leothefriendlyl...@gmail.com wrote:
> Strabismus refers to having one eye turned slightly inwards. Burgess found this attractive in women (hence the venerean, referring to Venus).
>
> Interestingly, in Japanese kabuki, turning cross-eyed signifies passion, so perhaps AB's proclivity is less idiosyncratic than one might think.

But Marius says there's no indication of proclivities. Could Burgess
simply be specifying an outward-turning squint with a pun on
"wandering eye"?

[Don Phillipson]

"CDB" <belle...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:a719acea-f485-4611...@m8g2000yqo.googlegroups.com...

Not likely on literary grounds. Authors since Chaucer have told us
specific
physical features betoken lecherous tastes. (His indicator was a gap
between
the front teeth, as sported by the Wife of Bath. This always made me wonder
about a particular kinswoman's private life . . .)

--
Don Phillipson
Carlsbad Springs
(Ottawa, Canada)

[John Varela]

On Fri, 27 Jul 2012 09:08:07 UTC, leothefri...@gmail.com
wrote:

> Strabismus refers to having one eye turned slightly inwards. Burgess found this attractive in women (hence the venerean, referring to Venus).
>
> Interestingly, in Japanese kabuki, turning cross-eyed signifies passion, so perhaps AB's proclivity is less idiosyncratic than one might think.
>

On a tour of Sicily I learned that "Orlando" is Italian for "Roland"
and that he is a standard character in Sicilian puppet shows, always
represented as being cross-eyed.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/francesco79/4058221799

--
John Varela

[Frank S]

"Don Phillipson" <e9...@SPAMBLOCK.ncf.ca> wrote in message
news:juukdu$voa$2...@speranza.aioe.org...

There's a word for that. Diastema, isn't it?

I knew an aura-reader who said people with that upper gap showed colors
consistent with third-eye perceptions.

--
Frank ess

[R H Draney]

Frank S filted:

>
>
>"Don Phillipson" <e9...@SPAMBLOCK.ncf.ca> wrote in message
>news:juukdu$voa$2...@speranza.aioe.org...
>>

>> Not likely on literary grounds. Authors since Chaucer have told us
>> specific
>> physical features betoken lecherous tastes. (His indicator was a gap
>> between
>> the front teeth, as sported by the Wife of Bath. This always made me
>> wonder
>> about a particular kinswoman's private life . . .)
>
>There's a word for that. Diastema, isn't it?
>
>I knew an aura-reader who said people with that upper gap showed colors
>consistent with third-eye perceptions.

I've been trying unsuccessfully for a couple of decades now to find a copy of
this movie:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0095199

....r


--
Me? Sarcastic?
Yeah, right.

[R H Draney]

Lewis filted:
>
>In message <juvtt...@drn.newsguy.com>

> R H Draney <dado...@spamcop.net> wrote:
>
>> I've been trying unsuccessfully for a couple of decades now to find a copy of
>> this movie:
>
>> http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0095199
>

>$30 <https://www.lesblank.com/mail_Personal.html>

A dollar per minute?...I just want to *see* the film; I don't need to become a
majority shareholder....r

[peterjus...@gmail.com]

Burgess is translating the Italian term "strabismo di Venere"---fittingly because Hortense in "Earthly Powers" has married an Italian composer.

"Venerean strabismus" is a term that refers to Botticelli's famous painting of the birth of Venus, where the goddess is represented as slightly cross-eyed:

https://books.google.com/books?id=_Y5_AwAAQBAJ&pg=PA8&lpg=PA8&dq=aphrodite+%22cross-eyed%22&source=bl&ots=B24Nqashv-&sig=CL6r9LSTNdjE-BzBcZizguTw3TY&hl=en&sa=X&ei=jX4xVdOjBcyjyASlrYCQCg&ved=0CDoQ6AEwCQ#v=onepage&q=aphrodite%20%22cross-eyed%22&f=false

The underlying idea is that perfect beauty must necessarily have a small flaw in order to set it off. However, the concept is earlier than Botticelli and can be traced all the back to classical Rome. The Roman satirist Petronius (whom Burgess uses as a character in "The Kingdom of the Wicked") gives these words to a character in "The Satyricon":

"Nam quod strabonus est, non curo: sicut Venus spectat." (Sat. LXVIII)

The Loeb Classical Library edition of Petronius translates this as:

"For I do not mind his being cross-eyed: he has a look like Venus."

This is what Burgess is referring to whenever he uses the phrase "Venerean strabismus."

It's

[Don Phillipson]

<peterjus...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:0f8e00bc-7cdd-4ffc...@googlegroups.com...

> The underlying idea is that perfect beauty must necessarily have a small
> flaw in order to set it off.
> However, the concept is earlier than Botticelli and can be traced all the
> back to classical Rome. The
> Roman satirist Petronius (whom Burgess uses as a character in "The Kingdom
> of the Wicked") gives
> these words to a character in "The Satyricon":
>
> "Nam quod strabonus est, non curo: sicut Venus spectat." (Sat. LXVIII)
> The Loeb Classical Library edition of Petronius translates this as:
> "For I do not mind his being cross-eyed: he has a look like Venus."
>
> This is what Burgess is referring to whenever he uses the phrase "Venerean
> strabismus."

This survived among English soldiery into the 20th century.
RAF airmen in the 1950s told each other women with squints
were easier than others.

[Will Parsons]

peterjus...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> Burgess is translating the Italian term "strabismo di Venere"---fittingly because Hortense in "Earthly Powers" has married an Italian composer.
>
> "Venerean strabismus" is a term that refers to Botticelli's famous painting of the birth of Venus, where the goddess is represented as slightly cross-eyed:
>
> https://books.google.com/books?id=_Y5_AwAAQBAJ&pg=PA8&lpg=PA8&dq=aphrodite+%22cross-eyed%22&source=bl&ots=B24Nqashv-&sig=CL6r9LSTNdjE-BzBcZizguTw3TY&hl=en&sa=X&ei=jX4xVdOjBcyjyASlrYCQCg&ved=0CDoQ6AEwCQ#v=onepage&q=aphrodite%20%22cross-eyed%22&f=false
>
> The underlying idea is that perfect beauty must necessarily have a small flaw in order to set it off. However, the concept is earlier than Botticelli and can be traced all the back to classical Rome. The Roman satirist Petronius (whom Burgess uses as a character in "The Kingdom of the Wicked") gives these words to a character in "The Satyricon":
>
> "Nam quod strabonus est, non curo: sicut Venus spectat." (Sat. LXVIII)
>
> The Loeb Classical Library edition of Petronius translates this as:
>
> "For I do not mind his being cross-eyed: he has a look like Venus."
>
> This is what Burgess is referring to whenever he uses the phrase "Venerean strabismus."

It's always annoyed me when science fiction writers would use the
barbarism "Venusian" to refer to an inhabitant of Venus, rather than
the correct "Venerean".

--
Will

[Stan Brown]

On 18 Apr 2015 16:02:54 GMT, Will Parsons wrote:
>
> It's always annoyed me when science fiction writers would use the
> barbarism "Venusian" to refer to an inhabitant of Venus, rather than
> the correct "Venerean".

Correct according to which authority and for which English?

AHD4 defines "Venusian" as

"Of, relating to, or characteristic of the planet Venus.
"A hypothetical inhabitant of the planet Venus."

AHD4 it makes no mention of "Venerean" as an alternative, and that
word is not an entry in the dictionary.

If "Venerean" ever was standard, I suspect bit's been driven out by
the too-close pronunciation and spelling of "venereal".

--
"The difference between the /almost right/ word and the /right/ word
is ... the difference between the lightning-bug and the lightning."
--Mark Twain
Stan Brown, Tompkins County, NY, USA http://OakRoadSystems.com

[Joe Fineman]

Stan Brown <the_sta...@fastmail.fm> writes:

> On 18 Apr 2015 16:02:54 GMT, Will Parsons wrote:
>>
>> It's always annoyed me when science fiction writers would use the
>> barbarism "Venusian" to refer to an inhabitant of Venus, rather than
>> the correct "Venerean".
>
> Correct according to which authority and for which English?
>
> AHD4 defines "Venusian" as
>
> "Of, relating to, or characteristic of the planet Venus.
> "A hypothetical inhabitant of the planet Venus."
>
> AHD4 it makes no mention of "Venerean" as an alternative, and that
> word is not an entry in the dictionary.
>
> If "Venerean" ever was standard, I suspect bit's been driven out by
> the too-close pronunciation and spelling of "venereal".

OED calls it obsolete -- and when it was used, it meant venereal, in a
medical or astrological sense.
--
--- Joe Fineman jo...@verizon.net

||: If wishes were horses, there would be an easy explanation :||
||: for all this horseshit. :||

[CDB]

On 18/04/2015 5:17 PM, Joe Fineman wrote:

> Stan Brown <the_sta...@fastmail.fm> writes:
>> Will Parsons wrote:

>>> It's always annoyed me when science fiction writers would use
>>> the barbarism "Venusian" to refer to an inhabitant of Venus,
>>> rather than the correct "Venerean".

>> Correct according to which authority and for which English?

>> AHD4 defines "Venusian" as

>> "Of, relating to, or characteristic of the planet Venus. "A
>> hypothetical inhabitant of the planet Venus."

>> AHD4 it makes no mention of "Venerean" as an alternative, and that
>> word is not an entry in the dictionary.

>> If "Venerean" ever was standard, I suspect bit's been driven out
>> by the too-close pronunciation and spelling of "venereal".

> OED calls it obsolete -- and when it was used, it meant venereal, in
> a medical or astrological sense.

But the two fit nicely into a pattern: Mercurian/mercurial,
Venerean/venereal, Martian/martial, Jovian/jovial. (OK,
Saturnian/saturnine.) Maybe Terrestrian/terrestrial. "Corps
Diplomatique Terrestrienne" (sic) in the Retief novels, wasn't it?

I have a vague memory of some elaborate ruse that was necessary, in the
early days of radio, to get the word "syphilis" spoken on the air.
Surely it was the tabooed nature of "venereal" that skunked "venerean"
and begat "Venusian".

[Mark Brader]

Will Parsons:

> It's always annoyed me when science fiction writers would use the

> barbarism "Venusian" to refer to an inhabitant of Venus...

This comes up here every few years. I again suggest that the last
word on the subject belongs to Sir Arthur C. Clarke:

# The adjective for the planet Venus presents grave linguistic problems.
# "Venusian" is unacceptable to purists; "Venerean" raises false
# expectations; "Cytherean" is correct but no one except classical
# scholars understands what it means. Take your choice.

(In "The Promise of Space", 1968.)
--
Mark Brader | "Don't be a luddy-duddy! Don't be a mooncalf!
Toronto | Don't be a jabbernowl! You're not those, are you?"
m...@vex.net | --W.C. Fields, "The Bank Dick"

[James Silverton]

On 4/23/2015 11:22 AM, Mark Brader wrote:
> Will Parsons:
>> It's always annoyed me when science fiction writers would use the
>> barbarism "Venusian" to refer to an inhabitant of Venus...
>
> This comes up here every few years. I again suggest that the last
> word on the subject belongs to Sir Arthur C. Clarke:
>
> # The adjective for the planet Venus presents grave linguistic problems.
> # "Venusian" is unacceptable to purists; "Venerean" raises false
> # expectations; "Cytherean" is correct but no one except classical
> # scholars understands what it means. Take your choice.
>
> (In "The Promise of Space", 1968.)
>

Overall, I agree with the comments and, to me, the best compromise
adjective is "Venusian", which I don't find barbarous (but I'm no
classical scholar.)

--
Jim Silverton (Potomac, MD)

Extraneous "not." in Reply To.

[Richard Tobin]

In article <y5ednUnC5Yiuk6TI...@vex.net>,

Mark Brader <m...@vex.net> wrote:

># The adjective for the planet Venus presents grave linguistic problems.
># "Venusian" is unacceptable to purists; "Venerean" raises false
># expectations; "Cytherean" is correct but no one except classical
># scholars understands what it means. Take your choice.

Since Venus is Aphrodite as surely as the morning star is the
evening star, how about "Aphroditean"?

-- Richard

[R H Draney]

ric...@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Richard Tobin) wrote in news:mhb4bf$13t6$2
@macpro.inf.ed.ac.uk:

I was just saying that to my good friend, Ishtar Morgenstern....r

[Peter T. Daniels]

Wouldn't that have to be Aphrodisian, thus returning to the original
indelicacy (or "false expectations")?

[Will Parsons]

On 23 Apr 2015, James Silverton wrote:
> On 4/23/2015 11:22 AM, Mark Brader wrote:
>> Will Parsons:
>>> It's always annoyed me when science fiction writers would use the
>>> barbarism "Venusian" to refer to an inhabitant of Venus...
>>
>> This comes up here every few years. I again suggest that the last
>> word on the subject belongs to Sir Arthur C. Clarke:
>>
>> # The adjective for the planet Venus presents grave linguistic problems.
>> # "Venusian" is unacceptable to purists; "Venerean" raises false
>> # expectations; "Cytherean" is correct but no one except classical
>> # scholars understands what it means. Take your choice.
>>
>> (In "The Promise of Space", 1968.)

At least he recognized the problem!

> Overall, I agree with the comments and, to me, the best compromise
> adjective is "Venusian", which I don't find barbarous (but I'm no
> classical scholar.)

If you were, you would!

--
Will

[Will Parsons]

Why, I think you're right!

--
Will

[Richard Tobin]

In article <6600e738-23f1-4d15...@googlegroups.com>,

Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:

>> Since Venus is Aphrodite as surely as the morning star is the
>> evening star, how about "Aphroditean"?
>
>Wouldn't that have to be Aphrodisian, thus returning to the original
>indelicacy (or "false expectations")?

Hmm, I guess the problem is inherent in the goddess.

-- Richard

[charles]

In article <mhb3dj$dee$2...@dont-email.me>,

It certainly feature in "Dan Dare"

--
From KT24 in Surrey

Using a RISC OS computer running v5.18

[Guy Barry]

"Richard Tobin" wrote in message news:mhba54$16ol$3...@macpro.inf.ed.ac.uk...

>
>In article <6600e738-23f1-4d15...@googlegroups.com>,
>Peter T. Daniels <gram...@verizon.net> wrote:

>> Richard Tobin wrote:
>
>>> Since Venus is Aphrodite as surely as the morning star is the
>>> evening star, how about "Aphroditean"?
>>
>>Wouldn't that have to be Aphrodisian, thus returning to the original
>>indelicacy (or "false expectations")?
>
>Hmm, I guess the problem is inherent in the goddess.

That's what Wikipedia suggests in its article on "Cytherean" (a term I
hadn't heard before):

' When planetary scientists began to have a need to discuss Venus in detail,
an adjective was needed. Based on Latin principles, the correct adjectival
form of the name would be Venerean. However, this term has an unfortunate
similarity to the word venereal as in venereal diseases (related to
"Venerean" as martial is to "Martian"), and is not generally used by
astronomers. The term Venusian is etymologically messy (similar to saying
"Earthian" or "Jupiterian"), and a "cleaner" version was desired.

It was suggested that since Venus had a Greek name, as well as a Roman one,
this should be used; however, the adjectival form of Aphrodite was
"aphrodisial", which again was felt to be unfortunately close to
"aphrodisiac", again evoking matters not directly pertaining to astronomy.

A compromise was reached. In Greek mythology, the goddess Aphrodite was said
to have been born from the sea, from which she emerged on a sea shell at the
island of Cythera, and as such was sometimes known as Cytherea. The
adjective Cytherean was taken from this name and remained popular in
scientific literature for some time.

The term has since fallen out of common use. Venusian is the form most
frequently used, with others, including Venerean appearing from time to
time; the term Cytherean is now mostly found in older scientific papers, but
some scientists still stick to the "tasteful" naming. In addition, the word
"Cytherean" as an adjective referring to Venus is often found in science
fiction of the early and mid 20th century. '

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cytherean

--
Guy Barry

[R H Draney]

"Guy Barry" <guy....@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in
news:O%k_w.319839$xn.9...@fx18.am4:

And farther out in the solar system, "Uranian" refers to a female psyche
in a male body....r

[Adam Funk]

Or "Hesperal" or "Bosporal", or maybe even "Phosphorous".


--
With the breakdown of the medieval system, the gods of chaos, lunacy,
and bad taste gained ascendancy.
--- Ignatius J Reilly

[Adam Funk]

But I bet you know (unlike the (Yes) Minister) that if you looked a
Trojan horse in the mouth, you'd see a bunch of Greeks (not Trojans)
hiding inside.


--
Consistently separating words by spaces became a general custom about
the tenth century A. D., and lasted until about 1957, when FORTRAN
abandoned the practice. --- Sun FORTRAN Reference Manual

[Adam Funk]

On 2015-04-24, Guy Barry wrote:

> That's what Wikipedia suggests in its article on "Cytherean" (a term I
> hadn't heard before):
>
> ' When planetary scientists began to have a need to discuss Venus in detail,
> an adjective was needed. Based on Latin principles, the correct adjectival
> form of the name would be Venerean. However, this term has an unfortunate
> similarity to the word venereal as in venereal diseases (related to
> "Venerean" as martial is to "Martian"), and is not generally used by
> astronomers.

Yet they haven't renamed Uranus, still the butt of many jokes.


--
I was born, lucky me, in a land that I love.
Though I'm poor, I am free.
When I grow I shall fight; for this land I shall die.
May the sun never set. --- The Kinks

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Friday, April 24, 2015 at 9:00:06 AM UTC-4, Adam Funk wrote:
> On 2015-04-23, James Silverton wrote:
> > On 4/23/2015 11:22 AM, Mark Brader wrote:
> >> Will Parsons:

> >>> It's always annoyed me when science fiction writers would use the
> >>> barbarism "Venusian" to refer to an inhabitant of Venus...
> >> This comes up here every few years. I again suggest that the last
> >> word on the subject belongs to Sir Arthur C. Clarke:
> >> # The adjective for the planet Venus presents grave linguistic problems.
> >> # "Venusian" is unacceptable to purists; "Venerean" raises false
> >> # expectations; "Cytherean" is correct but no one except classical
> >> # scholars understands what it means. Take your choice.
> >> (In "The Promise of Space", 1968.)
> > Overall, I agree with the comments and, to me, the best compromise
> > adjective is "Venusian", which I don't find barbarous (but I'm no
> > classical scholar.)
>
> But I bet you know (unlike the (Yes) Minister) that if you looked a
> Trojan horse in the mouth, you'd see a bunch of Greeks (not Trojans)
> hiding inside.

They didn't need condoms, because the boys couldn't get pregnant.

I don't see _what_ the discussion of Second Planet adjectives has to do with
the Trojan Horse.

[Adam Funk]

"but I'm no classical scholar" --- remember the subthread in the past
month or so about Hacker (the Minister in _Yes Minister_) making the
mistake about the contents of the horse "because you went to the LSE"?



--
$2.95!
PLATE O' SHRIMP
Luncheon Special

[Peter T. Daniels]

Is that similar to "I don't believe there's climate change because I'm not
a scientist"?

[R H Draney]

"Peter T. Daniels" <gram...@verizon.net> wrote in
news:3a62d841-e256-4dd2...@googlegroups.com:

It goes further than that:

https://youtu.be/0BlqogvkOpI

....r

[Adam Funk]

Ha! How is it that I've never heard of that film until now?!


--
The generation of random numbers is too important to be left to
chance. [Robert R. Coveyou]

[Adam Funk]

Not really. But I did read something interesting/curious recently
(which I can't find now) to the effect that people with more
scientific knowledge are more likely (than those with less) to have a
strong opinion *one way or the other* about climate change.


--
Thinking about her this morning, lying in bed, and trying to get my
thoughts on the right track, I reached into the drawer of the bedstand,
and found the Gideons' Bible, and I was going for the Psalms, friend, honest
I was, but I found the Song of Solomon instead. --- Garrison Keillor

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Monday, April 27, 2015 at 8:00:06 AM UTC-4, Adam Funk wrote:
> On 2015-04-27, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> > On Sunday, April 26, 2015 at 4:30:05 PM UTC-4, Adam Funk wrote:

> >> "but I'm no classical scholar" --- remember the subthread in the past
> >> month or so about Hacker (the Minister in _Yes Minister_) making the
> >> mistake about the contents of the horse "because you went to the LSE"?
> > Is that similar to "I don't believe there's climate change because I'm not
> > a scientist"?
>
> Not really. But I did read something interesting/curious recently
> (which I can't find now) to the effect that people with more
> scientific knowledge are more likely (than those with less) to have a
> strong opinion *one way or the other* about climate change.

_Relevant_ scientific knowledge? I.e. the 1% dissenters among climate scientists
are passionate in their denial?

I was thinking of Ted Cruz (cuckoo republican presidential candidate -- the
one who renounced his Canadian citizenship even though he was born there),
who ducks the issue in non-closed interviews by saying "I'm not a scientist,
so I'm not entitled to have an opinion on the question."

Which is different from the fact that when the republicans took over the
Senate this year, they handed the Science and Technology committee over to
a chairman who essentially denies the validity of scientific research.

[Peter Moylan]

On 27/04/15 13:28, Peter T. Daniels wrote:

> Is that similar to "I don't believe there's climate change because I'm not
> a scientist"?

Since arriving in Newcastle in 1969, I have been through three
once-in-a-hundred-year storms. The climate change deniers have a lot to
answer for. We're not allowed to hang them, but it's well past time that
we threw them out of government. Perhaps with the aid of tar and feathers.

--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW, Australia

[Peter Moylan]

On 27/04/15 21:49, Adam Funk wrote:
> On 2015-04-27, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>
>> On Sunday, April 26, 2015 at 4:30:05 PM UTC-4, Adam Funk wrote:
>
>>> "but I'm no classical scholar" --- remember the subthread in the past
>>> month or so about Hacker (the Minister in _Yes Minister_) making the
>>> mistake about the contents of the horse "because you went to the LSE"?
>>
>> Is that similar to "I don't believe there's climate change because I'm not
>> a scientist"?
>
> Not really. But I did read something interesting/curious recently
> (which I can't find now) to the effect that people with more
> scientific knowledge are more likely (than those with less) to have a
> strong opinion *one way or the other* about climate change.

In my opinion, those without scientific knowledge are not entitled to
have an opinion.

[R H Draney]

Adam Funk <a24...@ducksburg.com> wrote in news:94k11cx0nr.ln2
@news.ducksburg.com:

> On 2015-04-27, R H Draney wrote:
>
>> "Peter T. Daniels" <gram...@verizon.net> wrote in
>> news:3a62d841-e256-4dd2...@googlegroups.com:
>>

>>> Is that similar to "I don't believe there's climate change because I'm
>>> not a scientist"?
>>
>> It goes further than that:
>>
>> https://youtu.be/0BlqogvkOpI
>
> Ha! How is it that I've never heard of that film until now?!

Don't know, but I heartily recommend it for anyone who's ever had to sit
through any badly-made '50s sci-fi movie....r

[Stan Brown]

+1

The modern idea that all opinions are equally valid just makes my
blood pressure skyrocket. Dammit, that may be true in philosophy or
art, but in science and engineering some things are true and some are
false (and data are insufficient on some).

--
"The difference between the /almost right/ word and the /right/ word
is ... the difference between the lightning-bug and the lightning."
--Mark Twain
Stan Brown, Tompkins County, NY, USA http://OakRoadSystems.com

[snide...@gmail.com]

On Monday, April 27, 2015 at 4:29:15 PM UTC-7, Stan Brown wrote:
> On Tue, 28 Apr 2015 02:01:33 +1000, Peter Moylan wrote:
> >
> > On 27/04/15 21:49, Adam Funk wrote:
> > > Not really. But I did read something interesting/curious recently
> > > (which I can't find now) to the effect that people with more
> > > scientific knowledge are more likely (than those with less) to have a
> > > strong opinion *one way or the other* about climate change.
> >
> > In my opinion, those without scientific knowledge are not entitled to
> > have an opinion.
>
> +1
>
> The modern idea that all opinions are equally valid just makes my
> blood pressure skyrocket. Dammit, that may be true in philosophy or
> art,

Probably not there, either

> but in science and engineering some things are true and some are
> false (and data are insufficient on some).
>

That provides the risk of turning scientists into a priesthood,
which many non-scientists fear.

/dps

[David Kleinecke]

On Monday, April 27, 2015 at 4:29:15 PM UTC-7, Stan Brown wrote:

> The modern idea that all opinions are equally valid just makes my
> blood pressure skyrocket. Dammit, that may be true in philosophy or
> art, but in science and engineering some things are true and some are
> false (and data are insufficient on some).

I think you might not worry about your blood pressure. I doubt that
anyone really believes "all opinions are equally valid". Could you
perhaps point me to somewhere where the idea is maintained?

There are many people who believe their opinion is just as good as
anyone else's but the opinions of people who do not agree with them
are obviously wrong.

[Charles Bishop]

In article <mhlm9l$smh$1...@dont-email.me>,

Peter Moylan <pe...@pmoylan.org> wrote:

> On 27/04/15 13:28, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>
> > Is that similar to "I don't believe there's climate change because I'm not
> > a scientist"?
>
> Since arriving in Newcastle in 1969, I have been through three
> once-in-a-hundred-year storms. The climate change deniers have a lot to
> answer for. We're not allowed to hang them, but it's well past time that
> we threw them out of government. Perhaps with the aid of tar and feathers.

So, the climate change deniers are responsible for the, what, last two
storms, since these would have been prevented if only they had not been
deniers?

I'm unsure of the dates, but back in 1969 wasn't the prediction for a
colder earth?

--
charles

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Monday, April 27, 2015 at 8:47:25 PM UTC-4, David Kleinecke wrote:
> On Monday, April 27, 2015 at 4:29:15 PM UTC-7, Stan Brown wrote:

> > The modern idea that all opinions are equally valid just makes my
> > blood pressure skyrocket. Dammit, that may be true in philosophy or
> > art, but in science and engineering some things are true and some are
> > false (and data are insufficient on some).
>
> I think you might not worry about your blood pressure. I doubt that
> anyone really believes "all opinions are equally valid". Could you
> perhaps point me to somewhere where the idea is maintained?

Apparently CBS News is still of that opinion. On yesterday's Face the Nation,
Bob Schieffer actually apologized (sort of) for giving one of the more notorious
fag-bashers a few minutes to talk against "gay marriage."

And FauxNews, at least, still seems to give equal time to climate-change
deniers, because they're what their audience wants to hear.

[snide...@gmail.com]

On Monday, April 27, 2015 at 8:20:49 PM UTC-7, Charles Bishop wrote:

> I'm unsure of the dates, but back in 1969 wasn't the prediction for a
> colder earth?

So you don't think that 45 years of working on the models would produce
better predictions?

(I believe 1969 was when colder-earth predictions started /going out of fashion/,
and there are a lot more ice cores read since then, computers have started
to manage larger datasets since 1969, and research into what factors are
important to the models has been ongoing.)

Observational data is already indicating a serious trend, with shifts
in the center of rainfall in the Thailand-Bangladesh-India area, the
North American jet stream becoming more variable, warm-weather species
moving north both in the Rockies and along the West Coast.

For those interested in knowing more about the models, the Computing
Science" column of the Nov-Dec issue of _American Scientist_ has an
introduction to them. Since it's a column instead of a feature
article, you can find the whole column at
<URL:http://www.americanscientist.org/issues/pub/2014/6/clarity-in-climate-modeling>
and the sample stripey-model and references at
<URL:http://bit-player.org/extras/climate/>

/dps

[Peter Moylan]

On 28/04/15 13:20, Charles Bishop wrote:
> In article <mhlm9l$smh$1...@dont-email.me>,
> Peter Moylan <pe...@pmoylan.org> wrote:
>
>> On 27/04/15 13:28, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>>
>>> Is that similar to "I don't believe there's climate change because I'm not
>>> a scientist"?
>>
>> Since arriving in Newcastle in 1969, I have been through three
>> once-in-a-hundred-year storms. The climate change deniers have a lot to
>> answer for. We're not allowed to hang them, but it's well past time that
>> we threw them out of government. Perhaps with the aid of tar and feathers.
>
> So, the climate change deniers are responsible for the, what, last two
> storms, since these would have been prevented if only they had not been
> deniers?

Climate trends have enormous momentum, so we can't do much about the
current extreme weather events. Our actions now can, however, affect the
weather 50 years from now. I can't blame the deniers for the present
floods, but I can blame them for what they're doing to my grandchildren.
They can't claim ignorance when the evidence is staring them in the face.

> I'm unsure of the dates, but back in 1969 wasn't the prediction for a
> colder earth?

Global warming was well under way by then, but the evidence was still
ambiguous because not enough data had been evaluated.

I don't particularly mind if people deny that we're changing the climate
in the privy of their own homes. I do mind if the deniers have the power
to affect public policy. This is a big problem in Australia at present,
because the best-known climate change denier in the country is our Prime
Minister. When he won government he scrapped carbon pricing; sacked
people who were working on renewable energy solutions; and did a bunch
of other things to ensure that as a country we would become a bigger
polluter. Such people are a danger to the country and to the world.

[anaya....@gmail.com]

It has double meaning (double entendre). Hortense has a lazy/ wondering eye. Both describing her physical appearance and well as foreshadowing her infidelity when she realizes her husband is sterile.

[CDB]

That sounds reasonable. There was a thread about it here ten years ago
in which it was thoroughly discussed; but I've already written the rest,
so I'll probably send this.

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/alt.usage.english/zS3WG8ClKVg

Google says that "strabismo di Venere" is a known expression, not
uncomplimentary, in Italian. Didn't Burgess spend a lot of time in Italy?

According to this site it refers to the Botticelli painting.

https://forum.wordreference.com/threads/strabismo-di-venere.1860504/

And yes, the eyes may be just a bit googly:

https://preview.tinyurl.com/y4fp94zq

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Saturday, September 14, 2019 at 9:30:07 AM UTC-4, CDB wrote:
> On 9/14/2019 1:24 AM, anaya....@gmail.com wrote:

> > It has double meaning (double entendre). Hortense has a lazy/
> > wondering eye. Both describing her physical appearance and well as
> > foreshadowing her infidelity when she realizes her husband is
> > sterile.
>
> That sounds reasonable. There was a thread about it here ten years ago
> in which it was thoroughly discussed; but I've already written the rest,
> so I'll probably send this.
>
> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/alt.usage.english/zS3WG8ClKVg

You posted a reference to this thread in this thread.

This is its third revival.

> Google says that "strabismo di Venere" is a known expression, not
> uncomplimentary, in Italian. Didn't Burgess spend a lot of time in Italy?

Yes.

[CDB]

On 9/14/2019 9:46 AM, Peter T. Daniels wrote:

> CDB wrote:
>> anaya....@gmail.com wrote:

>>> It has double meaning (double entendre). Hortense has a lazy/
>>> wondering eye. Both describing her physical appearance and well
>>> as foreshadowing her infidelity when she realizes her husband is
>>> sterile.

>> That sounds reasonable. There was a thread about it here ten years
>> ago in which it was thoroughly discussed; but I've already written
>> the rest, so I'll probably send this.

>> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/alt.usage.english/zS3WG8ClKVg

> You posted a reference to this thread in this thread.

Only if you're a goggle groper.

[...]

[Peter T. Daniels]

I clicked your link and it took me directly to your message the link was
in. Looking back two pages I saw that the thread dates only to 2009 and
was revived triennially.

Whither does the link take the GG-deprived?

[Quinn C]

* Peter T. Daniels:

To the same place; the difference is that they hadn't been there
already.

For regular Usenet users, it's a link from the current part of the
thread to the complete archive.
.
--
Trans people are scapegoated for the impossibilities of this two-box
system, but the system harms all of us. Most people have felt ashamed
of the ways we don't conform to whatever narrow idea of man or woman
has been prescribed onto our bodies -- H.P.Keenan in Slate

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Sunday, September 15, 2019 at 10:28:10 AM UTC-4, Quinn C wrote:
> * Peter T. Daniels:
> > On Saturday, September 14, 2019 at 10:59:53 AM UTC-4, CDB wrote:
> >> On 9/14/2019 9:46 AM, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> >>> CDB wrote:
> >>>> anaya....@gmail.com wrote:

> >>>>> It has double meaning (double entendre). Hortense has a lazy/
> >>>>> wondering eye. Both describing her physical appearance and well
> >>>>> as foreshadowing her infidelity when she realizes her husband is
> >>>>> sterile.
> >>>> That sounds reasonable. There was a thread about it here ten years
> >>>> ago in which it was thoroughly discussed; but I've already written
> >>>> the rest, so I'll probably send this.
> >>>> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/alt.usage.english/zS3WG8ClKVg
> >> > You posted a reference to this thread in this thread.
> >> Only if you're a goggle groper.
> > I clicked your link and it took me directly to your message the link was
> > in. Looking back two pages I saw that the thread dates only to 2009 and
> > was revived triennially.
> > Whither does the link take the GG-deprived?
>
> To the same place; the difference is that they hadn't been there
> already.

Of course they'd been there; it's where the link was posted.

[CDB]

On 9/15/2019 10:28 AM, Quinn C wrote:
> * Peter T. Daniels:

>> CDB wrote:
>>> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>>>> CDB wrote:
>>>>> anaya....@gmail.com wrote:

>>>>>> It has double meaning (double entendre). Hortense has a lazy/
>>>>>> wondering eye. Both describing her physical appearance and well
>>>>>> as foreshadowing her infidelity when she realizes her husband is
>>>>>> sterile.
>>>>> That sounds reasonable. There was a thread about it here ten years
>>>>> ago in which it was thoroughly discussed; but I've already written
>>>>> the rest, so I'll probably send this.

>>>>> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/alt.usage.english/zS3WG8ClKVg

>>> > You posted a reference to this thread in this thread.

>>> Only if you're a goggle groper.

>> I clicked your link and it took me directly to your message the link was
>> in. Looking back two pages I saw that the thread dates only to 2009 and
>> was revived triennially.

>> Whither does the link take the GG-deprived?

> To the same place; the difference is that they hadn't been there
> already.

> For regular Usenet users, it's a link from the current part of the
> thread to the complete archive.

I didn't answer Peter because I didn't think his question was a request
for information: he knows the answer perfectly well. I see that he has
confirmed that, a little farther downthread.

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Sunday, September 15, 2019 at 5:19:54 PM UTC-4, CDB wrote:
> On 9/15/2019 10:28 AM, Quinn C wrote:
> > * Peter T. Daniels:
> >> CDB wrote:
> >>> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> >>>> CDB wrote:
> >>>>> anaya....@gmail.com wrote:

> >>>>>> It has double meaning (double entendre). Hortense has a lazy/
> >>>>>> wondering eye. Both describing her physical appearance and well
> >>>>>> as foreshadowing her infidelity when she realizes her husband is
> >>>>>> sterile.
> >>>>> That sounds reasonable. There was a thread about it here ten years
> >>>>> ago in which it was thoroughly discussed; but I've already written
> >>>>> the rest, so I'll probably send this.
>
> >>>>> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/alt.usage.english/zS3WG8ClKVg
>
> >>> > You posted a reference to this thread in this thread.
>
> >>> Only if you're a goggle groper.

That, actually, makes no sense. And see what Q wrote, actually answering
the question.

> >> I clicked your link and it took me directly to your message the link was
> >> in. Looking back two pages I saw that the thread dates only to 2009 and
> >> was revived triennially.
>
> >> Whither does the link take the GG-deprived?
>
> > To the same place; the difference is that they hadn't been there
> > already.
>
> > For regular Usenet users, it's a link from the current part of the
> > thread to the complete archive.
>
> I didn't answer Peter because I didn't think his question was a request
> for information: he knows the answer perfectly well. I see that he has
> confirmed that, a little farther downthread.

How would I know where a non-GG user is taken by clicking that link?

If you're already in the place it takes you to, why would there be any
"taking" at all?

I have no way of knowing how you arrived at the link, but it seems the
most useful link to answer the question that was asked would have been
to the initial message in the thread, not to the last one.