May also be worth watching:
Atomic: Living in Dread and Promise, tomorrow Sunday), 9pm, BBC4.
"Fiercely intelligent and insidiously affecting documentary [...] a
nuanced history of atomic power", according to the Times.
On Sat, 08 Aug 2015 21:22:01 +0100, Mike Tomlinson wrote:
That too is scheduled, along with the 0230 less vandalised version on
the 10th. I only bother with the early evening airings as 'safety
recordings' since they inevitably suffer extreme end credit vandalism.
The subsequent midnight onwards repeats only suffer audio vandalism at
worst, sometimes remaining completely unmolested. It's usually only the
last programme on BBC4's daily schedule that suffers from BSL vandalism.
On Sat, 8 Aug 2015 21:22:01 +0100, Mike Tomlinson wrote:
Jim @ Sellafield has been plugged summat roten on BBC Four for about
two weeks. This is often not a good sign of a decent factual
programme but of some dumbed down mass audience programme. The trails
are of the dumbed down nature and Jim's stuff is normally good. Get
iPlayer primed to grab it when it becomes availabe.
But this one hasn't been plugged or if it has not to the extent of
Jim @ Sellafield. About to prime GiP... thanks.
Like Professor Brian "Astroturf" Cox a couple years ago, you mean? You
couldn't put the bleeding box on without him popping up.
I watched al-Khalili's series "The Story of Electricity" a couple years
ago. That was ok, no more than that.
Tell me about it. Watched Horizon the other day about space debris, the
first time I've watched it in a while. The level of dumbing down was
shocking. Cut out all the bollocks, scare tactics, doom-laden
voiceovers and special effects and you had the makings of a decent half-
It's available on iPlayer now. I've recorded it nut not yet watched.
On Sun, 09 Aug 2015 13:21:15 +0100, Mike Tomlinson wrote:
Much as I admire JaK for bringing his obviious enthusiasm for science to
a wider audience (the Life Scientific on R4 is invariably fascinating) it
still grates hearing him use crowbarred politically correct imperial
units when he's able (required) to use SI units for the science bit.
No one younger than me should have any excuse - metric was made
compulsory the year I started school - 1971. I never once used imperial
in any school work. Or was London a bit weird ?
Crowbarred? He should certainly be using SI for a specifically
scientific item, but for something more general such as the altitude of
a satellite, then remember we still use miles for long(-ish) distances.
So you've no idea about the older units, then? Bad luck, you're left in
ignorance. It cuts you off from chunks of our heritage and history, and
you won't be able to relate to what's written in older books.
And you won't be able to name your son Miles. You'll have to call him
"That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without
On Mon, 10 Aug 2015 10:39:04 +0100, Mike Tomlinson wrote:
A (n English) pint *is* 568 ml. Which also highlights that the "imperial"
system isn't even consistent with it's own terms, as US pints and gallons
will attest to.
I'm sure part of the alleged opposition to metrication came from a whole
swathe of people who failed to grasp that no one was forcing anyone to
work in rounded metric.
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.