Castle Aching

[Phil Traxson]

3 hours ago, runs as required said:

I’ve just read that Plaid Cymru’s manifesto includes re-opening the Manchester & Milford. They definitely would get my vote.

So how would the Cardiff to North Wales train get from Aberystwyth northwards without passing through England ie  Oswestry, Salop?

Answer: it would have to be mixed gauge! A modern electric/battery train built to pass through the Glaslyn tunnels would be most exciting. Presumably it would split at Porthmadog with the announcement: “y ddau gar blaen yn unig i Carnavon a Holyhead, y cefn i Blaenau Ffestiniog y Wrecsam”

 

edit 

then forwards (summer only) Wrecsam to Manchester Victoria via ex GCR Queensferry, thence ex GWR via Warrington?

Perhaps re-open the Afon Wen, Caernarfon, Bangor link.  The Aberystwyth to Afon Wen section still exists though without looking I'm not sure that the side of the triangle near Morfa Mawdach that links the Aberystwyth and Pwllheli lines without reversal exists. I believe this is also in part of the plan if the first part succeeds. Unfortunately I doubt that I will live long enough to see it happen. I'm also of the opinion that it is about as likely to happen as the FR & WHR extending from Caernarfon to Bangor, in fact the latter, at "no chance" may well be more likely! 

 

Phil T. (I'm in favour of either or both of the above)

   

[wagonman]

6 hours ago, RedGemAlchemist said:

Probably one of the most cynical writers and philosophers ever in my honest opinion. Don't get me wrong, Atlas Shrugged is a good book. Just try not to read too much into the meaning as it's both depressing and overly mean-spirited.

 

Ayn Rand, High Priestess of rugged individualism, died in abject poverty living on welfare. Maybe there is some justice in this world.

[Annie]

22 minutes ago, wagonman said:

 

Ayn Rand, High Priestess of rugged individualism, died in abject poverty living on welfare. Maybe there is some justice in this world.

'Death is the test of any philosophy'.  I forget where I read that, but it seemed appropriate.

[webbcompound]

I always thought railways were a rationalist concept, but then I read someone on here (and so presumably a railway afficianado) suggesting evolution and creationism were equivalent theories. I suppose that explains all those antideluvian dragon bones we keep finding in the coal in our tenders.

[Compound2632]

1 hour ago, webbcompound said:

I suppose that explains all those antideluvian dragon bones we keep finding in the coal in our tenders.

 

When George Stephenson was living in splendour on the profits of his coal-mining business at Tapton House, he was much visited by eminent scientists. One such was William Buckland, the pioneering geologist and palaeontologist. One evening after dinner Stephenson and Buckland were on the parterre looking down over the North Midland line, watching the trains go by.

 

'Now Buckland, said Mr. Stephenson, 'I have a poser for you. Can you tell me what is the power that is driving that train?' 'Well,' said the other 'I suppose it is one of your big engines.' 'But what drives the engine?' 'Oh, very likely a canny Newcastle driver'. 'What do you say to the light of the sun?' 'How can that be?' asked the doctor. 'It is nothing else', said the engineer: 'it is light bottled up in the earth for tens of thousands of years, - light absorbed by plants and vegetables, being necessary for the condensation of carbon during the process of their growth, if it be not carbon in a different form, - and now, after being buried in the earth for long ages in fields of coal, that latent light is again brought forth and liberated, made to work, as in that locomotive, for great human purposes'.

 

Samuel Smiles, The Life of George Stephenson (1857).

Edited December 7, 2019 by Compound2632

[James Harrison]

5 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

 

I saw that and thought: Martian invasion!

 

Don't let the BBC near it for God's sake....

[Donw]

4 hours ago, St Enodoc said:

Thanks Annie. I've been looking for something to cure my mercurial eruptions for quite a while now.

 

I was interested in the female complaints, I get quite a few of those;    'you've forgotten to switch the oven off'  'the porch is full of your shoes you cannot wear three pairs at once' ' there are too many railways magazines left on the sideboard' etc.

 

Don

[Compound2632]

2 minutes ago, Donw said:

'there are too many railways magazines left on the sideboard'

 

How many is too many?

[Regularity]

1 hour ago, webbcompound said:

suggesting evolution and creationism were equivalent theories

What was said was that such a suggestion was not true.

But they are attempts to explain something and equally valid in their way - which is how to easily side-step this issue:

Creationism is a theological explanation and a matter of faith.

Evolution is a scientific explanation open to challenge, debate, evidence and fact.

Taken on their own terms, they are fine, but don’t belong together in the same arena.

[Regularity]

2 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

 

How many is too many?

Is this possible?

[Compound2632]

3 minutes ago, Regularity said:

 

Creationism is a theological explanation and a matter of faith.

 

 

Bad theology dressed up as bad science. 

[Allegheny1600]

5 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

 

How many is too many?

That might depend on the spouse concerned.

Some might say "one", others might say "All of them"!

I'm lucky that my beloved spouse might only take offence at a half dozen or so.

[Regularity]

1 minute ago, Compound2632 said:

 

Bad theology dressed up as bad science. 

Yes, but you debate it on those terms, not as science.

[Donw]

2 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

 

How many is too many?

 

Ah I never argue that point. I fear one could be too many if I push it. I just remove those I don't intend to read that day.

 

Don

[Compound2632]

8 minutes ago, Regularity said:

Yes, but you debate it on those terms, not as science.

 

Yes, because its advocates are not interested in science or the scientific method. Thy're Trumpians through and through: "The truth is what I choose to say it is."

[Donw]

I have never understood why Creationists want to maintain an argument. If they were to accept that a day to God might be a rather long time and that animals did evolve but that was how god arranged it those two conflicts would be resolved. Scientists could never show that there wasn't a God directing it all, creating the rules and situations to make it all happen. At the heart of religeons there is usually something unproveable that has to be taken as  a matter of faith.

 

Don 

[Compound2632]

25 minutes ago, Donw said:

I have never understood why Creationists want to maintain an argument. If they were to accept that a day to God might be a rather long time and that animals did evolve but that was how god arranged it those two conflicts would be resolved. Scientists could never show that there wasn't a God directing it all, creating the rules and situations to make it all happen. At the heart of religeons there is usually something unproveable that has to be taken as  a matter of faith.

 

Don 

 

Just don't engage with it. By opposing what may be known by God-given revelation to what can be deduced by God-given reason, they make God a liar. Their arguments are self-defeating and proceed from a lack of faith rather than an excess. Besides which, there's generally an agenda to discredit the scientific method for non-religious ends. 

 

Apologies for that outburst. For my penance, I submit a picture of a Great Eastern Railway locomotive, Class T26 2-4-0 No. 420:

 

 

Nice clean lines. How could any RTR manufacturer who already has a Y14 under their belt resist?

 

(By the way, @Donw, your proposed solution is pretty much the position taken by William Buckland and his contemporaries before the publication of The Origin of Species in 1859.)

Edited December 7, 2019 by Compound2632
Exculpatory locomotive added.

[nick_bastable]

6 minutes ago, Donw said:

I have never understood why Creationists want to maintain an argument. If they were to accept that a day to God might be a rather long time and that animals did evolve but that was how god arranged it those two conflicts would be resolved. Scientists could never show that there wasn't a God directing it all, creating the rules and situations to make it all happen. At the heart of religeons there is usually something unproveable that has to be taken as  a matter of faith.

 

Don 

Given that day on Uranus is approx 84 days earth days anything is possible I suppose

 

still each to their own as long as it is their own and not forced on others

 

Nick

[Regularity]

1 hour ago, nick_bastable said:

Still each to their own as long as it is their own and not forced on others

 

I think that generally characterises debates in the CAPC, which is why our host accepts them.

Wouldn’t happen on most threads/forums.

[sem34090]

Even when I believed in it wholeheartedly, I took the 7 days of the creation story to be representative of a much greater length of time. The principles of first light, then water, then the gradual evolution of the life on the planet seemed generally sound to me. 

 

But then a culmination of various factors drew me towards a point of agnosticism that very often turns into atheism. However, at risk of seriously offending those whom I have not already offended, I can't tolerate atheists who won't accept that others are entitled to have religious beliefs. Just because one may perceive another to be wrong doesn't mean that one has a right to impose one's own beliefs on that other. Unless they're about to seriously harm people...

Edited December 7, 2019 by sem34090

[Annie]

4 hours ago, Donw said:

I was interested in the female complaints.........

I tried it and now there are no more big trucks rumbling through town and our local railway is back.  I was going to see if it would work on my complaints about certain world political leaders, but unfortunately the bottle was empty and I don't seem to be able to get anymore.

[Malcolm 0-6-0]

Coming in late to the usual 3 pages of discussion (this planetary rotation is the very devil to keep up with) could I add -

 

1. On temperance, in my younger day there were times when I awoke to the sudden, if painful realisation, that temperance was the answer I needed. This generally lasted until the sun was over the yard arm and the will to live had returned.

 

2. In regard to Annie's excellent tonic advertisement I can say that the combination of electricity and water is only beneficial in hydro electric power. All other combinations I have found from experience can be a shock to the senses.

 

3. As an archaeologist I can say that creationism and its bastard child creation science, are demonstrable evidence that there are people upon whom any form of education is wasted. Perhaps if they stuck to the core philosophy of their religion which is essentially doing good and left it at that they might find some sympathy from me.

 

4. I have found that on the question of what constitutes too many railway magazines is a structuralist philosophical problem, the answer to which is usually revealed when one finds that one's abode has suddenly started leaning in a direction unintended by its builders. Balance is needed in all things so I suggest just even the piles out so the load is spread.

 

5. On the subject of Boris Johnson, I can say, with all honesty, just don't reintroduce transportation and send him here. When that migration scheme was in operation we received a better class of malefactor.

 

6. I hope I have covered everything, and given the religious overtones that crept in over night (a good set of door locks will fix that),  I close with the 11th Commandment "Thou shall not abandon thy sense of humour, for that is the greatest virtue of all".          

[brianusa]

5 hours ago, Donw said:

 

I was interested in the female complaints.................................

 

Don

 

We were never allowed to discuss such a thing!

      Brian.

[Malcolm 0-6-0]

5 hours ago, nick_bastable said:

Given that day on Uranus is approx 84 days earth days anything is possible I suppose

 

 

If we antipodeans have trouble keeping up due to the need to sleep that probably explains the paucity of Uraneans following this thread ....................     

[Donw]

5 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

 

Just don't engage with it. By opposing what may be known by God-given revelation to what can be deduced by God-given reason, they make God a liar. Their arguments are self-defeating and proceed from a lack of faith rather than an excess. Besides which, there's generally an agenda to discredit the scientific method for non-religious ends. 

 

Apologies for that outburst. For my penance, I submit a picture of a Great Eastern Railway locomotive, Class T26 2-4-0 No. 420:

 

 

Nice clean lines. How could any RTR manufacturer who already has a Y14 under their belt resist?

 

(By the way, @Donw, your proposed solution is pretty much the position taken by William Buckland and his contemporaries before the publication of The Origin of Species in 1859.)

 

Nice picture. I wasn't proposing the solution for my self. It just suggests to those who do wish to follow an accepted religion that they could easily adapt their understanding to avoid conflict. If a teacher explained the mechanism of evolution as defined by Darwin adding a sentence to say that it is thought by some that this process was the intent of god to lead to us. Which would not conflict with understanding the science.

 

Personally I am aware there is a great unknowable - whether this whole universe was produced or directed by some intelligence  or merely the results of seemingly random shifts of energy between various states is something I cannot answer. I can follow to some extent the process of a singularity becoming the universe we have, but how, why or what the singularity actually is and why it was there is something I have not come across. Where I do differ from most religions is the conviction that any intelligence able to conjour this universe would not really be bothered about my behaviour even if I personally could trigger a sequence of events which destroyed this planet it would merely be hastening the ultimate demise of a minor planet on a minor star in a small galaxy.

 

Don

Edited December 7, 2019 by Donw
wrong there