The Chamonix to Zermatt Walker's Haute Route

But in reverse. And not complete. You can find descriptions of the route in various places, for example here. Arguably, after Wednesday going down to Fionnay I was off route; but I don't care. Here's my route, overlaid on the "official" map from Kev's book, the 1991 edition I think. Yellow dots for start / sleep / end.

 

How far you go each day is mostly determined by accomodation, which quantises things unless you camp out, and the Swiss aren't keen on you doing that. I had enough (down jacket, warm trousers) to survive a night out at least in theory, so could be a bit carefree, but in the end didn't use it. Traditionally it is from C to Z; but I started in Z so went backwards; and having been in Z for a bit didn't feel like doing the Mattertal itself - plus I'd walked out that way last year - so I started by taking the train (25 CHF, ouch) down to St Niklaus on a bright sunny Sunday morning. Now read on...

 

Sunday August 21st: Zermatt to Zinal

GPS: Jungen to Gruben over Augstbord pass; Gruben to Zinal. 32 km; 8 hours; +2000 m.

Jungen has a baby cable car (12 CHF) so I use that to save myself 700 m of ascent. It is only four persons so wait for second lift, after the slight embarrassment of being tactfully told I wouldn't fit into the first one. Up! At top, resto, a few houses, and a sign for Augstbord pass: push on; it is charming and green and has great views but I'm late in the day. 11:45 2405 rest. Mostly sun, some relief by cloud, some grateful shade from trees. Views! Across to Gratchen up valley to Tasch I think. If you're worried about getting lost, the Swiss are in the habit of signing their paths.

Above: view from just above Jungen; views R back up the Mattertal not showing Zermatt. Below: pano from above the tree line.

Top 2890 13:15 a grind, whew. And so 10 mins rest - there's a chill wind at the col - and then a bit more than 1000 m to descend down to Gruben.

Fine views across to the next ridge. The path turns out to be fair and goes painlessly (looking back to col); down to hotel Schwartzhorn at 15:25. Cafe. Sitting under shade in a comfy chair with a second cafe and the excuse that my watch is still charging looking out at green grass then woods then ridge and distant snow (possibly les Diablons) is v pleasant. If I was single-staging, I'd be stopping here.

But I'm not, so at 4:10 off, pausing briefly to look inside the church with its fine stained glass. Along road over bridge grass up valley then head up. Long even gradient road and bonus: its in the shade. Up. 6:55: to top of Forcletta, which is quite decent. I am lighter by one ski stick which fell off somewhere, alas. Book (booking.com) hotel Besso in Zinal, since I'm now likely to make my time, and head down, only 1200 m to go. Briefly see fox in the undergrowth. 

Looking down towards Zinal:

How long will the light last? Sun behind peaks at 8 but still fine and the route is good - indeed, it is the route of the Sierre to Z run and I keep passing signs saying "6 km to go"... and so on. But it is a long traverse. At last do last descent 8:45 as light fades but lights of Zinal come on so no need for head torch. Besso is right there… but reception is shut. Ask in Poste who says ask in Europa who phones guy and (with mutual apologies) by 9:10 I'm in my room and shower. Whew: a long day.

Monday 22nd: Zinal to la Gouille

GPS: Zinal to la Forclaz to les Hauderes; les H to la Gouille; 20 km; 6 h; +1500 m.

B'fast 7:30. Feeling a bit battered from y'day but we'll see. Wx: sun above little cloud still shade here. We're now in French speaking Swiss so I feel less like an idiot.

Besso: fine. Decent old building and room (e.g. Fr window-closing). B'fast good. Also Poste and Europa looked ok. Zinal is a smallish pleasant village probably optimised for skiing. Shops, supermarkt, etc.

9: get lift up 800 m to Sorebois 7 CHF (with half-price from hotel): we're back to vaguely sane lift prices. Today should be more relaxing: start with cafe at topstation 24xx. Thin cloud hugs mountain. And, I can speak to people.

Col (2850, under Corne de Sorebois, not 2812): 10:50. Sun. Views down to v blue Barrage de Moiry. Bread (pain Paillasse, still fresh) and cheese and half hour rest. Z side is a bit of a ski-scape.

Descent easy passing many poor folk labouring up. 12:10: lac/barrage de Moiry 2250. Lovely blue, views to sunlit grassy slopes and lowish peaks beyond, cafe. There's a bus service and camper-van overnighting at the far end; and a gite; and a via ferrata.

Hour for cafe+coca. Around lake, bread+houmous at far end. Path up obscure from here. Off 14:20.

15:25 rest at 2640; the path resolved itself at the bridge as it should. Clouding; hints of spots of rain; but clearing as I climb. Distant cowbells.

Col Tsate, 15:55. Ahead: sunshine; scree; then a plateau with lake. Pt 2975 aka Cherra is reachable to the S but no.

La Forclaz 17:45 disappoints (despite the beehives lower down): the only cafe is on hols and accom is thin and expensive (the village itself is cute). But! Find dorm another three miles on, so its marching time again. 18:25: les Hauderes, cafe+rest+watch recharge. I have discovered SAC app will show gps location. 19:45: la Gouille, little place, cute, bed in dortoir but that's fine I'm the only one. To bar for - gasp - an actual bierre, pression, Valaisienne. Route here from lesH was the "old road" I'm pretty sure, now just a track.

Tuesday 23rd: La Gouille to Cabane Prafleuri via Pas de Chevres and Col des Roux

GPS: La Gouille to Arolla to col Pas de Chevres to lac des Dix (8h; 1100 m); Lac des Dix to col des Roux to Cab Prafleuri (1:30; 400 m).

B'fast 7:30 pay 40 inc bierre and off 8:50; it is v quiet and deep valley NS so sun is way above so all very dewy and early-feeling. Decide on road to Arolla. There is the old track but it is so quiet the road is fine. The sun rises over the valley edge.

Arolla initially disappoints: the grand hotel Mont Collon is shut and there's little else but! Upper or center Arolla is much better: cafe, epicerie, shop. Although I don't know it at the time, this turns out to be pretty well my last "village" of the walk. 9:50. Rest over cafe for half hour and admire Mont Collon opposite outlined against the relentless blue sky.

Up 100 m to another Grand Hotel and they have a lovely green law with parasols but alas no service and then they start mowing the lawn so I move on.

Pas de Chevres 2850 13:00. Whew. A pull under the sun (heading up). Views over to Lac des Dix and glacier / Lac de Cheilon. Also ref des Dix perched up an eminence opposite. Snooze. Bees. Possible distant Matterhorn. Pano:

Ladders (easy: broad, not vertical, platforms, short. Now I look, you can see the old steeper ladder hanging off unused to the right under the platform; and in the foreground, the chains section) then chains. Easy if you've done any via ferrata, but the grockles were making something of a meal of it.

Then get overconfident: I end up taking what might be an old path, with paint splodges, then decide I don't trust it and leave it and… end up scrambling down scree, right down to the "bank" of the glacier above the lake. Sigh, again.

I do have enough margin to be safe this close to the ice but errrm well. Then to level area former glacier lovely walking and little lake… should I? 

(pic: looking S to Mont Blanc de Cheilon (3870), the triangle on the R; Glacier de C., center; L (probably) Pointes de TsenaRefien. View from further down.)

Yes! Swim. Cool, refreshing. All is quiet bar distant river/w'fall. Find replacement Arkenstone of Panda. Realise I can lace boots so toes are loose: helps little toes be less squashed. Pic: looking W to La Luette (3547) I think. You wouldn't believe how much of a pain setting up this selfie was.

16:00: 10 mins rest+snack at the top of milky blue-white-grey le lac des Dix. Which is vast. Scenery above was grand.

And so round. View back. Quite a long way but stays lovely. Stop to re-power gps and play with stream. At last, to turn up to Col des Roux. (On the way, La Barma, which I think would have had a refuge if I'd wanted one... des Gentianes? La cabane est gardée uniquement durant les weekends. Pendant la semaine, le bâtiment principal (cuisine et dortoir 15 places) ainsi que les toilettes restent ouverts à tous perhaps). It is only another 400 m how hard can that be? Bouquetin.

Top, 18:30. Whew. 

Can just about see my hut, Cabana Prafleuri (it is slightly tucked in to the R by the umbrellas, not the "obvious" building in the center). Only 200 m down and decent path so arrive mid-dinner. 

Off boots etc put phone+watch on power then register, in broken Fr and their better Eng. And then sit outside with a ViviKola, the Swiss cola since 1938. Pic: the hut. To the L, the new buildings. The wooden stuff to the R appears unused. They have good taste in wildlife posters. I finally abandon ol' Plato to the Boite a Don. Inside: salle a manger.

Oddities: a locker for your rucksac; and they provide a disposable sheet-liner and don't want you to use your own. 40 chf. No signal.

For dinner I have bread from Zermatt, not yet finished; the remains of the houmous; and some cheese. It is surprising how little I've felt the need to eat; I had one Farmer bar today. I don't see any showers; toilets appear few. Bed, 20:45. I'm done with Bacon: prosy, prolix.

Wednesday 24th: to Mauvoisin

Cabane Prafleuri to Louvie across le Grand Desert (9k; 5:30h; +500 m; but there are GPS gaps); Cabane de Louvie to Fionnay (4k; 1hr; -800 m).

Note: I was only vaguely following the "true" route if there is one; going down to Fionnay isn't the offical path, instead one heads off towards Verbier; but that looked dull and rather low to me. So after today, I'm definitely off-route.

Various snoring o'night but sleep well. Up for 7, one of the last, what are these people doing? They are all walkers. B'fast a bit confused cos I don't have a proper place: 4 slices bread butter honey and coffee. Off 8 heading for Col de Prafleuri (signpost): 9: 2987 (signpost; the small lake is the Lac de Cleuson but we're not going that way). Note: col is a little to R of where you might expect. On the way: battlin' bouquetins on the hillside up before the col; view and pathmarkers up towards the col. Looking back. At the top there's a large pathmakers crowbar. Just visible: the refuge. Pano at the col: to the left, the past; to the right, the future. In the middle, beyond the line of the ridge, is the rather nice Rosablanche with the Glacier de Prafleuri to the L (closer) and rather more hidden barely-a-glacier-any-more Grand Desert.

Across le Grand Desert to Col de Louvie, 2921, 11. Rest. This was the view to start:

So it kinda lives up to the name. Inevitably, there is stuff about the retreat of the glaciers; more. Signpost to Col de Louvie, or down to Cleuson. Ahead lies Lac Louvie, and beyond Le Grand Combin; more of tha anon. Flowers! On the way down... on this side of the lake still high up, there's an old stone cabin converted into a rustic shelter / refuge.

By the lake there's a long stone barn (you can see inside) with a panneau about how they made it: heaped up earth, built the arch over it, then dug the earth out.

1:30 to Cabane de Louvie. Coke, poire tarte. The first food I haven't carried myself since… Zermatt I think. Oh, excluding b'fast obvs. Signal, just, if you sit overlooking the valley. Enjoy views especially over to Grand Combin. Pano: the lake.

Off 3. Down. Towards Fionnay and the Val de Bagnes. 4: down to Fionnay which tantalises with hotel (shut, and notice about souris) and cafe (fermi le mercredi). But there's a bus (7.60) up to Mauvoisin in an hour so sit back (literally in deckchair outside quiet tourist office) and let their wifi suck up my pix. There's also a glorious w'fall 300 m when not blown away by wind.

5:30: at Mauvoisin which has hotel-cafe & that's all and get a space in dortoir. Sit on terrace awaiting my bierre… which is good. Dinner: could be part of package but go for pates bolognaise instead. And it is v good.

After, pay (73 total) and to dortoir to rest. Snooze. Wake 8 realise I could look around… won't pass dam tomorrow perhaps tonight? It is 190 m up… in fact it is vast, mostly hidden by trees here. Lots of interesting history. Three brass figures donated by the architect of the dam. View down: the waterfall a golden line. Tiny chapel. Path up, after a bit… disappears into rock. Still open, unsupervised? Go in. And in. And up. Posters; info on the dam. Pix of construction. Spoooky esp when I think they might shut doors. Up, a long way. Come out 10 m below dam top, and there's another tunnel, road this time, to the top. Its getting late but clearly there is much more one could explore. And so, down.

Thursday 25th: Mauvoisin to Cabane Panossiere; to Cabane de Mille

GPS: Mauvoisin to Cabane Panossiere (8k; 3hr; +1000 m); Cabane Panossiere to Cabane de Mille (15k; 4hr; +700 m)

B'fast 7 v quiet; brief convesation in Fr with german-speaker off 8. Cool still in deep valley sun higher.

View down to Mauvoisin with the dam (view down from higher up):

1 h up: sit by La Tseumette old low stone with maintained wooden sleeping platform. Since this is only 1 hr in, I could have kipped here last night, had I known. For the future!

10:40: to Col des Otanes (signpost) fairly easily (some of the aid is just a bit silly; the steps and the chains aren't really needed). View up towards the col; and with le Grand Combin just peeking out.

Descend just a little to gasp in awe at my new favourite mountain, le Grand Combin. Pano. At this point I'm off the official "haute" route but I think it is worth it.

Doesn't look too easy though. Below and to R Cabane Panossiere with bonus yellow chopper. 

Looks like they are having to jump through hoops to get water in these times. Rest relax at hut (signpost). C'est sympa. Eau is potable. There are showers including one al fresco. Like most, there is free charging. M texts: when is my flight home? Oh you know what maybe I didn't book it… oops. Book: £225 plus £50 hold bag. I'd be outraged but as a percentage of the holiday it isn't much; and is a useful lesson. When I arrive the staff are having their dinner but that's OK; sit out with a little bread and cheese. Hut history one and two and three. Hut book pages; and more.

Off 1:45 for Brunet. Yet more edelwiess, though admittedly a bit scruffy. There are two ways: low and high; and I realise I can take the low. Down moraine... swiftly the glacier turns into mank, and hence...

...there's a loong suspension bridge over...

...and turn down, though col up looks green and inviting. Pass pathmakers with rakes and pickaxes. Note: generally I don't describe scenery: there are pix for that. Here we are looking back; ahead is getting greener. There's another suspension bridge, but smaller.

4:10: Brunet. Smallish. Bierre and tarte aux prunes; water is scarce. Liddes looks like tonights target? But which way? Another little old stone shed converted into a bothy. Pause, 6ish, to wash in stream all over: this I discovered from y'day's pool: it makes the rest fresh, as long as I don't steam along in the hot sun. View round, towards the little stream in it's meadow.

7: the route is such that over the col makes sense: 150 m left. But I don't think I'll make Liddes: it is finally time to sleep out. I feel a bit afraid: how will I cope? But also a bit sad: this is so reminiscent of the old TMB days with M, and now I am alone. Distantly: cowbells. Across the valley: Verbier. Ahead: the last of the light in the grass.

To col. And, as the map said, there is a cabane. But not the empty thing I expected. It is a refuge: Cabane de Mille. Weeell: ok. Why not? Nicely placed nearly on ridgeline, just as sun disappears into cloud. Dinner - which I didn't want - is over but a place is CHF 25, fine. Plus b'fast plus coca plus p'card of Gr Combin. And so the sun quietly sets and light fades. They have a map of a possible circular walk (ah: the Tour des Combins); but not much water (but they do give some out). Outside late: there is weak network on valley edge.

Friday 26th: Cabane de Mille down to Bourg St Pierre; up to Grand St Bernard; to Ferret

GPS: Cabane de Mille down to Bourg St Pierre (13k; 3h; +300 m); Bourg St Pierre up to Grand St Bernard (13k; 3h; +1000 m); Grand St Bernard to Ferret (11k; 3hr; +375 m)

Sleep slightly hotly… I think I got careless with my blankets. Up 7 off :30. Sign says 3:45 to Bourg St Pierre: can that really be so? Yes; well, 3 h. Mostly traverse across vast hillsides to the sound of cowbells, but with ups into little valleys. Today is cloudy, which is welcome, except it is blocking my view of Mt Blanc. Here's the hut, perched on it's spur (more distant; ahead). Tiny private hut/shed by the side of the path.

BSP disappoints: the village is cute but all life is on the road; cafe. What next? Gr St Bernard seems obvious and I think I'll go for it. But I need to rest to let my phone and watch charge.

This Hotel du Cret is perfectly typically Fr: old woman and bloke running it; croissants at the bar; fiddly decoration and sports trophies and the like. And quiet :-)

Start up (signpost). Looking grey ahead and then… rain. For about two hours. Now eased off, and am having brief rest in little shelter 2270 ish. It even has a fireplace, and the bench has an inspiring motto. View out of the window.

Also, I need a new raincoat; I've been spoilt by lack of rain up till now. Put mitts on: hands cold. But keep on up and end at col (before: some olde stone-paved sections). Note: the walking path is a bit annoying as unlike the road it is distinctly non-monotonic. There's the grand monastic buildings avec resto and musee de chien but go for little cafe...

...which looks far more like my kind of place. Sit, recover, recharge phone+watch and outside a little sun emerges. Here we are looking over the col.

And now for the final act… Col de Ferret. Up we go (with dodgy start; you have to go down and round; don't get confused by all the routes) on the 13A...

...and top, and we're back in Swiss. Me!

And in cloud too. Well, head down. It is quite dramatic, wild lonely and steep. Finally desc out of cloud, keep on. 

After a bit things become more civilised and I'm finally descending to lower altitude.

I was originally heading for La Fouly but Ferret (sign; plus me) does not disappoint and has hotel so stop there around 7. I get a bed in the dortoir (another view), but am the only one. Shower. Wash socks. Look around a little, in particular the local chapel (interior; image; another).

To bar for biere, catch up phone, and bed. Eat very last of cheese. Note: I still have some Farmer bars left.

Saturday 27th: Ferret to La Fouly; bus to Orcieres; train to Sembrancher then Martigny then Chillon; boat to Lausanne

GPS: Ferret down to La Fouly (3k; 40 mins). At this point I could have, if I'd felt like it, continued on towards Chamonix, possibly getting that far. But I've been there before, and going down to Martigny from here is "natural", and I felt like spending some time on Lac Leman.

To La Fouly (sign). Back to gorgeous wx.

TMB runners lean and stringy; folks en route cheer+cowbell. View back: farewell, mountains!

Happily in time to get 8:48 bus Orcieres. Then 9:20 train to Sembrancher; and connection down to Martigny. Then a little gap and 10:16 to Chillon via Aigle, buying yog+juice+melon in interval. And brief stroll near station: good.

That concludes the walk in the mountains. I leave you with Chillon, where I swam

 

(another view). La Suisse took me along the lake but I don't have a nice pic of her, so I end with the Simplon.

Ready for Rishi?

Rishi Sunak calls for stability and unity as he wins contest to be PM is Aunty's phrasing, and that seems plausible. Effectively this resets the clock to a month and a half back, when the Tory party faithful unwisely chose Truss over Sunak. And we have our first Furriner as PM. What would my father have thought? This kinda reminds me of the John Major premiership, when the country bottled out of going for Labour, only to overwhelmingly change its tiny mind the next time it had the chance. 

Anyway, reality and the Tory MPs have told the membership not to be so silly, and we can hope that fewer surprises are in store. Thankfully that clown Boris didn't get another chance; he is just what the country doesn't need, and the idiot membership would probably have voted for him given such a chance.

My image shows a dahlia; it has been a good year for the same, as Elvis Costello rather mournfully sang. More such pictures are available on Instagram.

Bizarrely, some have thought that Liz Truss Brought Libertarians to Power in the U.K.; but this is foolishness. Tax cuts aren't L, if you simply replace them with borrowing; L would be decreasing the size of the govt, which Truss certainly didn't: to the contrary, she increased spending, thus increasing govt, which is quite the opposite of L. I don't know, kids nowadays, it makes me feel old.

Predictions: always the test. I have nothing very exciting to offer: RS should (with moderate caution, which I expect) make it to the next general election. Whether things look good or bad at that point will largely depend on external factors like the war in Ukraine; that is looking somewhat hopeful now, but with obvious potential to go horribly wrong.

Refs

* The Function of Privilege

* Catastrophic climate risks should be neither understated nor overstated (linking that here is my contribution to the debate at ATTP)

* Covid excitement on Twatter

* Rishi Sunak’s first job? Clearing up his own mess; A clever man, with a penchant for bad ideas says Bagehot at the Economist (arch) but that's a touch negative; Rishi Sunak is anointed Britain’s new prime minister is perhaps fairer (arch).

* Who Will Run It? by Bryan Caplan.

* More than 250 literary figures rail against acquisition by Penguin Random House of book by conservative US supreme court justice - I was going to do a post on this, but really it is just a bit of tedious nonsense from the Graun. These aren't "250 literary figures" - these are mostly book-shop clerks and the like; or in their own delicate phrasing members of the writing, publishing, and broader literary community; just see the list for yourself. But the prize goes to the Orwellian it is imperative that publishers uphold their dedication to freedom of speech with a duty of care. The stuff about inalienable human rights is just a confusion between how the world is and how they would like it to be; all too commonplace.

* COP27: THE GREAT RACE TO EGYPT!

 

Death of a salesman, part 3 or 4

I must be getting old; or the GW wars are getting old; it seems to be more obituaries than births nowadays. The latest to shuffle off this mortal coil is Tim Ball, who may perhaps be most notable for the number of times he has bounced in and out of wiki. Like a rubber ball, geddit? Anyway, he is there now but not here, so to speak. And as we speak, the talk page is trying to find a [[WP:RS]] for his passing away, the Dork Side not being considered suitable¹.

As a tribute to him, I can imagine no better memorial than the Youtube video that WUWT recommends, especially TB himself speaking. TB leads off with Global Cooling, but as you'd expect, doesn't talk about the science, instead he talks about a pop book: Lowell Ponte's The Cooling. Then there's a pile of paranoia about Maurice Strong. Then (15:20) he confuses the radiative effects of clouds with those of humidity. Then some paranoia about Soros. Then I got bored.

Refs

* Patrick Michaels suffers hard delete

* Mann vs Ball dismissal: the transcript

* No, a cherry-picked analysis doesn’t demonstrate that we’re not in a climate crisis - ATTP. Though I still find all the stuff I read on TC's etc deeply unconvincing; e.g. Hurricane Ian is no anomaly. The climate crisis is making storms more powerful by Michael E Mann and Susan Joy Hassol.

* Latour has kicked it, too. As RS notes.

* What Conservatives Have Forgotten about Subsidiarity and the Common Good.

* SHIPPING AEROSOLS & ALBEDO: A CLOUD OF WITNESS.

* Henderson on Gray's Arbitrary Lines.

* The End of History and The Last Man and Liberalism and Its Discontents.

* Governments do not stabilize markets by Scott Sumner.

* Ukraine’s Path to Victory - https://www.foreignaffairs.com/.

Notes

1. Finally, there's an obit in the Winnipeg Free Press.

Ye workes of ye Francis Bacone

This summer, looking for something free to read on my Kindle, I stumbled upon Francis Bacon, and thought: why not? The answer turns out to be: because he is a windbag². I think I was put on to Bacon by something at ACX, but can no longer recall quite what. With that stupendous introduction, now read on, bearing in mind that this review is not entirely fair, and is largely reconstructed from my impressions of a month ago dredged out of my notoriously poor memory. However I feel that in reviewing someone who is mainly telling us that his predecessors were wrong, it would be wrong of me to be over kind.

Wiki says that Bacon "has been called the father of empiricism" which isn't his fault. Stanford, normally a bit more sober, goes for "one of the leading figures in natural philosophy and in the field of scientific methodology in the period of transition from the Renaissance to the early modern era". Between those two you can find enough nice things said about him and his works, so I don't need to trouble to do that. ThonyC is less kind.

Of his works I consider three: Novum Organum (1620), The Advancement of Learning (1605), and The New Atlantis (posthumous, 1627).

Novum Organum, sive Indicia Vera de Interpretatione Naturae

This is the Big One. Curiously, I find that the LibertyFund has it, so that will do (I read Gutenberg's version on my Kindle). Let's give you some taste of his style:

They who have presumed to dogmatize on nature, as on some well investigated subject, either from self-conceit or arrogance, and in the professorial style, have inflicted the greatest injury on philosophy and learning. For they have tended to stifle and interrupt inquiry exactly in proportion as they have prevailed in bringing others to their opinion: and their own activity has not counterbalanced the mischief they have occasioned by corrupting and destroying that of others. They again who have entered upon a contrary course, and asserted that nothing whatever can be known, whether they have fallen into this opinion from their hatred of the ancient sophists, or from the hesitation of their minds, or from an exuberance of learning, have certainly adduced reasons for it which are by no means contemptible. They have not, however, derived their opinion from true sources, and, hurried on by their zeal and some affectation, have certainly exceeded due moderation. 

It is interesting that Newton's Principia was published a mere 67 years later but is utterly revolutionarily different: eschewing entirely the windbaggery in favour of actual content⁵.

Bacon gets credit for realising that a lot of the old stuff is wrong: Plato, Aristotle (note that the name NO is a riff on A's Organon), whatever; and that new thought is needed. I shouldn't minimise how hard this is to do, because just waking up is difficult enough. In the beginning he is keen to stress how peaceable he is with "We make no attempt to disturb the system of philosophy that now prevails"; but I think that is just fluff; not long after he says "we regard all the systems of philosophy hitherto received or imagined, as so many plays brought out and performed, creating fictious and theatrical worlds".

B is keen on Induction not Syllogism. By which I think he means deducing general principles from lots of observations; rather than a stepwise logically-impeccable deduction of a chain of truths from... something; or possibly; rather than just Making Shit Up¹. I had no great patience with this, so you may prefer wiki's Baconian Method article. His method tends towards the "gather large numbers of observations and facts and from them make theories" kind of thought, which doesn't really work, as it neglects the role of theory in deciding what things you want to observe; though to be fair he does give some role to iteration between the two⁶.

As far as I can tell he believes in "continuous matter" not atoms (This method will not bring us to atoms, which takes for granted the vacuum, and immutability of matter (neither of which hypotheses is correct); and thus he can try things like The first regards the body as an aggregate or combination of simple natures. Thus, in gold are united the following circumstances: it is yellow, heavy, of a certain weight, malleable and ductile to a certain extent; it is not volatile, loses part of its substance by fire, melts in a particular manner, is separated and dissolved by particular methods, and so of the other natures observable in gold. An axiom, therefore, of this kind deduces the subject from the forms of simple natures; for he who has acquired the forms and methods of superinducing yellowness, weight, ductility, stability, deliquescence, solution, and the like, and their degrees and modes, will consider and contrive how to unite them in any body, so as to transform it into gold. Which is charming: you can move things towards being gold by separately pushing them on axes of yellowness, density, malleability and so on, This is wrong, of course, but that's not the point: the point is that he is doing what he charges the antients with: Making Shit Up³. I don't think he even attempts to postulate the idea of an experiment which might distinguish the two views.

[2023/04 update: added pic, from Trinity chapel, where he is one of the worthies seated at Newton's feet. Doubtless he is intended to be pondering deeply, but he looks like a portly old gentleman resting his eyes for the afternoon after too much ale at lunchtime.]

[2024/01 update: see-also Extension and divisibility section from Kant's Dialectic.]

Random: he hasn't realised that biological processes are Really Complicated, and so if you want to investigate, say, heat, you really ought to start by separating organic from inorganic and looking at the latter.

He is fond of lists. A significant part of the book is "Prerogative Instances"; for example We will treat of the instances of divorce as the fifteenth of our prerogative instances. They indicate the separation of natures of the most common occurrence. They differ, however, from those subjoined to the accompanying instances; for the instances of divorce point out the separation of a particular nature from some concrete substance with which it is usually found in conjunction, while the hostile instances point out the total separation of one nature from another. They differ, also, from the instances of the cross, because they decide nothing, but only inform us that the one nature is capable of being separated from the other. They are of use in exposing false forms, and dissipating hasty theories derived from obvious facts; so that they add ballast and weight, as it were, to the understanding. For instance, let the acquired natures be those four which Telesius terms associates, and of the same family, namely, heat, light, rarity, and mobility, or promptitude to motion; yet many instances of divorce can be discovered between them. Air is rare and easily moved, but neither hot nor light; the moon is light but not hot; boiling water is warm but not light; the motion of the needle in the compass is swift and active, and yet its substance is cold, dense, and opaque; and there are many similar examples. I found all that unenlightening.

He is also fond of vague over-arching "aristocratic" or "dilettante" science, and doesn't seem to have much patience for the details⁴, where progress is to be found: Men generally make their experiments carelessly, and as it were in sport, making some little variation in a known experiment, and then if they fail they become disgusted and give up the attempt; nay, if they set to work more seriously, steadily, and assiduously, yet they waste all their time on probing some solitary matter, as Gilbert on the magnet.

That's about it I think. Did I miss anything?

Of the Proficience and Advancement of Learning, Divine and Human

Largely a pre-tread of NO, from my recollection, and so not worth reading independently unless you really want all the latin tags, which I think are fewer in NO. Gutenberg text here.

The New Atlantis

An unfinished Utopia knock-off, which shows us a society which has used his ideas, and whose main content is a loong speech by a worthy of the "Salomon's House" telling us about all the kewl kit they have over there. Ironically but inevitably this exposes Bacon's total lack of any actual rather than meta ideas, since everything they have is just like what England had at the time, only bigger; or better; or hotter; or colder.

Notes

1. I supply the example "The circle is a perfect shape; the heavens are perfect; thus planets move in circles" as an example of Making Shit Up. For more of me dissing the antients MSU, see Après ma mort, je ferai tomber une pluie de roses. For an alternative view, see Popper, Conjectures and Refutations, where he views MSU (but being open to rational criticism of your ideas) as key to progress.

2. He is also massively over-rated by Ye Populare Mediae, but is hardly unique in that.

3. And also for being pretty vague about it all; try searching the Standford article for "atom".

4. Another instance: the tides: let the required nature be the flow and ebb of the sea, which is repeated twice a day, at intervals of six hours between each advance and retreat, with some little difference, agreeing with the motion of the moon. But he makes no attempt to establish observations of the times of the tides, and compare these to lunar position.

5. Or I suppose Galileo's Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems of 1632.

6. In retrospect I realise I should have been harsher here: his induction is wrong, and since he is generally cited as the source for the idea, he gets credit for misleading people for centuries after; though to fair, just like those who relied on the Greeks, people are responsible for their own mistakes. For Popper, who will supply the correct answer, see Conjectures and Refutations.

Refs

* MISTAH COAL, HE NOT DEAD

* The city without zoning / Martha's Migrants

* Renaissance Science – LI: ThonyC / The Renaissance Mathematicus on Bacon

* Magnetic Variations – VI De Magnete - ThonyC quoting William Harvey, in his Brief Lives, John Aubrey tells us “had been physitian to the Lord Chancellour Bacon, whom he esteemed much for his witt and style, but would not allow him to be a great Philosopher. Said he to me, ‘He writes Philosophy like a Lord Chancellour,’ speaking in derision, ‘I have cured him.’” (Gutenberg)

Bad beekeeping, autumn 2022

Not so much to report this time. Summary: before:

And after:

In more detail... the one on the left is mine, and healthy; the one on the right is my friend's, and healthy; the one in the middle is mine, and dead. So I took the two supers of empty frames and gave them to the live hive, which was looking quite full and probably glad of the space.

It has been quite a long time since I've had a proper chance to look into the brood box in the middle. It was not a pretty sight, shall we say. Here's the floor, which should be clear, and was instead littered with the junk of many years, mostly old cells that I've hastily stripped off and let fall; but also the odd snail.

The brood comb isn't in great shape either, but the cobwebs are spider, not waxmoth, so may be saveable. They are just a touch dark though, because I'm very bad at replacing comb. Hopefully I'll get round to a refurbishment over the winter.

I didn't even try to take any honey off, since I have enough for my needs now and it can wait until spring.

Refs

* ATTP goes up

Missus Quin her dead

Compare and contrast two Twits:

Embassy of Ukraine to the UK:

Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II will forever remain in our hearts as pattern of impeccable public service and devotion to duty. We bow our heads in sorrow together with the subjects of the British Crown around the world.

Barack Obama:

Like so many of you, Michelle and I are grateful to have witnessed Her Majesty’s dedicated leadership, and we are awed by her legacy of tireless, dignified public service. Our thoughts are with her family and the people of the United Kingdom at this difficult time.

The first is simple, dignified, moving. The second is focussed on the audience of the Twit, then on the Obamas, and only thirdly on her Maj. Despite his brutal barrage of complete sentences, this seems all too typical.

As to what I think: when young I was a good republican, of course; now it hardly seems to matter in comparison to other matters; having someone vaguely sane as a non-political figurehead seems like a good idea.

Refs

* Heart of Darkness

Vaclav Smil and Steve Koonin

In a recent interview in New York Times Magazine, energy expert and polymath Vaclav Smil found himself quoting Stoat... that's not quite strictly true; what he said was "I cannot tell you that we don’t have a problem because we do have a problem. But I cannot tell you it’s the end of the world by next Monday because it is not the end of the world by next Monday. What’s the point of you pressing me to belong to one of these groups?". Which is essentially my If it isn’t catastrophic we’ve got nothing to worry about, have we? from 2014: Stoat, always leading from the front!

I wouldn't trouble you with this, except it begins RP Jr's review of Unsettled by Steve Koonin (substack; arch). RP's view is that For well over a decade, the American debate over climate change has largely been a battle between two extremes: those who view climate change apocalyptically, and those castigated as deniers of climate science... Predictably, the categories map neatly onto the extremes of left-versus right politics; and that Koonin had a chance to push back on this "framing"; and (as a what we could generously regard as a side effect) RP gives us his framing. I agree that the "debate" is often largely unproductive; I'm not at all convinced that SK ever had a chance to produce a productive book because of his inbuilt biases and history. And while RP is correct to call out the quality of debate, this is cheap; and I couldn't really recommend his analysis.

This is reminiscent of Remarks by President Biden on the Continued Battle for the Soul of the Nation, which compares so unfavourably to The Gettysburg Powerpoint Presentation. The man, and all his advisers, are so partisan down to their boots that they're incapable of even seeing it.

I apply the usual "Stoat Test" to Koonin: he is a by-blow in The East is Red and All of this will soon be moot, anyway but the author of a dodgy and pointless amicus brief in the Alsup case.

Refs

* Nature: Manuscripts that are ideologically impure and “harmful” will be rejected

* O’Sullivan’s Law Has A Different Cause

* Pinochet, less shit than modern progressives - Timmy

* The importance of science communication - ATTP

* Gorbachev failed. That's why he was showered with honors

* Simple models predict behavior at least as well as behavioral scientists

* Tribalism and Electoral Politics - "Clinton put many potential voters, the Trump supporters, in the “them” category. Trump put foreigners who don’t vote, in the “them” category"

* Inflation: Why Didn’t We Think of That Before? by Pierre Lemieux

* The Caplan-Singer Debate: My Opening Statement on “Do the Rich Pay Their Fair Share?”

* Global economic inequality: what matters most for your living conditions is not who you are, but where you are

Sawyer, 1972, impartially consider'd

Today marks the 50th anniversary of a remarkable research paper on global warming, says CarbonBrief: Man-made Carbon Dioxide and the “Greenhouse” Effect by J Sawyer. I have a PDF of it available here, for reasons I can't recall; and Archer has one here; mine appears to be of slightly higher quality. 

It is said that the article makes one of the first predictions of future global warming – that temperatures would rise 0.6C by the end of the 20th century. Which is a bit odd, because the "prediction" just takes the 2.4 CS value of Manabe and Wetherald and scales it to a 25% CO2 rise by 2000. The article got a 35th birthday too (in 2007, oddly enough) but everyone has forgotten that. And ScepticalScience noted it in 2014.

Is this of any importance? No. S, aka M+W, happened to get about the right answer, but this provides little or no confirmation of GW theory; the models were too simple. If they had got the wrong answer, no one would care, so you're not allowed to make much of the right answer; you can't retrospectively make it into a test. Gavin somewhat disagrees with me, but in matters of climate models I know who I'd trust more. I said this about Hansen 1981 somewhere too, but can't find that right now.

A long dry summer

It has been a long dry summer in Europe. This is obvious enough from the news for anyone paying attention; this post merely collects some observations from my recent trip to the Swiss alps. To add a couple of parochial matters: the Great Ouse (half) Marathon was cancelled due to low water levels; as was the Peterborough Summer regatta. But back to the alps...

The path from Felksin to the Britannia hut has dramatically changed since I did it (at about the same time) last year (GPS: traverse; lakes). All the snow has gone, and the glacier shrunk. But do I have the pix to prove it? Not as well comparable as I'd like. Here's 2021:

And 2022:

All the snow is gone. Which is annoying, because snow is much easier to walk on than ice. But the "ramp" down onto the glacier is totally gone too, transforming an easy stroll into a rough path. Further round, the "traverse" route over snow is gone, so you have to go the "lakes" route, which is half an hour longer and more work. Indeed, in theory the route from Felskin is closed from 11th August, and the alternative is to climb up an extra 500 m from Morenia.

The lakes themselves are like this now:

and were like this in 2021:

Although to be fair that isn't convincingly anything other than annual variation.

Higher up, on the Allalingletscher, I don't have good pix for comparison, but what I happily walked on last year solo with barely a "woo, there's some crevasses here under the snow, I really ought to walk carefully" was replaced by a "well we may be roped together but we're having to zig-zag through this ugly crevasse field" because all the snow bridges had melted out. And there was no snow, just bare ice, until about 3300 m.

We had a second similar experience from the Monte Rosa hut. Last year, again, I was at the "woo, there are some crevasses here" stage:

But this year it was "FFS, how are we supposed to get through this?":

That picture actually makes it seem better than it was; what it was, was impassable, at least for us, though some others did get through.

Others: a newspaper article about the ice melting. And several huts had run out of water; either because their snowpack or streams had gone.

Refs

* 2022 was a disastrous year for Swiss glaciers... (arch)

Switzerland, 2022

I'm back; I trust you missed me. Below, Le Grand Combin, very nice. No I didn't climb it.

 

Switzerland again; some climbing, some walking. A full report will follow. It was a very dry summer. 

 

ZOMG catastrophe, part n

Or, Climate endgame: risk of human extinction ‘dangerously underexplored’. The latest fad is to argue about the tone of reporting, and complain about or push "doomerism", as an alternative to doing anything useful. Although since the people doing the chattering aren't capable of doing anything useful - that tends to come from the people doing solar panels and windmills - perhaps it is all harmless enough¹. It comes from Climate Endgame: Exploring catastrophic climate change scenarios featuring that nice Tim Lenton.

Anyway, I got as far as We know that temperature rise has “fat tails”: low-probability, high-impact extreme outcomes (9) before giving up. Because: ref 9 is, and I kid you not, G. Wagner, M. L. Weitzman, Climate Shock: The Economic Consequences of a Hotter Planet (Princeton University Press, 2015). FFS: it is a pop-sci book. You can't use that as a ref in a serious paper; therefore, this isn't a serious paper.

Notes

1. Harsh and not fair; I exaggerate for effect.

Refs

* With all the hype about the heatwave, it’s worth having a bit of perspective - JA. Heat vs Cold deaths. And a reply from Gavin. And an ACX post; thanks A.

* China Is on Track to Double Its Solar Panels From Last Year’s Record

* VV: WATN: The 10th anniversary of the still unpublished Watts et al. (2012) manuscript. Includes actual real data from Coppa 2021. See-also Moyhu.

* Gavin attempts to shortcut the problem, but it doesn't work.

* The best case for worst case scenarios: Gavin, 2019.

* Reto Knutti seems sane.

* Open Posts, Closed Works, Other Worlds: part 3 - Rich Puchalsky

* The Skull Beneath the Skin - Hayek and Atavism; Q: if I look in antient Greek plays, do I find warnings of this?

* Blame the Principals - BC

Lovelock shuffles off this mortal coil

Having had fun with the Dork Side, I suppose I really ought to dunk on everyone's favourite uncle, James "Gaia" Lovelock. Who has recently pegged out, though he had a good run.

But I think my Junk from von S is a fair summary of where he stood on GW: he was confused. I'm not sure his final appearence in Is Bruno Latour a useless ponce? really represents his true value, but so it goes.

And - having just checked wiki - who could forget his spectacularly ill-judged "We need a more authoritative world... You've got to have a few people with authority who you trust who are running it... Even the best democracies agree that when a major war approaches, democracy must be put on hold for the time being. I have a feeling that climate change may be an issue as severe as a war. It may be necessary to put democracy on hold for a while". Sigh; we're back to the philosopher-kings so beloved of folks like him and Jim "back to Plato" Al-Khalili. If, say, Farage had said that the Graun would be all over him; but because it is cute-n-cuddly Lovelock, the Graun just rolls over.

I liked Gaia, though.

Refs

* Claim: A new bombshell report found that 96% of ConUS NOAA temperature is corrupted (false).

* Would You Abdicate If You Could Be the Dictator?

Patrick Michaels suffers hard delete

Tasteless but I couldn't resist. See-also Joseph D'Aleo suffers soft delete or Science advances one funeral at a time. Or perhaps it would be better to see Cainozoic history of southern New Zealand: An accord between geological observations and plate-tectonic predictions. Although if I look at CO2 "Science"'s obit, He leaves a legacy of sound science and dedication to the scientific process is rather pedestrian¹. I'm expecting better from WUWT... nope; just a cut-n-paste of the CO2 "Science". Or vice-versa, who knows. By contrast, Kate Carter got "great scholar". Let's hope some of the Watties read this and feel the need to puff PM a bit. I'd like to accuse them of being small for taking a dig at Mann in PM's obit, but that would be rather inappropriate in a post like this.

And now I realise I forgot to do my due diligience: did PM make it into Stoat? And the answer is he's doing better at that; in Death at UAH I gave him "the real septics like Singer and Michaels and Inhofe". In Trump's EPA pick will make Obama regret his environmental overreach? he got "evil arch uber-villain Patrick Michaels" though I was riffing off this, he didn't really earn it all himself. And a few more, like MIT Climate Scientist Dr. Richard Lindzen urges Trump: “Cut the funding of climate science by 80% to 90% until the field cleans up’? but there he's a filler that just about makes the cut before I trail off: "Otherwise its Happer, Idso, Michaels… and then tails off into blanks". And "old" Stoat noted PM was a touch shy on the betting front.

Notes

1. As well as untrue, obvs.

Refs

* Empathy and denialism by Brian

* The United States: World Party Central

* Gavin on Twotter: "why Patrick Michaels was scorned by mainstream climate science - it wasn’t because of his policy preferences, but because of his mendacity"

* Weather and Climate Disaster Losses So Far in 2022, Still Not Getting Worse - Pielke

* Incidence Not Insanity

* Now, Read This Properly, Again: Tim Worstall looks at The oil and gas industry has delivered $2.8bn (£2.3bn) a day in pure profit for the last 50 years, a new analysis has revealed.

* Josh Hawley's UnAmerican Nationalism

* ATTP: Limits to Growth? and my reply. It bounced off, of course.

* The Distributive Distraction.

Joseph D'Aleo suffers soft delete

Reference Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joseph D'Aleo. Humiliatingly for Smokey Joe, the final delete reason is "The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD". Or, in other words, no-one cared. How the GW wars have faded.

Refs

* Archive of Google's cache.

* WATN: John Brignell

* WATN 2015; 2016.

* Tim Ball: turned out NN again

Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy

Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy is a book by Joseph "Creative Destruction" Schumpeter: "one of the most famous, controversial, and important books on social theory, social sciences, and economics" if you can believe wiki. I recommend it. I read it about six months ago and was going to blog it, but realised I really couldn't remember enough detail to do so properly.

Happily, that nice Pierre Lemieux has recently reviewed it. And he focusses, as anyone who cares must, on quite what did JS really mean? Because, contrary to what all who have read Mises or Hayek know full well, his words say that socialism is possible and that capitalism was on the way out. But was he being ironic? My answer is both yes and no: in describing how socialism is possible, he describes a whole series of modifications to "pure" socialism that would be necessary, and never actually says that at the end of all that, he's pretty well re-invented capitalism¹. As to the inevitable end of capitalism, I think there's both an evil influence of Marxist historicism which is, wrong, obvs; quite a bit of poking fun at the worthless "intellectual elite"; and more correctly a recognition of the creeping influence of statist over-regulation, which is correct, alas equally obvs.

Notes

1. Ideally, at this point I'd support this with quotes and such, but I'm afraid you're out of luck there.

WV v EPA

Kavanaugh’s views on EPA’s climate authority and Kavanaugh's other dangerous assault - on the environment? refer. Spoiler: I have little new to say. This post is, of course, occaisioned by West Virginia v. EPA. You may wish to read SCOTUSblog's take. Reading the opinion and dissent, my impression is that both sides seem to be somewhat losing patience with each other.

To recap my opinions: which way to decide this is a matter of interpretation; either way is defensible; overall I'm inclined to agree with the majority.

The Agency ultimately projected, for instance, that it would be feasible to have coal provide 27% of national electricity generation by 2030, down from 38% in 2014

The judgement doesn't make much of this, but I would: the much-vaunted plan was shite to begin with. It aimed to get coal down to 27% by 2030. And by 2022, without the plan in place, coal is... 22%. So what was all the fuss about? The plan was totally pointless. The idiot govt should just stop this nonsense.

Absurd US Supreme Court decision leaves climate leadership in limbo?

From a twit by Mann, this piece by Trenberth, who really should know better. But, as roughly typical of that-kind-of-viewpoint, worth a breakdown. Calling the decision absurd is just wrong. KT leads with "As an expert on the science of climate change..." but hasn't realised that is irrelevant; the science wasn't an issue, as it wasn't in Alsup. He then mixes it up with "The decision is designed to tie the hands of EPA scientists to fight pollution and to protect air, water and our families from the climate crisis" but that isn't really true either. The EPA retains all those "ordinary" powers; what it doesn't get it power to regulate CO2, unless congress clearly states that it should.

Refs

* The Major Rules Doctrine

* Obama Climate Plan, Now in Court, May Hinge on Error in 1990 Law

* The Supreme Court throttles Joe Biden’s climate agenda - Economist

* How Effective Is (More) Money? Randomizing Unconditional Cash Transfer Amounts in the US

* Democrats Designed the Climate Law to Be a Game Changer. Here’s How - NYT. A claim that the IRA defines CO2 as a pollutant, to get around this judgement. We'll see.

* Trump taxes: Supreme Court clears Democrats to see returns - so much for the SCOTUS being a tool of Trump: Mr Trump hit out at the Supreme Court on Wednesday and said it had "become nothing more than a political body". "Why would anybody be surprised that the Supreme Court has ruled against me, they always do!" he wrote in a post on his social media platform Truth Social. He merely appointed some of them: they have no loyalty to him, or to anyone else.

* 2025: Family Guy on SCOTUS.