I'm singing in the rain...

... whilst I thought we were meant to be suffering from droughts?

Who knows what is up with the weather these days.

Two weeks ago, my newspaper informed me that we were suffering from the driest and warmest April in 20 years! There was a lot of talk about hose pipe bans (in fact, some were enforced already. In April? Yes, ridiculous) and worry that the south of the nation would be suffering from droughts if this sunny weather keeps up. There was talk of even closing a couple of main canal waterways to ensure that nothing was being wasted, as who knew when the next cloud would give us some respite from the barren ... Southern England.


Two weeks on, and now look. Torrential rain and what reporters are calling the "wettest April in 20 years". Make your minds up, mate. Actually, you shouldn't have come to such great conclusions that the start of this month, should you? And I wouldn't think that this month receiving slightly higher levels of precipitation than other months was to be expected due to the phrase "April showers". Obviously this is just reinforcing that this is not the time to call a plumber, so Ishouldn't be too surprised that April is a bit wetter, windier and groggier than the other months. Of course I shall complain about it, just like everyone else. However, we all know that our comments will only fall on deaf ears, as we have no control of the weather...but there are some who are able to decide upon weather. Of the past, of course. And it's generally through the extrapolation and misinterpretation of data. I call these guys sensationalists. I call these guys journalists.


The way that they report any sort of scientificly orientated article infuriates me, seeing as they have deformed the research paper they came across, which was most likely to be a thoroughly documented and well thought-out piece of research. Instead of reporting what the research project is actually about and what actually happened (yes, I know it may be a little long-winded, but that's all the fun!), results are misinterpreted, the conclusion becomes oversimplified, thus losing some of the credibility of the research paper as it is crudely reported in some tabloid.  The broadsheets are just as bad.

It;s one thing with it being a badly reported article. It's another thing if it tells the complete opposite from what the report states altogether. I guess it's the whole "dumbing down" and sensationalising that's employed to get the papers sold. No one wants to read something about some long word that no one can quite pronounce, let alone spell, that is capable of reversing certain strains of cancer in a couple of people out of the sample size. No. That would be boring. Why put that when you could put this?

NEW CANCER DRUG WORKS MIRACLES IN FIRST TRIAL - SUCCESS SPARKS TALKS WITH HOSPITALS TO MAKE CURE AVAILABLE TO ALL

WINGS SURGICALLY ATTACHED TO BABY - NOW HE CAN FLY

It is statistically proven that people will believe whatever the hell you put in the papers these days, and hold it to the gospel truth.