Thursday, March 17, 2011

Prof Brian Cox's wife, Gia Milinovich, bans Madame Arcati!

Prof Brian Cox more famous than wife
Ooh, diddums. I notice that Prof Brian Cox's delightfully outspoken wife, nuclear energy-loving Gia Milinovich, has banned Madame Arcati from joining her following on Twitter. I do hope it wasn't something I said. She describes herself on the site as 'married to that mindless pretty idiot from a pop band @ProfBrianCox.' It enhances my sense of romance that she aids self-definition by reference.

I do like her sense of humour. While tolerating certain fans' foolish suggestions that her husband is gay - I fear he is too unimaginative for that lifestyle option - she is happy to reveal, 'My last tweet was about how my chance to shag David Tennant was foiled by Paul McCartney sleeping on my hotel room floor.' Anyway ....

I can understand Gia's sensitivity to my trenchant criticism of her husband who is now the BBC's licence fee-paid voice of secularism and unelected, self-appointed scourge of all faiths. Criticism can be a painful thing, even for one who engages in pre-emptive self-laceration and larky asides. Oh, the pillow laughs! But is divisive opinion much tolerated chez Cox? I sleep alone.

Certainly Gia and Brian are one on nukes. She writes (see link above): 'Nuclear Power Is Not Nuclear War.' He writes (in the Sun): 'Nuclear reactors ... cannot explode like nuclear bombs.' Aren't they just adorable?

Still, I'm not one to bear grudges. Enjoy Gia's blog; laugh at her post-modernist, astutely framed jokes. And read her heart-rending description of being turned into an Invisible Wife by Brian's fame.

14 comments:

Mrs Dale said...

This is accidentally quite interesting.

Joe MacFarlane said...

I am banned by Kate Day (Daily Torygraph. She wears comfortable shoes). A few others.

Anonymous said...

What a lot of comments!

Madame Arcati said...

As few as on your site dearie, I'm sure. Still, the Coxes not a very interesting couple.

Tadgh said...

This is exactly the sort of anti-intellectual tripe that makes me fear for humanity. Your blog promotes the sort of idle minded bullshit that is wrong with media.

You focus on peoples' personal lives as opposed to their work. Pathetic really. Also you believe in pseudoscientific crap while chortling at astrophysics? How ostentatious.

The scientific and skeptic communities have proven wrong your barnum statement loaded cold reading ways.

You and your kind, if you were let run your deluded ways would usher in a new dark ages. I can only hope rational and reason prevail.

I hope you have the stones to approve this comment and engage me in intelligent discussion.

Madame Arcati said...

The tone of your comment suggests that you are not really capable of intelligent discussion. Indeed, you sound more like a faith hysteric who imagines he knows everything - even those things not studied. You just 'know' anything outside the known purviews of science are rubbish. Tell me I'm wrong.

The science 'communities' have proven nothing against astrology or any of the other divinatory practices. An ability to ape some of these practices in various set-ups only proves how versatile the human animal is. If you were really interested in science you would not be taking your catechism from the James Randis of the world who are simply preachers - like Prof Brian Cox.

Your search is for absolute certainties that comfort you - in effect, a religion without a god.

You are so typical of this time, like some kind of sad automaton, that I pity you.

Tadgh said...

"The tone of your comment suggests that you are not really capable of intelligent discussion." Well I guess that makes you feel big right there now doesn't it? Dismissing anything I say before I say it.

"The science 'communities' have proven nothing against astrology or any of the other divinatory practices." Excuse me, it has. Through countless double blind studies it has busted any false claims of clairvoyance or similar delusions. All astrology is based around a series of vague questions/statements to which the receiver is a blank canvas to which they can apply.

I do not take my "catechism" from Cox. I merely praise him and his likes for his role in undoing some of this scientific ignorance people like you thrive on.

"Your search is for absolute certainties that comfort you - in effect, a religion without a god." My search for knowledge comforts me, yes. But tell me where this leap of it being a religion without god comes from? There's some logic missing here.

The burden of proof lies on you and your in Madame Arcati. Why should I believe that cards, the time of year in which I'm born, angels or other pseudoscience. Proof of these ridiculous claims lies on you, the person making the claims. I ask for you solid proof. You will not deter me with your schoolyard bullying.

Madame Arcati said...

Ah, the old 'burden of proof' game, I know it well. You yourself assert, so you prove. Merely telling me of double blind tests proves nothing: we would need to know who conducted these tests, under what circumstances and to what end. I know this involves a bit of work, but I think you have the zeal to get to it.

Science does not speak with one voice. Various researches into astrology, for example, have produced mixed results but nothing that could be described as conclusively dismissive. On the contrary, Michel Gauquelin's work, for instance, was so positive about astrology that scientists have desperately attempted to misrepresent his findings ever since. His words cannot be misread.

Prof Cox is just a media preacher, presenting theory as fact (Big Bang is a slightly out of fashion idea these days). I'm sure he'll take over where Dawkins leaves off.

Anonymous said...

I'd quite while you're behind Tadgh

Elly said...

I just checked and Mrs Cox blocks me on twitter too. We are both cox blocked Madame!

Madame Arcati said...

Well done Elly. Plainly the Coxes can't cope with contradiction.

Anonymous said...

My dear Madame,

As a fellow astrologer and tarot reader, I read your blog with interest. Oh how the scientists scoff at our beliefs, little knowing that we astrologers have tremendous insight into the human psyche with just a few details.

Au contrare, Madam, I feel that the Coxes ARE interesting. He is at least. I think his rise to fame has alarmed his wife with his increasing popularity with women. It cannot be pleasant for her. But, why go on twitter and all these other mindless cesspits for the intellectually challenged?

These people all have their day, and with his chart showing him to be affable and pleasant, he could indeed run for quite some time yet. He is quite definitely a boon to science, I have learnt a lot in the last while entirely through watching Sir Cox.

I am curious to know if you and the dear lady Cox have actually met or had an altercation?

Madame Arcati said...

Thank you poppet. Brian (or Brain, as I prefer to call him, along with his good friend, Dara O'Brain) is an excellent broadcaster and teacher - indeed if he focused his talents on dissemination and not propaganda, he'd be even better.

I have not examined his chart in any great detail so cannot disagree with you that he is at least pleasant: I am quite convinced he would make an excellent Samaritan and would not step over an injured kitten in the street without first seeking help. What little I recall of his chart (Pisces) suggests, however, fanatical tendencies and a potential intolerance of differing views - see his Pluto aspects in particular.

I have not had the pleasure of meeting Lady Brain Cox, who spends her days blocking people on Twitter and bitching to her heavy-drinking media pals about the 'loons' of faith and other plotters against her person. One can only hope she gets over Brain's BBC-enhanced celebrity - perhaps Family Fortunes may need a new host soon. Not that I listen to gossip.

The Coxes are indeed fascinating. But then so is everyone else when put on the spot.

Lots of love MA x

Anonymous said...

Madame,

I bow to your superior knowledge with reference to the difficulties associated with Pluto. I agree with you that Brain really should concentrate solely on work ie Manchester University, CERN (tax free!!) and whatever the BBC are throwing at him. I believe a new series is about to take shape, and I, with many others, will look forward to learning from his charm and elequent manner.

Madame, Mrs Brain-less is not for us to ponder upon in the long term. I am aware of her fondness for blocking people, but again, I reiterate, if the dear lady had intelligence enough to remove herself from that most dreadful, vile place, then what others say about herself would matter not a jot. With a toddler and a teenager,not to mention her 'work', I don't know how she has the time to worry about such inane bullshit.

Astrologically, the dear love of Brains life displays much in the way of Mars, hence the aggression.

As I said, all these people have their day. Remember Bob Holness, he of the 'can I have a p please Bob?'. Oh, how we all laughed, but he too had his time. Now gone to the Summerland where I am sure he is watching us all with that lovely grin on his face.

I wish you a good evening, Madame.xx
PS...Media people are not heavy drinkers are they? I NEVER knew that!!! lol lol