For the original place I saw this article please see: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/11/01/thank-you-matt-ridley/#more-50468

>That the earl of Oxford wrote Shakespeare is pseudoscience.

That’s nothing to do with science or pseudoscience.  Its a conspiracy theory, its not claiming to be scientific, so it can’t be pseudoscientific.  The same goes most of the other statements in that sentence.  UFO’s being on there makes no sense – as there are undoubtedly flying objects which are unidentified.  Perhaps if the author was more credible he would have said “little green men”

>So is quite a lot, though not all, of the argument for organic farming.

Which argument is “the” argument?  My argument might be different from his.  Was banning DDT part of the organic farming movement?  Was it psuedoscience?
Religious faith isn’t pseudo science – it isn’t claiming to be science.  Its faith.  A different thing

>Imagine my surprise then when I found I was the heretic and that serious journalists working not for tabloids but for Science Magazine, and for a Channel 4 documentary team, swallowed the argument of the cereologists that it was highly implausible that crop circles were all man-made.

Notably “journalists” not “scientists – regardless of what publication they work for.  Also, to be classed as a “heretic” you’d need to be holding a position opposed to that of the scientific consensus.  There was no scientific consensus on crop circles as they weren’t deemed worth of study.  If they had been, i’ve no doubt the clear consensus would have been that crop circles are human-made

>So I learnt lesson number 1: the stunning gullibility of the media. Put an “ology” after your pseudoscience and you can get journalists to be your propagandists.

Agreed.  But you can’t run the argument in reverse.  Not all disciplines with an -ology on the end are psuedoscientific.  Hello biology

>Like antisepsis, many scientific truths began as heresies and fought long battles for acceptance against entrenched establishment wisdom that now appears irrational

That entrenched establishment wisdom wasn’t held by the scientific community though – it was typically imposed by the church – whom we agree aren’t scientific

>What sustains pseudoscience is confirmation bias. We look for and welcome the evidence that fits our pet theory

Of course.  Both sides of the climate change debate do this.  Notably, the vast majority of deniers have strong external reasons to be deniers, or don’t have even the most rudimentary scientific education.

>Philip Tetlock did the definitive experiment. He gathered a sample of 284 experts – political scientists, economists and journalists – and harvested 27,450 different specific judgments from them about the future then waited to see if they came true. The results were terrible. The experts were no better than “a dart-throwing chimpanzee”.

None of those disciplines is scientific – those people don’t use a system for predicting based on historical success unlike scientific method – which does have a long history of sucessful prediction.  Are doctors just as bad at predicting the future of your health?  What about astronomers predicting eclipses?  They seem pretty accurate to me

> Never rely on the consensus of experts about the future. Experts are worth listening to about the past, but not the future.

So, because political scientists and economists are useless at predicting the future, everyone else is too?  Almost every action in your life is based on a “best-guess” about the future.  I put money into savings on the “sensible” prediction that I won’t die tomorrow.  Is it sensible to predict that the world population will be higher in 6 months than it is today?  Yes, of course it is.  Is it possible it might be lower?  Yes, something could kill a lot of us.  Is a prediction that it will be higher appropriate – yes.  Is it useful – yes.

> I fully accept that carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas, the climate has been warming and that man is very likely to be at least partly responsible.

OK, So that’s pretty much the debate over from my point of view.

> still conclude that the threat of a dangerously large warming is so improbable as to be negligible

OK, even if I accept “negligible” – the consequences are SO severe that it isn’t worth the risk.

> while the threat of real harm from climate-mitigation policies is already so high as to be worrying

What harm?  Short-term economic harm?  I fail to see how replacing the burning of coal with the spinning of wind turbines can be bad for my health or our economy

> In the mid 2000s one image in particular played a big role in making me abandon my doubts about dangerous man-made climate change: the hockey stick

Surely you’re not STILL banging on about that, as if its relevant?

> Yet it has been utterly debunked by the work of Steve McIntyre and Ross McKitrick

It has been well challenged, but not “utterly debunked” by any stretch

> I urge you to read Andrew Montford’s careful and highly readable book The Hockey Stick Illusion*

I can reference good books by thorough authors that support the graph too.  Its not case closed

> For, apart from the hockey stick, there is no evidence that climate is changing dangerously or faster than in the past

The graph itself isn’t data, its just a representation of a small part of the data.  So that sentence doesn’t even make sense.  The wealth of data, which is increasing all the time, is what provides the evidence.

> It was warmer in the Middle ages* and medieval climate change in Greenland was much faster.

The temperature isn’t the issue, its the rate of change of temperature.  Also – we’re looking at global change, not localised change.  So neither statement is relevant – they’re just FOD

> Sea level* is rising at the unthreatening rate about a foot per century and decelerating.

The sea doesn’t have to go up in a linear relationship with temperature.  Melting sea ice won’t raise sea level, only ice melting on land in large quantities will do that.  The antarctic continent is warming, but hasn’t warmed enough to start melting in the central (land based) area yet.

> Your probability* of dying as a result of a drought, a flood or a storm is 98% lower globally than it was in the 1920s.  Malaria* has retreated not expanded as the world has warmed.

These are due to other influences.  Malaria has gone down due to better drugs, nets, etc.  If you could adjust for those then the story might be very different

> I’ve looked and looked but I cannot find one piece of data – as opposed to a model – that shows either unprecedented change or change is that is anywhere close to causing real harm.

No “one piece of data” will do it.  The climate is intensely complicated – you need lots and lots of data

> No doubt, there will be plenty of people thinking “what about x?”

Yes – here’s my “x”.  The sentence that the author himself accepted earlier… “I fully accept that carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas, the climate has been warming and that man is very likely to be at least partly responsible.”.  If that warming continues what will happen?  Eventually ice will melt, seas will rise, weather will change.  So the only questions really are “will it continue warming” and “if it continues warming, how long will it be before serious problems occur”.  It seems to me that if we keep raising CO2 levels, we will get continued warming.  So that only leaves the second question – how long until serious consequences happen.  I’d rather not find out…

> A snowy December, the BBC lectures us, is “just weather”

Au contraire.  Firstly – 1 year isn’t enough data to conclude anything, the climate can and does jump up and down locally.  We’re talking about long-term trends, not 1 off years.  Secondly – there is good reason to think climate change may bring colder winters to the UK by interupting the gulf-stream which brings us warmth

> To see confirmation bias in action, you only have to read the climategate emails, documents that have undermined my faith in this country’s scientific institutions. It is bad enough that the emails unambiguously showed scientists plotting to cherry-pick data, subvert peer review, bully editors and evade freedom of information requests. What’s worse, to a science groupie like me, is that so much of the rest of the scientific community seemed OK with that. They essentially shrugged their shoulders and said, yeh, big deal, boys will be boys.

Bullshit – Climategate was a big nothing.  Firstly – just because 1 or 2 people didn’t behave impeccably doesn’t make the whole scientific community dishonest.  Secondly – the climategate nonsense came out of attempts by climate deniers to demand incomplete data, so they could twist it to fit their own conclusions, and release it before it was complete – to undermine the use of the data in supporting climate change

> Water vapour forms clouds and whether clouds in practice amplify or dampen any greenhouse warming remains in doubt.

There is no doubt over water vapour being a potent greenhouse gas.  Further – evidence for clouds comes from post 9/11 – when the US grounded all airlines.  The temp dropped by over 1 degree in the US

> The sensitivity of the climate could be a harmless 1.2C, half of which has already been experienced, or it could be less if feedbacks are negative or it could be more if feedbacks are positive.

So, shall we assume it isn’t sensitive, and just take the risk, regardless of the consequences?

> The graph

Clearly shows an upward trend.  Thanks

> Her conclusion is that*: “Of the 18,531 references in the 2007 Climate Bible we found 5,587 – a full 30% – to be non peer-reviewed.”

Or, turned on its head.  70% of the IPCC’s huge report is based on carefully peer reviewed aticles.  12,944 articles that are peer reviewed and support climate change.  In addition there are 5,587 more articles which whilst not peer reviewed, also support climate change.  Thanks

Is the author trying to claim all those scientists are bad at the profession?  Is he claiming they’re all part of an enormous international conspiracy?

> Remember Britain’s unilateral climate act is officially expected to cost the hard-pressed UK economy £18.3 billion a year for the next 39 years and achieve an unmeasurably small change in carbon dioxide levels.

So the crap political implementation is the fault of the scientists who’ve identified a problem?  More likely, reducing our CO2 emissions will BOOST our economy.  Would the author also complain about the spending of government money on the road network (“these new roads are set to cost the UK tax payer 18 billion pounds a year to build for the next 40 years)

> At least* sceptics do not cover the hills of Scotland with useless, expensive, duke-subsidising wind turbines whose manufacture causes pollution in Inner Mongolia and which kill rare raptors such as this griffon vulture.

LOL.  So – burning coal and releasing soot, sulpur compounds, nitrogen compounds, etc is better for the environment is it?  Also, since the author is such a careful “skeptic” – where is his thorough research proving this harm to raptors.  And finally, how about offshore wind farms?  If these turbines were so bad, why aren’t the environmental NGO’s making a fuss?  Are they also a part of the climate change conspiracy?

> At least crop circle believers cannot almost double your electricity bills and increase fuel poverty while driving jobs to Asia, to support their fetish.

Double my electricity bill?  I thought it was the rising price of oil that did that?  The oil that the author seems to think we should keep merrily burning

> At least homeopaths have not made expensive condensing boilers, which shut down in cold weather, compulsory, as John Prescott did in 2005.

Does the author mean those boilers that are really reliable, and more efficient – saving the owner money on fuel bills

> At least astrologers have not driven millions of people into real hunger, perhaps killing 192,000 last year according to one conservative estimate, by diverting 5% of the world’s grain crop into motor fuel

Fair point.  Except its nothing to do with climate scientists.  Silly politicians came up with stupid biodiesel

> Around 1910 the vast majority of scientists and other intellectuals agreed that nationalizing reproductive decisions so as to stop poor, disabled and stupid people from having babies was not just a practical but a moral imperative of great urgency

Vast majority?  I’m afraid not.  Eugenics was a theory devised by politicians, economists and other leading non-scientist figures

> Or remember Trofim Lysenko*, a pseudoscientific crank with a strange idea that crops could be trained to do what you wanted and that Mendelian genetics was bunk. His ideas became the official scientific religion of the Soviet Union and killed millions; his critics, such as the geneticist Nikolai Vavilov, ended up dead in prison.

Because it was politicians who decided which “science” was right, rather than a scientific consensus.  Notably – in the west, where scientists WERE Free to make up their own mind, they concluded that mendelian genetics was correct

> There is no great fossil-fuel slush fund for sceptics.

The author names 4 people who may or may not be making any money (most likely not, but I don’t know – i’d like to see a declaration that they’re not).  Even if those 4 aren’t – that doesn’t mean the vast majority of deniers have nothing to gain

> My argument is that like religion, science as an institution is and always has been plagued by the temptations of confirmation bias. With alarming ease it morphs into pseudoscience even – perhaps especially – in the hands of elite experts and especially when predicting the future and when there’s lavish funding at stake. It needs heretics.

Agreed wholeheartedly.  The sensible critics help improve the science.  Just like sensible critics of parts of the theory of evolution.  What those challenges will result in is small tweaks to the overall theory, or even quite substantial changes (like relativity did to newtonian physics) but they wont bring down the whole theory

Credits
Original recipe: Janet Sarris
Creamy sauce recipe: Amie Stead

Info on the track Regulate and the artists Warren G and Nate Dogg is available on wikipedia.

Regulate – Synopsis

On a cool, clear night (typical to Southern California) Warren G travels through his neighbourhood, searching for women with whom he might initiate sexual intercourse. He has chosen to engage in this pursuit alone.

Nate Dogg, having just arrived in Long Beach, seeks Warren. On his way to find Warren, Nate passes a car full of women who are excited to see him. Regardless, he insists to the women that there is no cause for excitement.

Warren makes a left turn at 21st Street and Lewis Ave, where he sees a group of young men enjoying a game of dice together. He parks his car and greets them. He is excited to find people to play with, but to his chagrin, he discovers they intend to relieve him of his material possessions. Once the hopeful robbers reveal their firearms, Warren realizes he is in a less than favourable predicament.

Meanwhile, Nate passes the women, as they are low on his list of priorities. His primary concern is locating Warren. After curtly casting away the strumpets (whose interest in Nate was such that they crashed their automobile), he serendipitously stumbles upon his friend, Warren G, being held up by the young miscreants.

Warren, unaware that Nate is surreptitiously observing the scene unfold, is in disbelief that he’s being robbed. The perpetrators have taken jewellery and a name brand designer watch from Warren, who is so incredulous that he asks what else the robbers intend to steal. This is most likely a rhetorical question.

Observing these unfortunate proceedings, Nate realizes that he may have to use his firearm to deliver his friend from harm.

The tension crescendos as the robbers point their guns to Warren’s head. Warren senses the gravity of his situation. He cannot believe the events unfolding could happen in his own neighbourhood. As he imagines himself in a fantastical escape, he catches a glimpse of his friend, Nate.

Nate has seventeen cartridges to expend (sixteen residing in the pistol’s magazine, with a solitary round placed in the chamber and ready to be fired) on the group of robbers, and he uses many of them. Afterwards, he generously shares the credit for neutralising the situation with Warren, though it is clear that Nate did all of the difficult work. Putting congratulations aside, Nate quickly reminds himself that he has committed multiple homicides to save Warren before letting his friend know that there are females nearby if he wishes to fornicate with them.

Warren recalls that it was the promise of copulation that coaxed him away from his previous activities, and is thankful that Nate knows a way to satisfy these urges.

Nate quickly finds the women who earlier crashed their car on Nate’s account. He remarks to one that he is fond of her physical appeal. The woman, impressed by Nate’s singing ability, asks that he and Warren allow her and her friends to share transportation. Soon, both friends are driving with automobiles full of women to the East Side Motel, presumably to consummate their flirtation in an orgy.

The third verse is more expository, with Warren and Nate explaining their G Funk musical style. Nate displays his bravado by claiming that individuals with equivalent knowledge could not even attempt to approach his level of lyrical mastery. He also notes that if any third party smokes as he does, they would find themselves in a state of intoxication daily (from Nate’s other works, it can be inferred that the substance referenced is marijuana). Nate concludes his delineation of the night by issuing a vague threat to “busters,” suggesting that he and Warren will further “regulate” any potential incidents in the future (presumably by engaging their enemies with small arms fire).

Original Lyrics

[Intro - Sampled from Young Guns]
Regulators
we regulate any stealing of his property
we’re damn good too
But you can’t be any geek off the street,
gotta be handy with the steel if you know what I mean, earn your keep!

[Warren G]
REGULATORS!!! MOUNT UP!

[Warren G]
It was a clear black night, a clear white moon
Warren G was on the streets, trying to consume
some skirts for the eve, so I can get some funk
jus’ rollin in my ride, chillin all alone

[Nate Dogg]
Just hit the Eastside of the LBC
on a mission trying to find Mr. Warren G.
Seen a car full of girls ain’t no need to tweak
all you skirts know what’s up with 213

[Warren G]
So I hooks a left on 2 1 and Lewis
some brothas shootin dice so I said “Let’s do this”
I jumped out the ride, and said “What’s up?”
some brothas pulled some gats so I said “I’m stuck.”

[Nate Dogg]
Since these girls peepin me I’m a glide and swerve
these hookers lookin so hard they straight hit the curb
Won’tcha think of better things than some horny tricks
I see my homey and some suckers all in his mix

[Warren G]
I’m gettin jacked, I’m breakin myself
I can’t believe they taking Warren’s wealth
they took my rings, they took my Rolex
I looked at the brotha said “Damn, what’s next?”

[Nate Dogg]
They got my homey hemmed up and they all around
ain’t none of them seeing if they going straight pound for pound
They wanna come up real quick before they start to clown
I best pull out my strap and lay them busters down

[Warren G]
They got guns to my head
I think I’m going down
I can’t believe this happenin in my own town
If I had wings I would fly
let me contemplate
I glanced in the cut and I see my homey Nate

[Nate Dogg]
Sixteen in the clip and one in the hole
Nate Dogg is about to make some bodies turn cold
now they droppin and yellin
it’s a tad bit late
Nate Dogg and Warren G had to regulate

[Nate Dogg]
I laid all them busters down
I let my gat explode
now I’m switching my mind back into freak mode
if you want skirts sit back and observe
I just left a gang of those over there on the curb

[Warren G]
Now Nate got the freaks
and that’s a known fact
before I got jacked I was on the same track
back up back up cause it’s on
N A T E and me
the Warren to the G

[Nate Dogg]
Just like I thought
they were in the same spot
in need of some desperate help
the Nate Dogg and the G-child
were in need of something else
one of them dames was sexy as hell
I said “ooo I like your size.”
she said “my car’s broke down and you seem real nice,
would ya let me ride?”
I got a car full of girls and it’s going real swell
the next stop is the Eastside Motel

[Warren G]
I’m tweaking
into a whole new era
G-Funk
step to this
I dare ya
Funk
on a whole new level

[Nate Dogg]
the rhythm is the bass and the bass is the treble

[Warren G]
Chords
Strings
We brings
Melody
G-Funk
where rhythm is life
and life is rhythm

[Nate Dogg]
If you know like I know
you don’t wanna step to this
It’s the G-Funk era
funked out with a gangsta twist
if you smoke like I smoke
then you high like everyday
and if your ass is a buster
213 will regulate

Route

The Wherry Lines route is actually a Y shaped route. Trains leave from Norwich, and diverge at Brundall with half going to Lowestoft and half going to Great Yarmouth. We took the southern half of the route which goes to Lowestoft. It is probably possible to cover both halves of the Y, but we needed time to get back to our hotel to change before a night out in Norwich. As a result we didn’t travel all the way to Lowestoft, but started at Haddiscoe. I used google maps to create a custom map with all the details for our trip.  A Wherry Lines Rover can be had for £7.80.

Timetable

The timetable is available from National Express East Anglia. Trains don’t run on a regular time after the hour, so check the timetable for the time of day you’re travelling.

The pubs

Lowestoft

Oak Tavern
Location: 1100m from the platform, due north up Raglan Street.
Food: No
Our Thoughts: We didn’t visit here as we started in Haddiscoe for time reasons.

Triangle
Location: 850m from the platform, north and slightly east, up London Road North
Food: No
Our Thoughts: We didn’t visit here as we started in Haddiscoe for time reasons.

Somerleyton

The Duke’s Head
Location: 720m from platform, north through woodland
Food: Yes. A good looking selection.
Our Thoughts: We didn’t visit here as we started in Haddiscoe for time reasons.

Haddiscoe

The Bell Inn
Location: 1,700m from platform. Follow the railway, then cross it on the large road bridge. Follow the main road across the river and the pub is on the right.
Food: Yes. Excellent.
Our Thoughts: The Bell Inn was a lovely pub, with excellent food and a good selection of Ales. It also has a lovely view of the River Waveney. Several of us had food which was generously portioned, high quality, and swiftly delivered.

Reedham

The Ship
Location: 1,400m from platform. Leave the station, turn right and right again to go back across the railway. Follow the road south until it turns left. Continue to follow it until it forks and follow the right fork. Follow this road along the river and go past the Lord Nelson on the left.
Food: No
Our Thoughts: We liked The Ship, it had a lovely location next to the River Yare. There were 4 different ales available. I’m not sure what we had, but no-one had anything bad to say about the quality of beer.

The Lord Nelson
Location: 1,150m from platform. Leave the station, turn right and right again to go back across the railway. Follow Station Road south until it turns left. Continue to follow it until it forks and follow the right fork. Follow this road along the river, the pub is on the left hand side.
Food: Yes, but as it stands we wouldn’t want to try it.
Our Thoughts: The Lord Nelson was the biggest let down on the ale trail. Despite a wonderful building, a great location right on the River Yare and being a CAMRA 2011 Good Beer Guide pub, we couldn’t wait to leave. The first problem we encountered was the resident dog which was releasing some terrible smells on a regular basis. The second problem was a large swarm of bluebottle flies flying “patrol” in the very centre of the bar area. By far the biggest problem though was the beer. The taste was just below average, but we’ve had worse, but there were large bits of something floating in the beer. The glasses also hadn’t been washed properly – mine for example had a layer of scum at the bottom. Several of our party didn’t finish their beer. Hopefully new management will take over this pub with potential soon.

Ferry Inn
Location: 1,200m from platform. Leave the station, turn right and right again to go back across the railway. Follow Ferry Road South-West. The pub is by the ferry crossing on the right hand side.
Food: Yes. Some people in our party had food here and thoroughly enjoyed it.
Our Thoughts: A cracking pub. The staff were very friendly and the beer was good. There was free darts available which is a nice bonus in an ale pub. Unfortunately the weather took a turn for the worse so we didn’t have an opportunity to check out the beer garden.

Cantley

The Reedcutter
Location: 260m from the platform. Follow the signs south.
Food: Yes. We didn’t eat here, but plenty of people were, and they seemed to be very happy with what they got.
Our Thoughts: Another pub we liked. We stayed here for 2 pints. This is a large pub with dining room. It also had a pool table in the bar room. The beer selection was again good. We didn’t eat, but the food looked good.

Brundall

The Yare
Location: 70m from the platform. Directly across the car park.
Food: Yes
Our Thoughts: We don’t have much to say about this one as we whipped in, sank a pint, and moved on. It had a reasonable selection of ales, none of which were bad.

Brundall Gardens

The Ram
Location: 900m from the platform. Follow West end Avenue due north. At the end, turn right and follow Postwick Lane for 700m.
Food: No
Our Thoughts: A slightly disappointing choice. The Ram is more of a lager pub than an Ale pub. There were a couple of standard bitters available, but in future I wouldn’t include this on an Ale trail. There was nothing especially bad about it, just it didn’t fit in with the other venues chosen.

Great Yarmouth

St John’s Head
Location: 500m from the platform. Go south, over the footpath next to the abandoned rail bridge and follow N Quay south.
Food: No
Our Thoughts: We didn’t visit here as we took the Lowestoft half of the Y shaped route.

Route

We decided to start at the Leeds end of the line and work our way towards Manchester. There are 8 stops along the way, and as we were intending to have at least 1 drink at each we had to carefully plan our times so we didn’t miss the last train home. A South Pennines Day Ranger (for £19) covers all the journey, and in our case, also covered our journeys to and from Sheffield. For a handy quick-reference to each pub I’d recommend printing a copy of this ale trail flyer and my google map of the rail route and pub locations.

Timetable

The service required for the ale trail is operated by Northern Trains and is called the Huddersfield Route There are 2 different train services required, each covers half the route and both run to Huddersfield. The first is the Leeds – Dewsbury – Mirfield – Huddersfield service which stops at Cottingley, Morley, Batley, Dewsbury, Ravensthorpe, Mirfield, Deighton and Huddersfield, and the second is the Huddersfield – Ashton-under-Lyne – Manchester Victoria service which stops at Slaithewaite, Marsden, Greenfield, Mossley, Stalybridge, Ashton-under-Lyne and Manchester Victoria. Both of these services run once every 60 minutes. The Huddersfield Line Timetable covers both these services.
To save a bit of time, we didn’t follow the route in a straight-through fashion as we didn’t want to spend a full hour in each pub. We started by travelling from Leeds to Dewsbury, before travelling back towards Leeds to Batley. We then headed back towards Manchester but bypassed Dewsbury (where we’d already been) and went from Batley straight to Mirfield. Whilst this only saved us 34 minutes on the ale trail, it allowed us to catch a later train from Sheffield to Leeds (A Cross Country service which only takes 41 mins to Leeds)

The pubs

The Ale Trail website lists a pub for each stop, but having done part of the Ale Trail before, I knew there was more than 1 pub to choose from at each stop. Below I will cover all the pubs I am aware of

Leeds

Wetherspoons
Location: 100m from the platform in the station.
Food: Yes, standard Wetherspoons menu
Our thoughts: We didn’t visit here due to time – plus of course we’ve all been to a Wetherspoons before.

Batley

The Cellar Bar
Location: 60m from the platform on the far side of the station car park.
Food: Unknown
Our thoughts: The Cellar Bar looks like it might be rather disappointing from the outside (i.e. it looks like a typical football+carling bar) but once inside the friendly staff, excellent beers and resident cat give a much better impression. Between our group we had Saltaire Blonde and Copper Dragon Golden Pippin, both of which were excellent

Dewsbury

West Riding Refreshment Rooms
Location: In the station with direct access from platform 1
Food: Menu depends on day. On Saturdays there is an Ale Day Breakfast from 10am – 4pm
Our thoughts: The West Riding has a great interior, and lots of drinkers memorabilia. It also has an excellent selection of beer, and does a great sounding breakfast. Our only complaint was how busy it gets. At midday it felt more like midnight, absolutely rammed full of people who’d obviously started very early and were already drunk enough to be very loud. It wasn’t unfriendly drunk, everyone was jolly, but when you’re having your first pint of the day its nice to sit down and have a gentle natter at a normal volume!

Mirfield

The Navigation Tavern
Location: 300m from the platform. Walk down the road from the car park, turn right and go under the railway. Take the first left after passing under the railway.
Food: No
Our thoughts: This was one of my favourite pubs. The interior is dated, but each time I’ve been there has been room to sit and quick service. There is also an extensive selection of ales so what’s not to like! There are hand-pull pumps on the bar, and more handles with labels above the bar – these labels are for the beers that are available on the back bar! Don’t make the mistake that some of our party made of assuming the selection is limited to the pumps on the front bar. If in doubt – ask!

Huddersfield

Head of Steam
Location: In the station with direct access from platform 1. Towards the south-west end of the station.
Food: Yes. A very good selection is served until 9pm. We ate here and were very impressed with the quality of food and speed of service.
Our thoughts: We much preferred the head of steam to the kings head. The food, as noted above, was good. There were a couple of negatives though, both related to staff. The first was when we looked to get a table in the buffet room we were told only those people in our party who were eating could sit in there, so in effect we were told to split our party up. We chose instead to eat in the bar part of the pub which wasn’t a problem. The second issue was with one of the bar staff deliberately ignoring one member of our party when she was at the bar. There was no-one else at the bar at the time, and as soon as one of the other members of our party went to the bar instead they got service. It is our belief that the reason for the initial non-service was related to ethnic background. However, I would prefer to think that it was an innocent accident. On the positive side the beer was excellent. I had a Saltaire Raspberry Blonde which was by far the best fruit beer I’ve ever had. It had a delicious taste of raspberry without being sickly and sweet like most fruit beers.

Kings Head (FKA The Station Tavern)
Location: In the station in the “East Wing”
Food: No
Our thoughts: The Kings Head has a good selection of Ales, but despite being grade 1 listed is disappointing in terms of decor and comfort.

Slaithwaite

The Commercial
Location: 300m from the platform. Leave the platform into the car park. Do a 180 turn and go down the little road from the car park. At the main road take a hard-right and go down the hill. Follow the curve of the road to the left. At the roundabout the pub is on the near left corner.
Food: No
Our thoughts: We were a bit disappointed with the commercial which is billed as an ale pub and wine bar. It wasn’t a good start when our pints of ale were served in skiffs, especially as my better half’s Lager-Shandy was served in a proper glass – Surely the wrong way round! I asked the barman to recommend a Pale Ale and was presented with what I was told was a locally brewed pale ale. I wasn’t given the name, but I believe it was “Commerciale”. I would like to recommend people avoid it – it was quite eggy and very disappointing, not helped by the skiff no doubt. This is not the sort of experience I expect from a “CAMRA pub of the year 2009″ so maybe we were just unlucky?

The Swan
Location: 550m from the platform. North-East.
Food: No
Our thoughts: The swan is owned by the same people as the Commercial, and is further from the station. As a result we chose not to visit.

Marsden

The Riverhead Brewery Tap & Dining Room
Location: 300m from the platform. Go past “the railway” pub and follow the main road to the bottom of the hill. Go over the river. The pub is facing the river on the right.
Food: Yes, details unknown
Our thoughts: The Riverhead is owned by Ossett brewery, and as expected, offered a good choice of ales. It has a lovely setting right next to the river Colne. Whilst sat in the right hand half of the pub you get a great view into the brewery room which is always interesting.

The Tunnel End Inn
Location: 800m from platform. Leave the station, turn right and right again to cross the railway. Turn left and follow Reddisher Road due West. The pub is on the right hand side after 650m.
Food: Yes
Our thoughts: Unfortunately the Tunnel End Inn is temporarily closed. Hopefully it will reopen soon as it sounds like one of the best potential pubs on the trail

Greenfield

Railway Inn
Location: 50m from platform, on opposite side of the road
Food: We didn’t enquire, but believe there are pork pies available.
Our thoughts: The Railway Inn had a slightly less extensive selection of ales than most of the other pubs. When we visited the only ales available were Deuchars, Copper Dragon and Bombardier. The limited selection aside this was a decent pub, and it was nice to be able to get a table fairly readily.

Stalybridge

Stalybridge BuffetBar
Location: Direct access from platform, in the station
Food: No
Our thoughts: A very long thin pub, which made it hard to get into. Once we made our way through the crowds we were able to find a table at the far end. The selection of beer was good but by this point we’d lost interest in making many notes. I do remember some interesting pictures on the walls however. I think this would have been one of our favourites if it had been less busy, and we’d been more sober!

Manchester

We didn’t go as far as Manchester, but there are doubless pubs near the station if not in it.