On the London housing story, I'm not sure it's a bad idea, although it may not work.
The big problem we have here is buy to leave - essentially people buy up blocks and leave them empty - it's just a great way to make money because the market is rocketing. Few of my team are wealthy enough to get a look in, despite earning more than the national average.
We should start a debate on this - whether or not Miliband's proposal is viable.
Well it's certainly against EU law. There's no way he can stop properties being marketed to Italians or Greeks or others. He could stop them being marketed to the Chinese or Americans but that's hardly the way to encourage overseas investment.
It's the supply of property which is the problem but that would require a real determination to build houses/flats in London and the South East. This proposed policy is simply a distraction from the real source of the problem.
For Fluffy FPT. Re pensions, if perhaps you kept up with matters rump UK will have to pay my full state pension , as promised by DWP , just as they would if I lived in France or Australia. I have paid Westminster for 40 years and they cannot welch on it. Also as we will have a real NHS and not a privatised one I doubt I will need to go through the barbed wire.
A word of caution to my fellow Scottish unionists and non-Scots, never try and guess the psyche of the Scot. .... A great many across the UK will see today as a very bad day for Eck. In Scotland there will be a great many who believe he was the "little man" standing up against the English establishment for his country. The more Eck is seen as having his back to the wall, the more many Scots will be determined to support him. That is the greatest worry for the Better Together side.
I agree. After all these days of the "Westminster says no to the £" strategy from Osborne/Alexander/Balls, I lean to the view that this falls right into Salmond's aim of creating a Scotland vs Westminster debate. Maybe I will be proved wrong. But tonight to me it looks like a strategic blunder by the Unionists. Is Osborne Salmond's useful idiot?
The problem that all unionists have when dealing with Salmond is that they forget the basic fundamental truth about him and about almost all the other players in this game. He is a politician and his main interest is in winning, whether it is power or votes in a referendum.
It is only against that measure that he should be judged. And I have to say that to date, using that criteria, I am afraid the news is not good for the Unionists. However much you might despise, dismiss or just generally diss Salmond he is one of the most successful, if not the most successful, politicians in modern Scottish history.
Only when the votes have been counted and the Unionists have won will they have any cause to claim that Salmond has failed or was not up to the job. Until then they are very much counting chickens long before they have hatched. .
A word of caution to my fellow Scottish unionists and non-Scots, never try and guess the psyche of the Scot. .... A great many across the UK will see today as a very bad day for Eck. In Scotland there will be a great many who believe he was the "little man" standing up against the English establishment for his country. The more Eck is seen as having his back to the wall, the more many Scots will be determined to support him. That is the greatest worry for the Better Together side.
I agree. After all these days of the "Westminster says no to the £" strategy from Osborne/Alexander/Balls, I lean to the view that this falls right into Salmond's aim of creating a Scotland vs Westminster debate. Maybe I will be proved wrong. But tonight to me it looks like a strategic blunder by the Unionists. Is Osborne Salmond's useful idiot?
It's the credible (not in the strict sense) threat that's important, and Salmond has made it worse by tying it to repayment of Scotland's obligations, which as I've said is a strange decision.
The "threat" to not pay their debts is even more bonkers than the assumption that a currency union is a forgone conclusion. Have the SNP thought about what kind of message that would send?
Maybe the incompetent Cameroonian spinners think they are "near perfect" now. They do seem stupid enough to not even know that unionist parties oppose Independence after all.
Just saw Cameron in his wellies on the news saying 'Salmond's currency union plan is under threat'. Strangely diffident, and some distance from the Osballs' 'definitive' statements. Perhaps the strain of all that manufactured concern and competence is getting to him.
They saw fit to include the Cammie on the scottish news as well. Excellent.
The chippiness of some of the more challenged posters is a sight to behold.
Bit harsh on your Unionist brothers and sisters. But fair.
Why infest a site where virtually no-one with a vote? Couldn't you do us a favour and go and annoy people who care and may actually vote. Fop, osbrowne, titter, liar, tears of laughter etc, etc, et friggin cetra.
It's the credible (not in the strict sense) threat that's important, and Salmond has made it worse by tying it to repayment of Scotland's obligations, which as I've said is a strange decision.
The "threat" to not pay their debts is even more bonkers than the assumption that a currency union is a forgone conclusion. Have the SNP thought about what kind of message that would send?
They don't have to. This is not about what they will actually do after any Yes vote, it is about making sure they nullify the threat to the currency union in the minds of voters. Personally I have absolutely no doubt that after a Yes vote there will be no currency union and that the Independent Scotland will shoulder their portion of the debt. Those are both the most likely pragmatic scenarios. But that does not need to concern Salmond. All that he needs to be concerned about is persuading enough ordinary voters that the Osborne announcement is just a bluff and provide coherent reasons why. They do not have to be coherent to the small number of politically and economically aware people who frequent either news rooms or PB. They only have to be coherent to the normal voters who have little or no interest in either economics or politics.
That is the battleground on which Salmond's plans will succeed or fail.
It is only against that measure that he should be judged. And I have to say that to date, using that criteria, I am afraid the news is not good for the Unionists. However much you might despise, dismiss or just generally diss Salmond he is one of the most successful, if not the most successful, politicians in modern Scottish history
Who cares? If the Scots are barmy enough to vote on the basis of prejudice and fantasy, good luck to them. (As I've posted before, I actually think that, after a period of Thatcherite readjustment, they should do well, once they'd stopped whingeing and recovered their old prudence and entrepreneurial spirit). That doesn't mean we can't laugh at Salmond's position that they can impose a currency union on an economy ten times their size, or unilaterally join the EU without bothering to ask existing members what they think about the idea.
Apart from the fact that unpredictable storms fit in perfectly with theories of global warming, Nigel Lawson seems to have confused the International Panel on Climate Change with the woman who does the weather on the telly. Presumably when Sian Lloyd says: “This low pressure should clear up by Tuesday”, he shouts back, “How dare you expect me to get those useless energy-saving light bulbs, you know NOTHING” – which must be quite exhausting.
The puzzling part is that among the scientists whose job is to study these matters, there is no disagreement that rising carbon emissions have altered the climate.
So continually debating it, as if both sides are equally valid, makes as much sense as saying: “Now for sport. In the Winter Olympics the ski jumping final takes place today, but first I’m going to talk to Bill, who says there can’t be any ski jumping because gravity doesn’t exist.”
LOL. Hugh is going from bad to worse. Unable to quote or even understand the basic science he has given up entirely and is just posting drivel from comedy activists to support his position.
Next he will be using quoting Ken Dodd as support for his position on EU membership.
Regarding the UK's EU Commissioners job. Has anyone yet suggested the current President of the ECR and Tory MEP Martin Callanan? The thing is whilst he is a Tory MEP, he is their only MEP in the North East and given the shift of votes since 2009 his seat may be in danger (according to Dan Hannan anyway).
Now considering his position currently, should he lose his seat he would seem to be a good fit for a Commissioner's role having been an MEP since 1999 and a leader of an EU Parliament Grouping for three years.
Ladbrokes EU commisioners market is down for some reason but paddypower have.
Mitchell 11/4
Lansley 3/1
Cridland 5/1
Patterson 11/2
Cridland is of course the Director General of the CBI so he'll have to find some way to curry more favour with Cammie. But how? LOL
Pork
You need to add a couple more names.
The post of EU Commissioner is generally given to a public figure who has done the state some (political) service but who is:
a. without a job and with limited prospects of finding one; and/or,
b. is wanted out of the way by the current PM.
May I recommend for you consideration:
on ground a (from 19.09.2014), The Right Honourable Alexander Elliot Anderson Salmond, First Minister of Scotland; and,
on ground b, His Eminence the (soon-to-be) Cardinal Archbishop of Westminster Vincent Nichols.
Why infest a site where virtually no-one with a vote? Couldn't you do us a favour and go and annoy people who care and may actually vote. Fop, osbrowne, titter, liar, tears of laughter etc, etc, et friggin cetra.
'This is a Conservative site for Conservative people.'
I must have missed your insightful interventions on political betting, or indeed your appointment to the post of moderator.
It is only against that measure that he should be judged. And I have to say that to date, using that criteria, I am afraid the news is not good for the Unionists. However much you might despise, dismiss or just generally diss Salmond he is one of the most successful, if not the most successful, politicians in modern Scottish history
Who cares? If the Scots are barmy enough to vote on the basis of prejudice and fantasy, good luck to them. (As I've posted before, I actually think that, after a period of Thatcherite readjustment, they should do well, once they'd stopped whingeing and recovered their old prudence and entrepreneurial spirit). That doesn't mean we can't laugh at Salmond's position that they can impose a currency union on an economy ten times their size, or unilaterally join the EU without bothering to ask existing members what they think about the idea.
But the danger surely is that the Unionists seem to believe that everyone else is laughing along with them at Salmond. That is a very dangerous position for them to adopt. They may be right of course but I see no clear evidence for that at the moment.
Why infest a site where virtually no-one with a vote? Couldn't you do us a favour and go and annoy people who care and may actually vote. Fop, osbrowne, titter, twit, liar, tears of laughter etc, etc, et friggin cetra.
'This is a Conservative site for Conservative people.'
I must have missed your insightful interventions on political betting, or indeed your appointment to the post of moderator.
This is a site that is generally known for people being courteous to each other, since the arrival of a small number of idiots that is being eroded. If you're happy with that, great, I'm not. Insert humorous repost here ---------------->
There are more EU comissioner names and some that haven't even been mentioned on here on the paddypower site. Go have a look. Even for you that attempt at humour was toecurling. Stick to the inept spinning for Osbrowne. That's always comedy gold.
The Scots are now in a currency union with the rest of the UK.
They want to become independent.
Then they want to join a currency union with the rest of the UK.
Have I correctly summarised today's Independence referendum debate?
I'm just wondering what the point of this independence is.
The Dutch are now in a currency union with Germany.
They are independent.
That's the point of independence.
Obviously as a staunch Eurosceptic I would take issue with the idea that the Dutch are any longer an independent country. I know a fair few Dutch have the same opinion.
Apart from the fact that unpredictable storms fit in perfectly with theories of global warming, Nigel Lawson seems to have confused the International Panel on Climate Change with the woman who does the weather on the telly. Presumably when Sian Lloyd says: “This low pressure should clear up by Tuesday”, he shouts back, “How dare you expect me to get those useless energy-saving light bulbs, you know NOTHING” – which must be quite exhausting.
The puzzling part is that among the scientists whose job is to study these matters, there is no disagreement that rising carbon emissions have altered the climate.
So continually debating it, as if both sides are equally valid, makes as much sense as saying: “Now for sport. In the Winter Olympics the ski jumping final takes place today, but first I’m going to talk to Bill, who says there can’t be any ski jumping because gravity doesn’t exist.”
But the danger surely is that the Unionists seem to believe that everyone else is laughing along with them at Salmond. That is a very dangerous position for them to adopt. They may be right of course but I see no clear evidence for that at the moment.
No, but I'm afraid I see no hope for the Yes side. The No side just need to sow fear, uncertainty and doubt, which was always going to be easy. The SNP's complete failure to make a coherent case on the most basic questions of the currency and the EU (plus a whole raft of other issues such as pensions and even NATO) is just playing into the hands of the No side.
The silliest thing about this is that there are perfectly reasonable answers to all these questions; clearly Scotland could be a perfectly viable, indeed prosperous, independent country, with either its own floating currency, or a currency pegged to the pound, or at worst using Sterling informally, and with a fast-tracked application for full EU membership with a trade agreement in the interim. But answering every major question with the most ludicrous bluster, which falls apart as soon as a journalist asks what the other side of the negotiating table are saying, is a sure-fire way for Salmond to lose.
Britain's two leading business organisations have dealt a blow to Alex Salmond in his fightback against the rejection by Britain's three main political parties of a currency union with an independent Scotland.
The leaders of the Confederation of British Industry and the Institute of Directors both warned that a currency union would be "unstable" as David Cameron said that the Scottish first minister was "now a man without a plan".
In a direct challenge to the Scottish first minister, Salmond was told that his warnings of increased transaction charges for businesses on both sides of the border were outweighed by the disadvantages of creating a currency union outside a full political union.
Yes, we all know that the CBI and IoD are greatly respected voices of authority among Scottish swing voters. Good grief. You lot really haven't got the faintest clue about the task ahead of you.
Nor do you if you think you are getting a currency union.....
So far, who is in favour:
Salmond SNP Scottish voters
Who is against:
Cameron Osborne Balls Alexander CBI IOD HMT England/Wales voters.
But Salmond is right....and all of them are wrong.....
David Cameron: 'Lessons to learn' after floods - BBC News - http://bit.ly/1mpipnr pic.twitter.com/hOYozeqThn
Oh dear.
Ooh, wonder what lessons he'll learn?
Not to have incompetent Cameroonian spinners insult scots at every turn would be a start. Then again I doubt even CCHQ would dare employ some of the out of touch tory fools on here.
Maybe the incompetent Cameroonian spinners think they are "near perfect" now. They do seem stupid enough to not even know that unionist parties oppose Independence after all.
Just saw Cameron in his wellies on the news saying 'Salmond's currency union plan is under threat'. Strangely diffident, and some distance from the Osballs' 'definitive' statements. Perhaps the strain of all that manufactured concern and competence is getting to him.
Obviously as a staunch Eurosceptic I would take issue with the idea that the Dutch are any longer an independent country. I know a fair few Dutch have the same opinion.
Sure, and quite right too in a democracy. However perhaps the only starting point for a real discussion about what national sovereignty means in Europe is possessing the sovereignty that's currently available in the first place.
Obviously as a staunch Eurosceptic I would take issue with the idea that the Dutch are any longer an independent country. I know a fair few Dutch have the same opinion.
Sure, and quite right too in a democracy. However perhaps the only starting point for a real discussion about what national sovereignty means in Europe is possessing the sovereignty that's currently available.
Oh I agree. In fact I would go further and say that if the Scots had the courage of their convictions they should seize the opportunity offered by a Yes vote and choose to remain outside the EU as well - joining EFTA as a much better trading alternative. Trouble is I fear that the politicians want, as part of the spoils of Independence, to take their seat at the EU trough. They are, after all still politicians at the end of the day.
Brendan McCullum has just finished playing one of the great test innings. The first Kiwi ever to make 300 in a test match. Took NZ from 94-5 and 200 or so behind to 625-7. Unbelievable stuff.
Apart from the fact that unpredictable storms fit in perfectly with theories of global warming, Nigel Lawson seems to have confused the International Panel on Climate Change with the woman who does the weather on the telly. Presumably when Sian Lloyd says: “This low pressure should clear up by Tuesday”, he shouts back, “How dare you expect me to get those useless energy-saving light bulbs, you know NOTHING” – which must be quite exhausting.
The puzzling part is that among the scientists whose job is to study these matters, there is no disagreement that rising carbon emissions have altered the climate.
So continually debating it, as if both sides are equally valid, makes as much sense as saying: “Now for sport. In the Winter Olympics the ski jumping final takes place today, but first I’m going to talk to Bill, who says there can’t be any ski jumping because gravity doesn’t exist.”
LOL. Hugh is going from bad to worse. Unable to quote or even understand the basic science he has given up entirely and is just posting drivel from comedy activists to support his position.
Next he will be using quoting Ken Dodd as support for his position on EU membership.
Some people think the recent bad weather has been caused by human activity. Others blame gay marriage. The positions are equally credible.
I've just realised. We are going to have 8 months of this non-stop god forsaken Scottish Independence Referendum bickering on here. I think I'm off to watch some paint dry.......
Alex Salmond's speech in Aberdeen today was the first substantial intervention by Scotland's first minister since the independence debate got dramatically real last week. Mr Salmond had to respond to two large challenges to his independence strategy that have shaken up the debate about Scotland's future. The first was the chancellor George Osborne's declaration last Thursday, backed by both Labour and the Liberal Democrats, that a currency union with the remaining UK would not be on offer if Scots vote yes to independence in September. The second was the comment by the European commission president, José Manuel Barroso, at the weekend that it would "extremely difficult, if not impossible" for Scotland to join the EU after a yes vote. Since Mr Salmond's stance is that both the currency union and EU membership are desirable and achievable, the Aberdeen speech was a major test for the nationalist leader.
Richard Tyndall and I completely knocked you out on the canvas last week. You really should just give it a rest....yaaaaaaaaaaaaaaawn. You and the AGW crowd have been thoroughly discredited. Perhaps you could tell me what the Met Office long range forecast for the winter back last October was, using their AGW models?.......They were predicting a WARMER and DRIER than average winter based on their models. Its no surprise that the AGW mainstream media aren't reporting this, but its yet another inconvenient fact for you. And Piers Corbyn of weatheraction.com had this winter nailed down to a tee using his sunspot / solar wind models. He understands unlike you that the sun is the ruler of the climate, not levels of CO2 once above 120ppm.
Giving equal weight on climate science to a scientist and A Bloke Who Howls At The Moon In The Pub.
LOL. You do have exquisite timing don't you Hugh
Prof Kevin Anderson on Newsnight
"If politicians are saying floods are being directly caused by climate change they are exaggerating "
Because, as even a climate science denier oil industry mouthpiece would know, they cannot possibly be directly linked.
The certainties are that climate change will cause more extreme weather events, and the globe has been experiencing more extreme weather events. Including us.
Except of course they haven't. Just look at Hurricanes in the Atlantic which we were told would increase in both frequency and intensity and which have dropped.
The only thing that has changed is the willingness of the politicians and activists to point at weather events and claim they are proof of whatever their latest pet theory is.
Alex Salmond's speech in Aberdeen today was the first substantial intervention by Scotland's first minister since the independence debate got dramatically real last week. Mr Salmond had to respond to two large challenges to his independence strategy that have shaken up the debate about Scotland's future. The first was the chancellor George Osborne's declaration last Thursday, backed by both Labour and the Liberal Democrats, that a currency union with the remaining UK would not be on offer if Scots vote yes to independence in September. The second was the comment by the European commission president, José Manuel Barroso, at the weekend that it would "extremely difficult, if not impossible" for Scotland to join the EU after a yes vote. Since Mr Salmond's stance is that both the currency union and EU membership are desirable and achievable, the Aberdeen speech was a major test for the nationalist leader.
A word of caution to my fellow Scottish unionists and non-Scots, never try and guess the psyche of the Scot.
...
The more Eck is seen as having his back to the wall, the more many Scots will be determined to support him. That is the greatest worry for the Better Together side.
That is true. Sadly, many of our fellow Scots will get all upset about an English Tory telling them what to do, except of course, that is not at all what happened.
George Osborne was not campaigning for BetterTogether. He made a speech in his capacity as Chancellor of the Exchequer for the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, a position he will still hold, and have to exercise, on the 19th.
And in that role, it was his duty to point out that a currency union will not happen, and deal with the consequences.
If the SNPers spent more time on the realistic consequences of the vote than Eck's Fairy Tales I would have more respect for them. But they don't. So I don't.
Brendan McCullum has just finished playing one of the great test innings. The first Kiwi ever to make 300 in a test match. Took NZ from 94-5 and 200 or so behind to 625-7. Unbelievable stuff.
Amazing stuff Southam. Really pleased that a Kiwi has finally got a triple hundred. Martin Crowe's record needed knocking down. Speaking of Mr Crowe, I'm glad he's now free of his lymphoma cancer.
I reckon a posh lad gullible enough to not only believe Cammie's Veto flounce and Cast iron IN/OUT referendum promises, but to think they would actually win him the election, is about as likely to know the scottish psyche as any out of touch self-parody.
Alex Salmond's speech in Aberdeen today was the first substantial intervention by Scotland's first minister since the independence debate got dramatically real last week. Mr Salmond had to respond to two large challenges to his independence strategy that have shaken up the debate about Scotland's future. The first was the chancellor George Osborne's declaration last Thursday, backed by both Labour and the Liberal Democrats, that a currency union with the remaining UK would not be on offer if Scots vote yes to independence in September. The second was the comment by the European commission president, José Manuel Barroso, at the weekend that it would "extremely difficult, if not impossible" for Scotland to join the EU after a yes vote. Since Mr Salmond's stance is that both the currency union and EU membership are desirable and achievable, the Aberdeen speech was a major test for the nationalist leader.
It is perfectly possible for two apparently opposing truths to coexist. I suggest this will be the case with Salmond and the £
In what might be a first, the Guardian agrees with you:
It is, of course, very possible that his combative approach and a dislike of the Tories may tip support [Salmond's] way in the short term. But it is also possible that the long-term effect of the recent dramas will be to force Scots voters to weigh the risks rather more carefully and realistically than Mr Salmond did in his latest speech.
#floods UK weather: David Cameron blames Britain’s 'abnormal' winter storms on climate change as Met Office wa... http://ind.pn/1ihkOeo
He's correct to do so.
The problem is that we can't know exactly how the increase in extreme weather caused by climate change will affect us.
It will almost certainly mean more flooding, sure. But it could - and probably will - also mean more droughts, heatwaves, high winds, freezing temperatures etc.
We can't predict the frequency or severity of these events, so how the heck do we adapt to them? Depressing.
I do love the idea that any weather, at all, is apparently proof of AGW.
The problems humans have is that we believe that the conditions under which we exist today and have existed for the last couple of thousand years are the norm. We find it impossible as a race to envisage a situation where the climate is far more variable than we have enjoyed during the historic period. And yet if you look at the record it is massive variation is the norm. It is stability which is the freak weather.
This is particularly unfortunate because we have a majority of the world's population living very close to sea level. It is a position which is totally unviable in the medium to long term and mankind has no influence over that. All we can do is react.
Obviously as a staunch Eurosceptic I would take issue with the idea that the Dutch are any longer an independent country. I know a fair few Dutch have the same opinion.
Sure, and quite right too in a democracy. However perhaps the only starting point for a real discussion about what national sovereignty means in Europe is possessing the sovereignty that's currently available.
Oh I agree. In fact I would go further and say that if the Scots had the courage of their convictions they should seize the opportunity offered by a Yes vote and choose to remain outside the EU as well - joining EFTA as a much better trading alternative. Trouble is I fear that the politicians want, as part of the spoils of Independence, to take their seat at the EU trough. They are, after all still politicians at the end of the day.
I think the Scottish electorate are being battered a bit too much from all directions at the moment to recognise their convictions, let alone have the courage of them. Still, a few more interventions from Barroso, who knows?
Obviously as a staunch Eurosceptic I would take issue with the idea that the Dutch are any longer an independent country. I know a fair few Dutch have the same opinion.
Sure, and quite right too in a democracy. However perhaps the only starting point for a real discussion about what national sovereignty means in Europe is possessing the sovereignty that's currently available.
Oh I agree. In fact I would go further and say that if the Scots had the courage of their convictions they should seize the opportunity offered by a Yes vote and choose to remain outside the EU as well - joining EFTA as a much better trading alternative. Trouble is I fear that the politicians want, as part of the spoils of Independence, to take their seat at the EU trough. They are, after all still politicians at the end of the day.
I think the Scottish electorate are being battered a bit too much from all directions at the moment to recognise their convictions, let alone have the courage of them. Still, a few more interventions from Barroso, who knows?
As with the Eurosceptic movement in general, it usually turns out that your best players are the EU officials and politicians themselves who have an unerring ability to say exactly what you need them to say to annoy the general population and win you more support.
Brendan McCullum has just finished playing one of the great test innings. The first Kiwi ever to make 300 in a test match. Took NZ from 94-5 and 200 or so behind to 625-7. Unbelievable stuff.
Amazing stuff Southam. Really pleased that a Kiwi has finally got a triple hundred. Martin Crowe's record needed knocking down. Speaking of Mr Crowe, I'm glad he's now free of his lymphoma cancer.
It's been a pleasure to watch. I was very nervous when he was in the 290s. I loved his Dad's reaction. Real old school Kiwi. Very good news about MD Crowe.
Giving equal weight on climate science to a scientist and A Bloke Who Howls At The Moon In The Pub.
LOL. You do have exquisite timing don't you Hugh
Prof Kevin Anderson on Newsnight
"If politicians are saying floods are being directly caused by climate change they are exaggerating "
Because, as even a climate science denier oil industry mouthpiece would know, they cannot possibly be directly linked.
The certainties are that climate change will cause more extreme weather events, and the globe has been experiencing more extreme weather events. Including us.
Except of course they haven't. Just look at Hurricanes in the Atlantic which we were told would increase in both frequency and intensity and which have dropped.
The only thing that has changed is the willingness of the politicians and activists to point at weather events and claim they are proof of whatever their latest pet theory is.
We will get more severe weather, thanks to the decreasing solar activity. We've been here before with the Maunder and Dalton minima. Look back at the 17th century, some devastating Atlantic storms hit Britain with a more pwerful southerly jet stream thanks to an increased temperature pressure gradient.
Unfortunately there's this honey coated view that everything left naturally on the earth would be benign. Just a cursory glance and understanding of meteorological history shows that not to be so. And a colder world as we're now entering is much more challenging to the human race - reduced crop yields and the like. We're just going to have to adapt and make the best of it. And we don't control it, as much as some people like to believe otherwise. The sun as a celestial being is all powerful - accept it and adapt.
Brendan McCullum has just finished playing one of the great test innings. The first Kiwi ever to make 300 in a test match. Took NZ from 94-5 and 200 or so behind to 625-7. Unbelievable stuff.
Amazing stuff Southam. Really pleased that a Kiwi has finally got a triple hundred. Martin Crowe's record needed knocking down. Speaking of Mr Crowe, I'm glad he's now free of his lymphoma cancer.
It's been a pleasure to watch. I was very nervous when he was in the 290s. I loved his Dad's reaction. Real old school Kiwi. Very good news about MD Crowe.
You could feel the tension in the commentary.
I wish our players could watch this and see it is possible to bat for a long time in a test match.
Obviously as a staunch Eurosceptic I would take issue with the idea that the Dutch are any longer an independent country. I know a fair few Dutch have the same opinion.
Sure, and quite right too in a democracy. However perhaps the only starting point for a real discussion about what national sovereignty means in Europe is possessing the sovereignty that's currently available.
Oh I agree. In fact I would go further and say that if the Scots had the courage of their convictions they should seize the opportunity offered by a Yes vote and choose to remain outside the EU as well - joining EFTA as a much better trading alternative. Trouble is I fear that the politicians want, as part of the spoils of Independence, to take their seat at the EU trough. They are, after all still politicians at the end of the day.
I think the Scottish electorate are being battered a bit too much from all directions at the moment to recognise their convictions, let alone have the courage of them. Still, a few more interventions from Barroso, who knows?
As with the Eurosceptic movement in general, it usually turns out that your best players are the EU officials and politicians themselves who have an unerring ability to say exactly what you need them to say to annoy the general population and win you more support.
It's arguable that for the Eurosceptic movement here it's the Cameroons who have done the most to boost the kippers and Eurosceptics fortunes. All the u-turns, all the Cast Iron Pledges, all the backtracking, all the commons rebellions, all the shifting goalposts. Of course you can hardly ignore immigration but the thing that drives Eurosceptic tory MPs to running around like headless chickens the most has been the EU. Nor is it anything new even if the arguments have moved rapidly on to the fundamentals of IN or OUT.
Apart from the fact that unpredictable storms fit in perfectly with theories of global warming, Nigel Lawson seems to have confused the International Panel on Climate Change with the woman who does the weather on the telly. Presumably when Sian Lloyd says: “This low pressure should clear up by Tuesday”, he shouts back, “How dare you expect me to get those useless energy-saving light bulbs, you know NOTHING” – which must be quite exhausting.
The puzzling part is that among the scientists whose job is to study these matters, there is no disagreement that rising carbon emissions have altered the climate.
So continually debating it, as if both sides are equally valid, makes as much sense as saying: “Now for sport. In the Winter Olympics the ski jumping final takes place today, but first I’m going to talk to Bill, who says there can’t be any ski jumping because gravity doesn’t exist.”
LOL. Hugh is going from bad to worse. Unable to quote or even understand the basic science he has given up entirely and is just posting drivel from comedy activists to support his position.
Next he will be using quoting Ken Dodd as support for his position on EU membership.
Some people think the recent bad weather has been caused by human activity. Others blame gay marriage. The positions are equally credible.
Well, even I have to agree that gay 'marriage' is human activity, whatever my own views.
I actually think that the gay 'marriage' reason is the more credible. The UKIP councillor blamed the flooding on David Cameron's obsession on gay 'marriage'. Perhaps if he had concentrated on essential business of government rather than fripperies then large parts of the country wouldn't be under water.
Gearing works in both directions. When the market turns, for example in a years time with an incoming Milliband govt promising higher income taxes and a mansion tax, the overseas buyers will evaporate like the morning mist and the market will go into freefall.
On the London housing story, I'm not sure it's a bad idea, although it may not work.
The big problem we have here is buy to leave - essentially people buy up blocks and leave them empty - it's just a great way to make money because the market is rocketing. Few of my team are wealthy enough to get a look in, despite earning more than the national average.
We should start a debate on this - whether or not Miliband's proposal is viable.
On the list of things I worry about, falling London house prices is really quite low down.
< There's actually a worldwide trend of centrist political parties being in rapid retreat.
It wouldn't be surprising, but is it correct? Recent examples: Germany - confirmation of centrist parties Netherlands - radical parties did surpisingly badly with big swing back to centre Italy: inconclusive results with eccentric populists doing well France: moderate right replaced by moderate left
As some of the old ones here know, I'm from Brazil and live in Rio but I'm going to spend a week in London in June (yes, during the World Cup) and it would be nice to meet some of you.
That would be great - maybe we can have a pb meeting when you're here.
My (animal welfare) day job team been working a lot on Brazilian politics recently - we were involved in the recent Sao Paulo ban on animal tests for cosmetics and will be represented at the big Animal event in Brasilia over the next two days. Our representatives there keep briefing us on the positions of all the parties - we struggle to keep up!
I do love the idea that any weather, at all, is apparently proof of AGW.
The problems humans have is that we believe that the conditions under which we exist today and have existed for the last couple of thousand years are the norm. We find it impossible as a race to envisage a situation where the climate is far more variable than we have enjoyed during the historic period. And yet if you look at the record it is massive variation is the norm. It is stability which is the freak weather.
This is particularly unfortunate because we have a majority of the world's population living very close to sea level. It is a position which is totally unviable in the medium to long term and mankind has no influence over that. All we can do is react.
Extreme weather events are not "proof" of climate change.
They yet more evidence for it (as if it were needed). Yet another prediction of the theory confirmed.
The problem we humans have in this period is that we are living during a period of unprecedented climate change that we have caused.
Possibly the best strategy, and on this we might agree, is to just roll with it, keep extracting that oil, hope for the best.
And be glad it'll be our kids, grandkids, great-grandkids etc that have to suffer.
Well one thing they say is 'necessity is the mother of invention'. As I pointed out last week, its likely that mankind will finally discover how to make the best of fusion power - just last week they finally got more energy out a cold fusion reaction that that put in, so they're on the long course to solving it. And we've also got thorium which is a potential massive energy source for the future. Life and technology move on. We'll find a solution long before the oil and coal run out.
Extreme weather events are not "proof" of climate change.
They yet more evidence for it (as if it were needed). Yet another prediction of the theory confirmed.
The problem we humans have in this period is that we are living during a period of unprecedented climate change that we have caused.
Possibly the best strategy, and on this we might agree, is to just roll with it, keep extracting that oil, hope for the best.
And be glad it'll be our kids, grandkids, great-grandkids etc that have to suffer.
1.We have not caused this period of climate change 2. The AGW hypothesis did not predict more extreme weather. All it has done is label events we have seen in recent years as due to climate change after the event. It certainly didn't predict record snow falls across the US or record low temperatures. Nor did it predict increased rainfall in the UK - quite the reverse in fact. 3. The climate variation we are seeing is not unprecedented, not even in the measurement record let alone in the proxy record. 4. We sure as hell shouldn't keep burning hydrocarbons any longer than we absolutely have to. They are a finite resource which has a value far beyond that of a fuel source and which our whole modern world relies upon. Burning them is one of he most wasteful acts of the modern era and the sooner we find viable alternatives the better. But that has sweet FA to do with climate change.
Obviously as a staunch Eurosceptic I would take issue with the idea that the Dutch are any longer an independent country. I know a fair few Dutch have the same opinion.
I'd argue that there aren't any fully independent countries these days, just countries with varying degrees of delusion that they can decide anything significant on their own. I'd concede that the USA and China are partial exceptions, for now. EU membership is a symptom of interdependence rather than a cause.
BBC Newsnight "a vote to leave the UK is a vote to leave the EU" Scotland wouldn't be "kept out indefinitely" and would "get in eventually"....
Yes, but on what terms?
Compulsory Euro (transaction costs on trade with rUK) No EU rebate 'Compensation' to the upset Spanish. Spanish fishermen going beserk in Scottish waters? Avalanche of English students going north for free university education.
Re Item 15. It is just a shame for the AGW crowd that one of the senior climate advisors at the Met Office has just said that Global Warming had nothing to do with the current floods.
Richard, it's quite unfair to claim that "the AGW crowd", or any other group, should be judged on the basis of their more excitable members. As you know, I happen to think that mankind has had a major effect on the climate, but I, along with several others, have repeatedly said that is impossible to link any one individual weather event to more general climactic trends.
Some wonderfully quaint/parochial adverts between the overs - "NZ's only manufacturer of wire rope" is playing as I speak! And some commedy - groundsmen hammering away at a broken sightscreen, and Wagner's stumps being hit without the bails falling off.
They've just passed their highest ever Test total, gone past the 671/4 vs Sri Lanka when Crowe got his 299.
Obviously as a staunch Eurosceptic I would take issue with the idea that the Dutch are any longer an independent country. I know a fair few Dutch have the same opinion.
I'd argue that there aren't any fully independent countries these days, just countries with varying degrees of delusion that they can decide anything significant on their own. I'd concede that the USA and China are partial exceptions, for now. EU membership is a symptom of interdependence rather than a cause.
Give me a break. You really believe that the EU is not a cause of, say, Austria having less control over its economy and society than Switzerland?
Brendan McCullum has just finished playing one of the great test innings. The first Kiwi ever to make 300 in a test match. Took NZ from 94-5 and 200 or so behind to 625-7. Unbelievable stuff.
Amazing stuff Southam. Really pleased that a Kiwi has finally got a triple hundred. Martin Crowe's record needed knocking down. Speaking of Mr Crowe, I'm glad he's now free of his lymphoma cancer.
It's been a pleasure to watch. I was very nervous when he was in the 290s. I loved his Dad's reaction. Real old school Kiwi. Very good news about MD Crowe.
You could feel the tension in the commentary.
I wish our players could watch this and see it is possible to bat for a long time in a test match.
Yup. And it wasn't just McCullum.
Great commentary wasn't it? Real pride in their voices. I do love New Zealand.
BBC Newsnight "a vote to leave the UK is a vote to leave the EU" Scotland wouldn't be "kept out indefinitely" and would "get in eventually"....
Yes, but on what terms?
Compulsory Euro (transaction costs on trade with rUK) No EU rebate 'Compensation' to the upset Spanish. Spanish fishermen going beserk in Scottish waters? Avalanche of English students going north for free university education.
Yes, but apart from that it would be pretty much automatic....
It's the credible (not in the strict sense) threat that's important, and Salmond has made it worse by tying it to repayment of Scotland's obligations, which as I've said is a strange decision.
The "threat" to not pay their debts is even more bonkers than the assumption that a currency union is a forgone conclusion. Have the SNP thought about what kind of message that would send?
There's a lot of talk about the dire consequences of Scottish default.
I remember reading an IMF paper on sovereign default and it suggested the average suspension from money markets is about 2 years.
Whether or not Alex Salmond intended it, his analysis of the flaws in last week’s Treasury document accompanying George Osborne’s rejection of the sterling union points to one conclusion — independence means losing what’s left of Scotland’s big bank headquarters.
the problem is that if the banks retained the same structure that they have now after independence, all these London-based activities would be branch operations, for which Scotland — as host to the banks’ HQs — would be responsible for bailing out.
Giving equal weight on climate science to a scientist and A Bloke Who Howls At The Moon In The Pub.
LOL. You do have exquisite timing don't you Hugh
Prof Kevin Anderson on Newsnight
"If politicians are saying floods are being directly caused by climate change they are exaggerating "
Because, as even a climate science denier oil industry mouthpiece would know, they cannot possibly be directly linked.
The certainties are that climate change will cause more extreme weather events, and the globe has been experiencing more extreme weather events. Including us.
Except of course they haven't. Just look at Hurricanes in the Atlantic which we were told would increase in both frequency and intensity and which have dropped.
The only thing that has changed is the willingness of the politicians and activists to point at weather events and claim they are proof of whatever their latest pet theory is.
We will get more severe weather, thanks to the decreasing solar activity. We've been here before with the Maunder and Dalton minima. Look back at the 17th century, some devastating Atlantic storms hit Britain with a more pwerful southerly jet stream thanks to an increased temperature pressure gradient.
Unfortunately there's this honey coated view that everything left naturally on the earth would be benign. Just a cursory glance and understanding of meteorological history shows that not to be so. And a colder world as we're now entering is much more challenging to the human race - reduced crop yields and the like. We're just going to have to adapt and make the best of it. And we don't control it, as much as some people like to believe otherwise. The sun as a celestial being is all powerful - accept it and adapt.
Solar activity has caused the warming!
Wow, quick, publish your evidence, there's a Nobel Prize in it if overturns the crushing mass of evidence to the contrary!
None of the winter's events prove AGW! They've done a lot to prove otherwise through the mini-ice age patterns. All the AGW theory is consistent with the northern hemisphere jet stream moving NORTHWARD, not SOUTHWARD as has happened. And no AGW models predicted all the snowfall they've had in the NE USA or Tokyo, or the very cold winter Northern India has experienced. And the BBC should apologise for having told us back in 2007 that the Arctic would be completely free of ice in September by now. The Arctic Ice minimum extent INCREASED by 60% between September 2012 and September 2013. I bet your AGW models were predicting that! Crushing mass of evidence, give me a break!
Brendan McCullum has just finished playing one of the great test innings. The first Kiwi ever to make 300 in a test match. Took NZ from 94-5 and 200 or so behind to 625-7. Unbelievable stuff.
Amazing stuff Southam. Really pleased that a Kiwi has finally got a triple hundred. Martin Crowe's record needed knocking down. Speaking of Mr Crowe, I'm glad he's now free of his lymphoma cancer.
It's been a pleasure to watch. I was very nervous when he was in the 290s. I loved his Dad's reaction. Real old school Kiwi. Very good news about MD Crowe.
You could feel the tension in the commentary.
I wish our players could watch this and see it is possible to bat for a long time in a test match.
Yup. And it wasn't just McCullum.
Great commentary wasn't it? Real pride in their voices. I do love New Zealand.
It was, and they never lost their objectivity either.
Poor Martin Crowe, getting dismissed for 299 in a test match has got to be annoying.
Brendan McCullum has just finished playing one of the great test innings. The first Kiwi ever to make 300 in a test match. Took NZ from 94-5 and 200 or so behind to 625-7. Unbelievable stuff.
Amazing stuff Southam. Really pleased that a Kiwi has finally got a triple hundred. Martin Crowe's record needed knocking down. Speaking of Mr Crowe, I'm glad he's now free of his lymphoma cancer.
It's been a pleasure to watch. I was very nervous when he was in the 290s. I loved his Dad's reaction. Real old school Kiwi. Very good news about MD Crowe.
You could feel the tension in the commentary.
I wish our players could watch this and see it is possible to bat for a long time in a test match.
Yup. And it wasn't just McCullum.
Great commentary wasn't it? Real pride in their voices. I do love New Zealand.
It was, and they never lost their objectivity either.
Poor Martin Crowe, getting dismissed for 299 in a test match has got to be annoying.
Brendan McCullum has just finished playing one of the great test innings. The first Kiwi ever to make 300 in a test match. Took NZ from 94-5 and 200 or so behind to 625-7. Unbelievable stuff.
Amazing stuff Southam. Really pleased that a Kiwi has finally got a triple hundred. Martin Crowe's record needed knocking down. Speaking of Mr Crowe, I'm glad he's now free of his lymphoma cancer.
It's been a pleasure to watch. I was very nervous when he was in the 290s. I loved his Dad's reaction. Real old school Kiwi. Very good news about MD Crowe.
You could feel the tension in the commentary.
I wish our players could watch this and see it is possible to bat for a long time in a test match.
Yup. And it wasn't just McCullum.
Great commentary wasn't it? Real pride in their voices. I do love New Zealand.
It was, and they never lost their objectivity either.
Poor Martin Crowe, getting dismissed for 299 in a test match has got to be annoying.
I bet Brian Waddle was loving it, really refreshing his great enthusiasm and energy for the game. A lot of our crop of BBC commentators in Sochi could learn a lot from him for starters!
Brendan McCullum has just finished playing one of the great test innings. The first Kiwi ever to make 300 in a test match. Took NZ from 94-5 and 200 or so behind to 625-7. Unbelievable stuff.
Amazing stuff Southam. Really pleased that a Kiwi has finally got a triple hundred. Martin Crowe's record needed knocking down. Speaking of Mr Crowe, I'm glad he's now free of his lymphoma cancer.
It's been a pleasure to watch. I was very nervous when he was in the 290s. I loved his Dad's reaction. Real old school Kiwi. Very good news about MD Crowe.
You could feel the tension in the commentary.
I wish our players could watch this and see it is possible to bat for a long time in a test match.
Yup. And it wasn't just McCullum.
Great commentary wasn't it? Real pride in their voices. I do love New Zealand.
It was, and they never lost their objectivity either.
Poor Martin Crowe, getting dismissed for 299 in a test match has got to be annoying.
Now the greatest analyst in the game, Jeremy Coney!
Can't wait for the next lot of independence opinion polls to come out. And wouldn't it be fun if support for independence went up, contrary to what many on here are thinking. And I personally wouldn't be surprised if it spectacularly backfired on Osborne. Its so reminiscent of the poll tax in 1988, and imposing things on Scotland from Westminster. You'd think that Osborne would have learnt that lesson, but he seems determined to repeat the same mistake over again, just a quarter of a century on.
If I was up in Scotland, I'd actually prefer the independence option now on the plate with your own currency and leaving the EU (Barroso lol), Scotland could achieve great things with its finance / legal expertise, energy sources and highly skilled industries a la Norway. The transaction costs of a new currency are minimal, and as for the rest of the UK putting up tariffs with Scotland were it to go independent, just more pointless scare stories, and anyway the rest of the UK would be bound be EU trade agreements were that to be the case.
It wouldn't be surprising, but is it correct? Recent examples: Germany - confirmation of centrist parties Netherlands - radical parties did surpisingly badly with big swing back to centre Italy: inconclusive results with eccentric populists doing well France: moderate right replaced by moderate left
vs Greece - gains by radical left and right
Other examples?
France was one of the main examples I was thinking of actually -- stark contrast between centrist Francois Bayrou's performance in 2007, before the crisis erupted and when people responded to pleasantries about "unity" and working together and his Clegg-like platform of splitting the difference between the policies of the right and the left, and in 2012 where people wanted radical answers to more pressing issues. I would argue both Sarkozy and Hollande ran more radically right-wing and left-wing campaigns than would normally be expected too (of course Hollande in office has not really kept to the leftwing anti-austerity line he campaigned on, but that's a different story). And we're now seeing the far Right surge there.
Admittedly Merkel/the CDU is a rare example of a centre party still popular (although even in Germany the FDP crumbled to a worst-ever result), but I would argue that's because Germany is one of the few countries which is actually doing alright at the moment so there isn't quite such a demand for radical solutions.
Is it not possible to be both? a government that has taken its eye off the ball with fashionable metropolitan issues and global warming (anthropogenic or not) that would have been better tackled by windmills that pump water than windmills that make expensive electricity?
Apart from the fact that unpredictable storms fit in perfectly with theories of global warming, Nigel Lawson seems to have confused the International Panel on Climate Change with the woman who does the weather on the telly. Presumably when Sian Lloyd says: “This low pressure should clear up by Tuesday”, he shouts back, “How dare you expect me to get those useless energy-saving light bulbs, you know NOTHING” – which must be quite exhausting.
The puzzling part is that among the scientists whose job is to study these matters, there is no disagreement that rising carbon emissions have altered the climate.
So continually debating it, as if both sides are equally valid, makes as much sense as saying: “Now for sport. In the Winter Olympics the ski jumping final takes place today, but first I’m going to talk to Bill, who says there can’t be any ski jumping because gravity doesn’t exist.”
LOL. Hugh is going from bad to worse. Unable to quote or even understand the basic science he has given up entirely and is just posting drivel from comedy activists to support his position.
Next he will be using quoting Ken Dodd as support for his position on EU membership.
Some people think the recent bad weather has been caused by human activity. Others blame gay marriage. The positions are equally credible.
Well, even I have to agree that gay 'marriage' is human activity, whatever my own views.
I actually think that the gay 'marriage' reason is the more credible. The UKIP councillor blamed the flooding on David Cameron's obsession on gay 'marriage'. Perhaps if he had concentrated on essential business of government rather than fripperies then large parts of the country wouldn't be under water.
Brendan McCullum has just finished playing one of the great test innings. The first Kiwi ever to make 300 in a test match. Took NZ from 94-5 and 200 or so behind to 625-7. Unbelievable stuff.
Amazing stuff Southam. Really pleased that a Kiwi has finally got a triple hundred. Martin Crowe's record needed knocking down. Speaking of Mr Crowe, I'm glad he's now free of his lymphoma cancer.
It's been a pleasure to watch. I was very nervous when he was in the 290s. I loved his Dad's reaction. Real old school Kiwi. Very good news about MD Crowe.
You could feel the tension in the commentary.
I wish our players could watch this and see it is possible to bat for a long time in a test match.
Yup. And it wasn't just McCullum.
Great commentary wasn't it? Real pride in their voices. I do love New Zealand.
It was, and they never lost their objectivity either.
Poor Martin Crowe, getting dismissed for 299 in a test match has got to be annoying.
Now the greatest analyst in the game, Jeremy Coney!
He is up there.
I still remember CMJ reducing him to giggles and silence
I'm a betting man, I'm not sure I'd like to take that gamble if I was a Scot though. I doubt alot of people will. In fact if Salmond pushes this too hard he could do alot of damage to the credibility of the SNP OUTSIDE the referendum. He needs to tread carefully or SLAB could be the big beneficaries.
Can't wait for the next lot of independence opinion polls to come out. And wouldn't it be fun if support for independence went up, contrary to what many on here are thinking.
Most of the predictions on here have been from Separatists so confident of the toxicity of Osborne that support for separation will surge - something some unionists agree might well happen in the short term......
Whatever the impact on voting intention, just as with "Scotland's own referendum", "A DevoMax option on the ballot", "Automatic membership of the EU" and "It's Scotland's pound too", reality will sink in sooner or later, and Scots will be able to make a better informed choice. What's not to like?
I'm a betting man, I'm not sure I'd like to take that gamble if I was a Scot though. I doubt alot of people will. In fact if Salmond pushes this too hard he could do alot of damage to the credibility of the SNP OUTSIDE the referendum. He needs to tread carefully or SLAB could be the big beneficaries.
I am actually very worried about what this might be doing for Scottish Labour's prospects actually. Even if their allying with the Tories with the "blackmailing"/scaremongering succeeds in securing a "No" vote in the referendum, it could well come at the risk of painting the party as anti-Scottish.
Absolutely critical day in the financial markets tomorrow. Will we reverse strongly downwards from here, or make new all time highs on US indices above S&P1850? I'm narrowly in the former camp, but waiting and seeing before committing to any position. There's so much contrary stuff flying around on all the indicators I follow. Not a good risk reward right now.
I do see something very big indeed happening in April, that could have a marked effect on the May elections. Hopefully things will clear themselves up this week, its been a confusing ride over the past 2 weeks which I've stayed out of.
It would be great to be able to attend a pb meeting. I will be there between 19-23 of June.
I’m sure you feeling some difficult of keeping it up with brazilian parties position! They keep changing all the time. Perphaps I can help you with something (maybe some information on those politicians or anything). Which politicians/parties are your representatives talking to?
I'm a betting man, I'm not sure I'd like to take that gamble if I was a Scot though. I doubt alot of people will. In fact if Salmond pushes this too hard he could do alot of damage to the credibility of the SNP OUTSIDE the referendum. He needs to tread carefully or SLAB could be the big beneficaries.
I am actually very worried about what this might be doing for Scottish Labour's prospects actually.
You think that hasn't occured to some in SLAB already? The last Holyrood VI was pointing to a comfortable SNP win as it was and then the tories plonk Osborne smack bang into the middle of all this. There's a reason there's already a breakaway labour 'better together' group that wants to keep as far away from the toxic tories as possible.
It is of no consequence what scottish tory surgers or very right wing posters on PB think. Most of them called Osborne's omnishambles 100% wrong so it's not even as if they get westminster politics right. Never mind the laughable notion that PB tories have any meaningful insight as to what scottish public thinks when there are more pandas than scottish tory MPs.
1.We have not caused this period of climate change 2. The AGW hypothesis did not predict more extreme weather. All it has done is label events we have seen in recent years as due to climate change after the event. It certainly didn't predict record snow falls across the US or record low temperatures. Nor did it predict increased rainfall in the UK - quite the reverse in fact. 3. The climate variation we are seeing is not unprecedented, not even in the measurement record let alone in the proxy record. 4. We sure as hell shouldn't keep burning hydrocarbons any longer than we absolutely have to. They are a finite resource which has a value far beyond that of a fuel source and which our whole modern world relies upon. Burning them is one of he most wasteful acts of the modern era and the sooner we find viable alternatives the better. But that has sweet FA to do with climate change.
1) Yes we have Human influence on the climate system is clear. This is evident from the increasing greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere, positive radiative forcing, observed warming, and understanding of the climate system.
2) Yes it does. A changing climate leads to changes in the frequency, intensity, spatial extent, duration, and timing of extreme weather and climate events, and can result in unprecedented extreme weather and climate events.
3)Yes it is Warming of the climate system is unequivocal, and since the 1950s, many of the observed changes are unprecedented over decades to millennia.
4) I agree. Apart from the last sentence, which are the daft words you might expect from some, I dunno, oil industry mouthpiece or something, not an informed poster on PB.
www.ipcc.ch
IPCC - need I say more. 1) solar change via solar wind / lunar modulation 2) Increased snowfall, increased arctic ice, more southerly jet stream, reduced hurricanes, AGW give me a break 3) Look at the change in temperature at the end of the Younger Dryas - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Younger_Dryas Note a 7C change in temperature in a very short space of time. Also note tempertature went up over 2C very quickly after the end of the Maunder Minimum in 1715, much more rapid change than anything over the past 50 years. And global temperatures on a DOWNWARD trajectory since 1998. Did you notice that its not called GLOBAL WARMING any more, but CLIMATE CHANGE!
I'm a betting man, I'm not sure I'd like to take that gamble if I was a Scot though. I doubt alot of people will. In fact if Salmond pushes this too hard he could do alot of damage to the credibility of the SNP OUTSIDE the referendum. He needs to tread carefully or SLAB could be the big beneficaries.
I am actually very worried about what this might be doing for Scottish Labour's prospects actually.
there are more pandas than scottish tory MPs.
yes, that's about the quality of "deconstruction" we saw in Salmond's speech today.
""I'm right, he's wrong, and he's English too......"
I'm a betting man, I'm not sure I'd like to take that gamble if I was a Scot though. I doubt alot of people will. In fact if Salmond pushes this too hard he could do alot of damage to the credibility of the SNP OUTSIDE the referendum. He needs to tread carefully or SLAB could be the big beneficaries.
I am actually very worried about what this might be doing for Scottish Labour's prospects actually. Even if their allying with the Tories with the "blackmailing"/scaremongering succeeds in securing a "No" vote in the referendum, it could well come at the risk of painting the party as anti-Scottish.
Very quickly, I think you have every right to be. I'm amazed Darling, Miliband and Clegg agreed to Osborne's currency plan. Labour Lib Dem and Tory poll tax on all your houses position - staggering. And once you're seen as anti-Scottish, its downhill all the way. A fact which Osborne merely confirmed about the Tories to the Scottish public.
It would be great to be able to attend a pb meeting. I will be there between 19-23 of June.
I’m sure you feeling some difficult of keeping it up with brazilian parties position! They keep changing all the time. Perphaps I can help you with something (maybe some information on those politicians or anything). Which politicians/parties are your representatives talking to?
Thank you Me! I don't want to bore others here who don't necessarily share an interest in Brazil or animals with the discussion, but if you could drop me an email it would be nice to discuss it. I'm on nickmp1 at aol.com.
I'm a betting man, I'm not sure I'd like to take that gamble if I was a Scot though. I doubt alot of people will. In fact if Salmond pushes this too hard he could do alot of damage to the credibility of the SNP OUTSIDE the referendum. He needs to tread carefully or SLAB could be the big beneficaries.
I am actually very worried about what this might be doing for Scottish Labour's prospects actually.
there are more pandas than scottish tory MPs.
Impressive.....
There are more pandas than scottish tory MPs in scotland. That's why it's so funny.
Cheer up dear. There's always tomorrow for you to keep shrieking away pointlessly.
France was one of the main examples I was thinking of actually -- stark contrast between centrist Francois Bayrou's performance in 2007, before the crisis erupted and when people responded to pleasantries about "unity" and working together and his Clegg-like platform of splitting the difference between the policies of the right and the left, and in 2012 where people wanted radical answers to more pressing issues. I would argue both Sarkozy and Hollande ran more radically right-wing and left-wing campaigns than would normally be expected too (of course Hollande in office has not really kept to the leftwing anti-austerity line he campaigned on, but that's a different story). And we're now seeing the far Right surge there.
Admittedly Merkel/the CDU is a rare example of a centre party still popular (although even in Germany the FDP crumbled to a worst-ever result), but I would argue that's because Germany is one of the few countries which is actually doing alright at the moment so there isn't quite such a demand for radical solutions.
Hmm, yes. But the centre as defined by Bayrou in France has always been thinly populated - they like to switch from left to right and back with vigorous rhetoric which generally turns out not to mean very much - I'd describe both PS and UDR as centrist parties with ambitions to be more that don't quite work out.
Give me a break. You really believe that the EU is not a cause of, say, Austria having less control over its economy and society than Switzerland?
Sure. I read the Swiss press regularly, do you? The Swiss feel a sense of deep unease over their exposure to global winds: it's one reason the nationalist SVP do relatively well, and also why all the other main parties favour closer links to the EU (held back by public scepticism). It's a very efficient country so they manage OK anyway, but I don't think they feel in control more than, say, Sweden, which is another efficient country of similar size and inside the EU.
Clearly having a separate currency gives an extra lever in the short term, but the Swiss have found it a headache too - they try to fix it to the Euro as otherwise they risk pricing their exporters out of business.
Extreme weather events are not "proof" of climate change.
They yet more evidence for it (as if it were needed). Yet another prediction of the theory confirmed.
The problem we humans have in this period is that we are living during a period of unprecedented climate change that we have caused.
Possibly the best strategy, and on this we might agree, is to just roll with it, keep extracting that oil, hope for the best.
And be glad it'll be our kids, grandkids, great-grandkids etc that have to suffer.
1.We have not caused this period of climate change 2. The AGW hypothesis did not predict more extreme weather. All it has done is label events we have seen in recent years as due to climate change after the event. It certainly didn't predict record snow falls across the US or record low temperatures. Nor did it predict increased rainfall in the UK - quite the reverse in fact. 3. The climate variation we are seeing is not unprecedented, not even in the measurement record let alone in the proxy record. 4. We sure as hell shouldn't keep burning hydrocarbons any longer than we absolutely have to. They are a finite resource which has a value far beyond that of a fuel source and which our whole modern world relies upon. Burning them is one of he most wasteful acts of the modern era and the sooner we find viable alternatives the better. But that has sweet FA to do with climate change.
1) Yes we have Human influence on the climate system is clear. This is evident from the increasing greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere, positive radiative forcing, observed warming, and understanding of the climate system.
2) Yes it does. A changing climate leads to changes in the frequency, intensity, spatial extent, duration, and timing of extreme weather and climate events, and can result in unprecedented extreme weather and climate events.
3)Yes it is Warming of the climate system is unequivocal, and since the 1950s, many of the observed changes are unprecedented over decades to millennia.
4) I agree. Apart from the last sentence, which are the daft words you might expect from some, I dunno, oil industry mouthpiece or something, not an informed poster on PB.
www.ipcc.ch
Hugh, we have already established that you don't understand even the most basic principles of climate science. Quoting chunks of a political document in support of your position really isn't helping your cause. In fact you understand so little that you don't even realise that your second point backs up what I was saying.
Have you worked out what feedback mechanisms are yet and the central role they play in climate science?
Comments
It's the supply of property which is the problem but that would require a real determination to build houses/flats in London and the South East. This proposed policy is simply a distraction from the real source of the problem.
It is only against that measure that he should be judged. And I have to say that to date, using that criteria, I am afraid the news is not good for the Unionists. However much you might despise, dismiss or just generally diss Salmond he is one of the most successful, if not the most successful, politicians in modern Scottish history.
Only when the votes have been counted and the Unionists have won will they have any cause to claim that Salmond has failed or was not up to the job. Until then they are very much counting chickens long before they have hatched. .
They want to become independent.
Then they want to join a currency union with the rest of the UK.
Have I correctly summarised today's Independence referendum debate?
I'm just wondering what the point of this independence is.
Brilliant one! Thanks TSE.
That is the battleground on which Salmond's plans will succeed or fail.
Next he will be using quoting Ken Dodd as support for his position on EU membership.
You need to add a couple more names.
The post of EU Commissioner is generally given to a public figure who has done the state some (political) service but who is:
a. without a job and with limited prospects of finding one; and/or,
b. is wanted out of the way by the current PM.
May I recommend for you consideration:
on ground a (from 19.09.2014), The Right Honourable Alexander Elliot Anderson Salmond, First Minister of Scotland; and,
on ground b, His Eminence the (soon-to-be) Cardinal Archbishop of Westminster Vincent Nichols.
I must have missed your insightful interventions on political betting, or indeed your appointment to the post of moderator.
They are independent.
That's the point of independence.
There are more EU comissioner names and some that haven't even been mentioned on here on the paddypower site. Go have a look. Even for you that attempt at humour was toecurling. Stick to the inept spinning for Osbrowne. That's always comedy gold.
Sir Isaac Newton
The silliest thing about this is that there are perfectly reasonable answers to all these questions; clearly Scotland could be a perfectly viable, indeed prosperous, independent country, with either its own floating currency, or a currency pegged to the pound, or at worst using Sterling informally, and with a fast-tracked application for full EU membership with a trade agreement in the interim. But answering every major question with the most ludicrous bluster, which falls apart as soon as a journalist asks what the other side of the negotiating table are saying, is a sure-fire way for Salmond to lose.
So far, who is in favour:
Salmond
SNP
Scottish voters
Who is against:
Cameron
Osborne
Balls
Alexander
CBI
IOD
HMT
England/Wales voters.
But Salmond is right....and all of them are wrong.....
Not to have incompetent Cameroonian spinners insult scots at every turn would be a start.
Then again I doubt even CCHQ would dare employ some of the out of touch tory fools on here.
Prof Kevin Anderson on Newsnight
"If politicians are saying floods are being directly caused by climate change they are exaggerating "
Just the old good cop, bad cop routine,
Richard Tyndall and I completely knocked you out on the canvas last week. You really should just give it a rest....yaaaaaaaaaaaaaaawn. You and the AGW crowd have been thoroughly discredited. Perhaps you could tell me what the Met Office long range forecast for the winter back last October was, using their AGW models?.......They were predicting a WARMER and DRIER than average winter based on their models. Its no surprise that the AGW mainstream media aren't reporting this, but its yet another inconvenient fact for you. And Piers Corbyn of weatheraction.com had this winter nailed down to a tee using his sunspot / solar wind models. He understands unlike you that the sun is the ruler of the climate, not levels of CO2 once above 120ppm.
The only thing that has changed is the willingness of the politicians and activists to point at weather events and claim they are proof of whatever their latest pet theory is.
Scotland's future: state of denial
Alex Salmond's response to challenges about currency union and EU membership was a major test – one that he failed
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/feb/17/scotland-future-salmond-denial
Danny Alexander's was picture of a man with his head in the sand under the headline "Alex Salmond Reacts To Currency Debate"
Events, dear boy, events.
Salmond has failed to respond to events and has so failed as a politician.
The dustbin of history awaits.
George Osborne was not campaigning for BetterTogether. He made a speech in his capacity as Chancellor of the Exchequer for the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, a position he will still hold, and have to exercise, on the 19th.
And in that role, it was his duty to point out that a currency union will not happen, and deal with the consequences.
If the SNPers spent more time on the realistic consequences of the vote than Eck's Fairy Tales I would have more respect for them. But they don't. So I don't.
'It is a test that Mr Salmond failed.'
A clown without a plan.
Salmond has failed to respond to events and has so failed as a politician.
The dustbin of history awaits.
I put it down to political change, myself.
It is, of course, very possible that his combative approach and a dislike of the Tories may tip support [Salmond's] way in the short term. But it is also possible that the long-term effect of the recent dramas will be to force Scots voters to weigh the risks rather more carefully and realistically than Mr Salmond did in his latest speech.
The problem is that we can't know exactly how the increase in extreme weather caused by climate change will affect us.
It will almost certainly mean more flooding, sure. But it could - and probably will - also mean more droughts, heatwaves, high winds, freezing temperatures etc.
We can't predict the frequency or severity of these events, so how the heck do we adapt to them? Depressing.
I do love the idea that any weather, at all, is apparently proof of AGW.
The problems humans have is that we believe that the conditions under which we exist today and have existed for the last couple of thousand years are the norm. We find it impossible as a race to envisage a situation where the climate is far more variable than we have enjoyed during the historic period. And yet if you look at the record it is massive variation is the norm. It is stability which is the freak weather.
This is particularly unfortunate because we have a majority of the world's population living very close to sea level. It is a position which is totally unviable in the medium to long term and mankind has no influence over that. All we can do is react.
They've started shrieking again. Bless.
Unfortunately there's this honey coated view that everything left naturally on the earth would be benign. Just a cursory glance and understanding of meteorological history shows that not to be so. And a colder world as we're now entering is much more challenging to the human race - reduced crop yields and the like. We're just going to have to adapt and make the best of it. And we don't control it, as much as some people like to believe otherwise. The sun as a celestial being is all powerful - accept it and adapt.
I wish our players could watch this and see it is possible to bat for a long time in a test match.
I actually think that the gay 'marriage' reason is the more credible. The UKIP councillor blamed the flooding on David Cameron's obsession on gay 'marriage'. Perhaps if he had concentrated on essential business of government rather than fripperies then large parts of the country wouldn't be under water.
Germany - confirmation of centrist parties
Netherlands - radical parties did surpisingly badly with big swing back to centre
Italy: inconclusive results with eccentric populists doing well
France: moderate right replaced by moderate left
vs
Greece - gains by radical left and right
Other examples?
That would be great - maybe we can have a pb meeting when you're here.
My (animal welfare) day job team been working a lot on Brazilian politics recently - we were involved in the recent Sao Paulo ban on animal tests for cosmetics and will be represented at the big Animal event in Brasilia over the next two days. Our representatives there keep briefing us on the positions of all the parties - we struggle to keep up!
I do love the idea that any weather, at all, is apparently proof of AGW.
The problems humans have is that we believe that the conditions under which we exist today and have existed for the last couple of thousand years are the norm. We find it impossible as a race to envisage a situation where the climate is far more variable than we have enjoyed during the historic period. And yet if you look at the record it is massive variation is the norm. It is stability which is the freak weather.
This is particularly unfortunate because we have a majority of the world's population living very close to sea level. It is a position which is totally unviable in the medium to long term and mankind has no influence over that. All we can do is react.
Extreme weather events are not "proof" of climate change.
They yet more evidence for it (as if it were needed). Yet another prediction of the theory confirmed.
The problem we humans have in this period is that we are living during a period of unprecedented climate change that we have caused.
Possibly the best strategy, and on this we might agree, is to just roll with it, keep extracting that oil, hope for the best.
And be glad it'll be our kids, grandkids, great-grandkids etc that have to suffer.
Well one thing they say is 'necessity is the mother of invention'. As I pointed out last week, its likely that mankind will finally discover how to make the best of fusion power - just last week they finally got more energy out a cold fusion reaction that that put in, so they're on the long course to solving it. And we've also got thorium which is a potential massive energy source for the future. Life and technology move on. We'll find a solution long before the oil and coal run out.
2. The AGW hypothesis did not predict more extreme weather. All it has done is label events we have seen in recent years as due to climate change after the event. It certainly didn't predict record snow falls across the US or record low temperatures. Nor did it predict increased rainfall in the UK - quite the reverse in fact.
3. The climate variation we are seeing is not unprecedented, not even in the measurement record let alone in the proxy record.
4. We sure as hell shouldn't keep burning hydrocarbons any longer than we absolutely have to. They are a finite resource which has a value far beyond that of a fuel source and which our whole modern world relies upon. Burning them is one of he most wasteful acts of the modern era and the sooner we find viable alternatives the better. But that has sweet FA to do with climate change.
Compulsory Euro (transaction costs on trade with rUK)
No EU rebate
'Compensation' to the upset Spanish.
Spanish fishermen going beserk in Scottish waters?
Avalanche of English students going north for free university education.
Some wonderfully quaint/parochial adverts between the overs - "NZ's only manufacturer of wire rope" is playing as I speak! And some commedy - groundsmen hammering away at a broken sightscreen, and Wagner's stumps being hit without the bails falling off.
They've just passed their highest ever Test total, gone past the 671/4 vs Sri Lanka when Crowe got his 299.
Great commentary wasn't it? Real pride in their voices. I do love New Zealand.
I remember reading an IMF paper on sovereign default and it suggested the average suspension from money markets is about 2 years.
Hardly Earth-shattering.
Poor Martin Crowe, getting dismissed for 299 in a test match has got to be annoying.
Salmond gambles on 'bluff' over pound deal http://t.co/28H9FkjsPU #scotpapers http://t.co/GBz7EWpXLN
If I was up in Scotland, I'd actually prefer the independence option now on the plate with your own currency and leaving the EU (Barroso lol), Scotland could achieve great things with its finance / legal expertise, energy sources and highly skilled industries a la Norway. The transaction costs of a new currency are minimal, and as for the rest of the UK putting up tariffs with Scotland were it to go independent, just more pointless scare stories, and anyway the rest of the UK would be bound be EU trade agreements were that to be the case.
I want to write the morning thread!
Admittedly Merkel/the CDU is a rare example of a centre party still popular (although even in Germany the FDP crumbled to a worst-ever result), but I would argue that's because Germany is one of the few countries which is actually doing alright at the moment so there isn't quite such a demand for radical solutions.
I still remember CMJ reducing him to giggles and silence
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/tms/2008/05/possibly_the_most_famous_momen.shtml
I'm a betting man, I'm not sure I'd like to take that gamble if I was a Scot though. I doubt alot of people will. In fact if Salmond pushes this too hard he could do alot of damage to the credibility of the SNP OUTSIDE the referendum. He needs to tread carefully or SLAB could be the big beneficaries.
Whatever the impact on voting intention, just as with "Scotland's own referendum", "A DevoMax option on the ballot", "Automatic membership of the EU" and "It's Scotland's pound too", reality will sink in sooner or later, and Scots will be able to make a better informed choice. What's not to like?
I do see something very big indeed happening in April, that could have a marked effect on the May elections. Hopefully things will clear themselves up this week, its been a confusing ride over the past 2 weeks which I've stayed out of.
Good night all.
It would be great to be able to attend a pb meeting. I will be there between 19-23 of June.
I’m sure you feeling some difficult of keeping it up with brazilian parties position! They keep changing all the time. Perphaps I can help you with something (maybe some information on those politicians or anything). Which politicians/parties are your representatives talking to?
It is of no consequence what scottish tory surgers or very right wing posters on PB think.
Most of them called Osborne's omnishambles 100% wrong so it's not even as if they get westminster politics right. Never mind the laughable notion that PB tories have any meaningful insight as to what scottish public thinks when there are more pandas than scottish tory MPs.
1) solar change via solar wind / lunar modulation
2) Increased snowfall, increased arctic ice, more southerly jet stream, reduced hurricanes, AGW give me a break
3) Look at the change in temperature at the end of the Younger Dryas - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Younger_Dryas Note a 7C change in temperature in a very short space of time. Also note tempertature went up over 2C very quickly after the end of the Maunder Minimum in 1715, much more rapid change than anything over the past 50 years. And global temperatures on a DOWNWARD trajectory since 1998. Did you notice that its not called GLOBAL WARMING any more, but CLIMATE CHANGE!
Good night finally. Good night to AGW!
""I'm right, he's wrong, and he's English too......"
Impressive.....
Cheer up dear. There's always tomorrow for you to keep shrieking away pointlessly.
Clearly having a separate currency gives an extra lever in the short term, but the Swiss have found it a headache too - they try to fix it to the Euro as otherwise they risk pricing their exporters out of business.
Have you worked out what feedback mechanisms are yet and the central role they play in climate science?