Well, I've messaged you with what I *think* our bets were. I really must write these things down somewhere sometime.
I'll message you our bet as well.
Oh, I wont forget that one in a hurry! Havent had such good value since Mark Senior offered me 8/1 on Caroline Lucas retaining her seat
Wow ...... is that bet for real?
Oh yes.
Not quite in the same league as tim's evens on Osborne apologising to the House for being a bit political (which was just free money) but great value all the same.
Well, I've messaged you with what I *think* our bets were. I really must write these things down somewhere sometime.
I'll message you our bet as well.
Oh, I wont forget that one in a hurry! Havent had such good value since Mark Senior offered me 8/1 on Caroline Lucas retaining her seat
Wow ...... is that bet for real?
Oh yes.
Not quite in the same league as tim's evens on Osborne apologising to the House for being a bit political (which was just free money) but great value all the same.
I have £50 at evens with @Fluffy_Thoughts of this parish that 1 barrel of Brent Crude Oil will be above £50 at Year End. (He is unders).
Keith @KGBut 3m To all global warming nutters out there -This "freak" weather we're currently having is technically known as "Summer"
How clever.
And unlike most of the global warming models, it has the added benefit of being accurate.
June 2014 was globally the warmest June ever recorded (records date back to 1880), following the warmest May ever recorded according to NOAA.
Let's just pretend that global warming isn't happening...
Guess what, you are wrong again. Go look at the satellite data and you will find that neither May nor June were the warmest on record.
I pointed this out to you last month when you repeated this idiotic claim and you were strangely silent.
On the two main satellite systems May was either the 3rd or 6th warmest on record. June was the 4th warmest.
Given that everyone knows the world has been warming slowly (and naturally) since the end of the last Maunder minimum it is no surprise that the highest temperatures are the most recent. Of course that says nothing about cause in spite of what the scientifically illiterate like yourself might like to claim.
Whether it's third, fourth or sixth warmest on record is in the noise level. AGW is happening, the evidence is there and is being refined continuously by scientists using what is known as the scientific method ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method ). The vast majority of scientists are not climate change deniers ( http://www.salon.com/2014/03/25/10853_out_of_10855_scientists_agree_man_made_global_warming_is_happening/ ). The scientific method is designed to work out what is happening based on experimentation. When there are contrary indications experiments are made to see if the results are repeatable.If so the theory is refined. Newton wasn't wrong, but Einstein's work extended our knowledge. AGW is an important subject and needs to be talked about logically.
Almost wholly irrelevant. AGW isn't a fundamental theory reducible to nice simple equations like Newton's and Einstein's, it's about the best way to model and predict a highly complex and chaotic system. We know that this is an almost intractably difficult proceeding with any other system of equivalent complexity (like the human body, or the british electorate). Why is it uniquely easy in climate modelling (which it must be if it produces one answer which convinces virtually everybody)?
How do you propose to make experiments to see if your results are repeatable? Hint: how many spare earths do you have access to, for your subjects and controls?
2013/14 Acute FTs £m Income (less impairment reversals) 29,755 Expenditure before depreciation and impairment (28,325) Depreciation and amortisation (879) Impairments (net of reversals) (160) Net finance costs (661) Gains/(losses) from transfers by absorption 65 Other (1) Surplus / (deficit) for the year (206) Number of trusts 83
£206M defecit between 83 Foundation Trust Hospitals.
A deficit of 0.7%.
They overspent by £7 in every £1000. Hardly the end of civilised life as we know it, but further action to improve efficiency is required. Luckily progress is being made, carrying on from Andy Burnham's good work in making use of private providers to drive down costs and improve quality.
A number are having to survive via emergency loans despite achieving 20% efficiency in last 5 years due to the ridiculous payment system introduced by the Tories whereby they are paid only 30% of tariff for all additional A&E attendances.
I guarantee the NHS acute hospital financial crisis will be an election issue.
Shut A&E and its suddenly profitable to be an Acute Trust (cherry picking opportunity there for the Tory donors who are being handed contracts)
Not the end of the civilised world for non NHS users i suppose
Nearly 10% of al NHS Foundation Trust staff now either temporary or agency 52.000 staff. This percentage has more than trebled since 2010/11
Is that good or bad? How does it compare to the private sector? What sort of staff are we talking about? What are the additional costs of employing temporary or agency staff as opposed to full-time employees on a pensionable contract? What has caused this increase since 2010/11?
The point that struck me from your post, Mr. Owls, was that the NHS FT sector employs more than half a million people.
Guess what, you are wrong again. Go look at the satellite data and you will find that neither May nor June were the warmest on record.
I pointed this out to you last month when you repeated this idiotic claim and you were strangely silent.
On the two main satellite systems May was either the 3rd or 6th warmest on record. June was the 4th warmest.
Given that everyone knows the world has been warming slowly (and naturally) since the end of the last Maunder minimum it is no surprise that the highest temperatures are the most recent. Of course that says nothing about cause in spite of what the scientifically illiterate like yourself might like to claim.
Whether it's third, fourth or sixth warmest on record is in the noise level. AGW is happening, the evidence is there and is being refined continuously by scientists using what is known as the scientific method ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method ). The vast majority of scientists are not climate change deniers ( http://www.salon.com/2014/03/25/10853_out_of_10855_scientists_agree_man_made_global_warming_is_happening/ ). The scientific method is designed to work out what is happening based on experimentation. When there are contrary indications experiments are made to see if the results are repeatable.If so the theory is refined. Newton wasn't wrong, but Einstein's work extended our knowledge. AGW is an important subject and needs to be talked about logically.
Almost wholly irrelevant. AGW isn't a fundamental theory reducible to nice simple equations like Newton's and Einstein's, it's about the best way to model and predict a highly complex and chaotic system. We know that this is an almost intractably difficult proceeding with any other system of equivalent complexity (like the human body, or the british electorate). Why is it uniquely easy in climate modelling (which it must be if it produces one answer which convinces virtually everybody)?
How do you propose to make experiments to see if your results are repeatable? Hint: how many spare earths do you have access to, for your subjects and controls?
I'll ignore the sarcasm. I never said that it was easy to model the climate, but it is being done and conclusions are being drawn. Governments, not least the Chinese government ( http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/globalwarming/10804221/Global-warming-China-and-US-in-crucial-talks-on-cutting-carbon-dioxide-emissions.html ) are spending a lot of money on attempting to ameliorate AGW. Experiments on individual aspects of climate change are repeatable and I'm sure you could name a few. For example the amount of CO2 absorbed by the oceans. Obviously we only have one Earth, which is a good reason to get the science right, and to accept the best estimates we have.
In all seriousness, although there do not seem to be many Labour posters in here who actually bet, if you seriously think Ukip are going to implode, 8/11 Labour in Thurrock can't be a bad bet
Nearly 10% of al NHS Foundation Trust staff now either temporary or agency 52.000 staff. This percentage has more than trebled since 2010/11
Is that good or bad? How does it compare to the private sector? What sort of staff are we talking about? What are the additional costs of employing temporary or agency staff as opposed to full-time employees on a pensionable contract? What has caused this increase since 2010/11?
The point that struck me from your post, Mr. Owls, was that the NHS FT sector employs more than half a million people.
In my experience anout 80% of agency staff are nursing, agency nurses are working for a 20 to 30% premium compared to the pay frozen NHS ones and care much less for the patients at the various hospitals where they work than the permanent ones. More nurses are resigning permanent posts to a avoid a 5th year of pay freezes leading to the premium available going up. Of course agencies are doing very nicely out of this too.
569,000 voters ( i mean workers) in the Acute sector alone
Tory MP Nadhim Zahawi has written to the chief of the Met Police, Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe to ask him to investigate the comments by Liberal Democrat MP David Ward.
Nearly 10% of al NHS Foundation Trust staff now either temporary or agency 52.000 staff. This percentage has more than trebled since 2010/11
Is that good or bad? How does it compare to the private sector? What sort of staff are we talking about? What are the additional costs of employing temporary or agency staff as opposed to full-time employees on a pensionable contract? What has caused this increase since 2010/11?
The point that struck me from your post, Mr. Owls, was that the NHS FT sector employs more than half a million people.
In my experience anout 80% of agency staff are nursing, agency nurses are working for a 20 to 30% premium compared to the pay frozen NHS ones and care much less for the patients at the various hospitals where they work than the permanent ones. More nurses are resigning permanent posts to a avoid a 5th year of pay freezes leading to the premium available going up. Of course agencies are doing very nicely out of this too.
569,000 voters ( i mean workers) in the Acute sector alone
Nearly 10% of al NHS Foundation Trust staff now either temporary or agency 52.000 staff. This percentage has more than trebled since 2010/11
Is that good or bad? How does it compare to the private sector? What sort of staff are we talking about? What are the additional costs of employing temporary or agency staff as opposed to full-time employees on a pensionable contract? What has caused this increase since 2010/11?
The point that struck me from your post, Mr. Owls, was that the NHS FT sector employs more than half a million people.
In my experience anout 80% of agency staff are nursing, agency nurses are working for a 20 to 30% premium compared to the pay frozen NHS ones
But don't have a very expensive defined benefits pension future liability racking up to the taxpayer...
"... the Tory donors who are being handed [NHS] contracts ..."
Really? I care very much about the NHS (wouldn't be here without it )and am fascinated by this claim. Who are these Tory donors who are being handed contracts to run acute hospitals? Please give me the names and details of the contracts and I'll be on to my MP and everyone else I can reach like a shot.
As for closing A&E units, we locally have, for many years, been fighting an insane plan first introduced under Labour to push all Mid-Sussex A&E customers down to Brighton. Did Labour want to close A&E units so that Tory donors could be handed NHS contracts?
@bigjohnowls - Yes, there are some problems within an organisation with a budget of £109 Billion and employing 1.7 million people, doing a very complex range of jobs against a difficult demographic background and at a time when the country is in some financial difficulty inherited from Labour.
Why on earth would anyone be surprised that you can find issues in such a massive organisation? It would nothing short of a miracle if there weren't. But, like all Labour supporters, you seem curiously uninterested in the fact that there were problems before May 2010 as well, and even less interested in the fact that one of the worst of those inherited problems - Hinchingbrooke - has been turned around. By Circle Health.
The ideological obsessiveness of the Left regarding the NHS - actively objecting to efficiency improvements, if they come via sensible use of private providers - never ceases to amaze me. After all, GP services are run almost entirely by for-profit private providers, but no-one on the Left seems to have noticed that.
'In my experience anout 80% of agency staff are nursing, agency nurses are working for a 20 to 30% premium compared to the pay frozen NHS ones and care much less for the patients at the various hospitals where they work than the permanent ones'
If you take out the employer NI contributions,pension payments,sick leave,holiday pay etc.there's probably not much difference.
The key challenges for climate models are: 1. To share them openly and transparently with absolute clarity on what the inputs, process and outputs are - they need to be clearly understood by anyone who is interested to check. 2. To share openly and transparently where the input data comes from. 3. They need to explain the past accurately. Over a long timeframe.
I'm not sure current cliamte models, incl those used by the IPCC, meet such scientific criteria.
But, like all Labour supporters, you seem curiously uninterested in the fact that there were problems before May 2010 as well, and even less interested in the fact that one of the worst of those inherited problems - Hinchingbrooke - has been turned around. By Circle Health.
Labour supporters seem most uninterested in the fact that it was their Government that initiated the process of having a private provider run an NHS hospital.
As for closing A&E units, we locally have, for many years, been fighting an insane plan first introduced under Labour to push all Mid-Sussex A&E customers down to Brighton.
Whether it's third, fourth or sixth warmest on record is in the noise level. AGW is happening, the evidence is there and is being refined continuously by scientists using what is known as the scientific method ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method ). The vast majority of scientists are not climate change deniers ( http://www.salon.com/2014/03/25/10853_out_of_10855_scientists_agree_man_made_global_warming_is_happening/ ). The scientific method is designed to work out what is happening based on experimentation. When there are contrary indications experiments are made to see if the results are repeatable.If so the theory is refined. Newton wasn't wrong, but Einstein's work extended our knowledge. AGW is an important subject and needs to be talked about logically.
As I have pointed out to you before you are wrong on almost every salient point. Which is what you get for believing blogs.
Oh and as I have also pointed out to you before when you mistakenly tried to make use of it, you clearly do not understand the first thing about the scientific method. Repeatability and experimental confirmation are the basis of that method - but models are not experiments and cannot be used as a verification method. Additionally it is necessary to eliminate completely all other possible mechanisms for a hypothesis to be confirmed. AGW fails as a hypothesis because it has failed to make predictions that are observable by experimentation or observation and has failed to eliminate the many other possible causes of warming.
The Greenhouse gas experiment conducted in a laboratory by my Great Uncle (and the reason they named the Tyndall Centre after him) has only limited application in a global climate setting. Even those who support the AGW hypothesis know the limitations of that set of experiments which is why the argument on both sides is about feedback mechanisms both positive and negative. It is the balance between those mechanisms (forcings in climate study terminology) which determines whether or not man is causing the warming trend. I suggest before you start trying to quote basic scientific principles you actually go and learn something about the science.
Nearly 10% of al NHS Foundation Trust staff now either temporary or agency 52.000 staff. This percentage has more than trebled since 2010/11
Is that good or bad? How does it compare to the private sector? What sort of staff are we talking about? What are the additional costs of employing temporary or agency staff as opposed to full-time employees on a pensionable contract? What has caused this increase since 2010/11?
The point that struck me from your post, Mr. Owls, was that the NHS FT sector employs more than half a million people.
In my experience anout 80% of agency staff are nursing, agency nurses are working for a 20 to 30% premium compared to the pay frozen NHS ones
But don't have a very expensive defined benefits pension future liability racking up to the taxpayer...
That's the rub, Mr. Ghost. When I was employing in the public sector we had to budget for 33% on top of an employees salary for pension contributions, cost of employing etc.. I left that in 2006 and that add-on cost has almost certainly increased since them. So if an agency/temporary nurse is only costing 20-30% more than the salary of an employee nurse its actually a good deal for the tax payer and the nurse. At least its the nurse's choice whether to forgo long-term benefit in favour of immediate gain, but then that choice is no different from any plumber or sparks and indeed most employees. I see no reason why a particular sector should be exempt from the choices that the majority have these days to confront.
Mind you, I think Big John is underestimating the additional cost of employing agency nurses. Those agencies have to take their wack out of the system. I also think that his idea that agency nurses care less about their patients than full-time employees is very wide of the mark. I have extensive experience of both types and can confidently say their are good and bad (and bloody awful) in both.
"Should he shirk the challenge, in the year that family life was sucked into the vortex of global war, then his epitaph would be a damning one: that he proved too small a figure for this perilous age."
Keith @KGBut 3m To all global warming nutters out there -This "freak" weather we're currently having is technically known as "Summer"
How clever.
And unlike most of the global warming models, it has the added benefit of being accurate.
June 2014 was globally the warmest June ever recorded (records date back to 1880), following the warmest May ever recorded according to NOAA.
Let's just pretend that global warming isn't happening...
Guess what, you are wrong again. Go look at the satellite data and you will find that neither May nor June were the warmest on record.
I pointed this out to you last month when you repeated this idiotic claim and you were strangely silent.
On the two main satellite systems May was either the 3rd or 6th warmest on record. June was the 4th warmest.
Given that everyone knows the world has been warming slowly (and naturally) since the end of the last Maunder minimum it is no surprise that the highest temperatures are the most recent. Of course that says nothing about cause in spite of what the scientifically illiterate like yourself might like to claim.
I'm glad to be tagged scientifically illiterate. Puts me in the same boat as 99% of the world's experts...
I'm sorry, I'll always take actual measurements from NOAA and Hadley over satellite data.
No it doesn't. Simply quoting the 93, 97 or 99% myth shows where you get your information from and it sure as hell isn't science.
And the fact that you think the very scattered and partial NOAA data is more accurate than the satellite data also shows your utter ignorance.
By the way Hadley make use of the satellite data. If you actually had the first idea about the science you would know that.
F1: BBC gossip column has David Davis and Ming Campbell requesting the Russian Grand Prix be cancelled [not sure they know Ecclestone only speaks in currency].
There's also a rumour Mexico will get its race back next year. Wouldn't be a shock, but with Azerbaijan likely on the calendar as well something will have to give.
Nearly 10% of al NHS Foundation Trust staff now either temporary or agency 52.000 staff. This percentage has more than trebled since 2010/11
Is that good or bad? How does it compare to the private sector? What sort of staff are we talking about? What are the additional costs of employing temporary or agency staff as opposed to full-time employees on a pensionable contract? What has caused this increase since 2010/11?
The point that struck me from your post, Mr. Owls, was that the NHS FT sector employs more than half a million people.
In my experience anout 80% of agency staff are nursing, agency nurses are working for a 20 to 30% premium compared to the pay frozen NHS ones
But don't have a very expensive defined benefits pension future liability racking up to the taxpayer...
I also think that his idea that agency nurses care less about their patients than full-time employees is very wide of the mark. I have extensive experience of both types and can confidently say their are good and bad (and bloody awful) in both.
That's where the BJO leftie blinkers come down - if your pay is transferred from a govt bank you are a saint and in the job for altruistic reasons. If an evil private sector capitalist firm pays your wages you are making grannies drink out of vases.
As for closing A&E units, we locally have, for many years, been fighting an insane plan first introduced under Labour to push all Mid-Sussex A&E customers down to Brighton.
What's insane about the plan?
What was insane, Mr. Neil, was that it did not include additional paramedics and paramedic vehicles in the ambulance service and the number of staff, space, equipment in the RSCH was not going to expanded to meet the additional through-put of patients.
"... the Tory donors who are being handed [NHS] contracts ..."
Really? I care very much about the NHS (wouldn't be here without it )and am fascinated by this claim. Who are these Tory donors who are being handed contracts to run acute hospitals? Please give me the names and details of the contracts and I'll be on to my MP
"... the Tory donors who are being handed [NHS] contracts ..."
Really? I care very much about the NHS (wouldn't be here without it )and am fascinated by this claim. Who are these Tory donors who are being handed contracts to run acute hospitals? Please give me the names and details of the contracts and I'll be on to my MP
Was Andy B upset that having sold of Hinchinbrooke, he wasn't getting any of the reward?
"But a spokesman said: “Circle has never made any donations to a political party. The vast majority of Circle’s NHS contracts actually started under the last Labour government.”
And a Tory spokesman added: “The decision to contract out Hinchingbrooke was taken by Andy Burnham.”
Labour supporters seem most uninterested in the fact that it was their Government that initiated the process of having a private provider run an NHS hospital.
Yes, I keep praising Andy Burnham for that and inviting our Labour friends to share in taking credit for the succcess of the process, but am met only with silence. It's baffling.
OGH, I think you have actually answered your own question. The reason most over 60 year olds are not interested in GO's changes is that they have already taken their 25% tax free cash and there is very little they can change, even if they wanted to (like changing banks, seems to much of a bother). They know what their money in/out is.
That's not true. You have not read the Govt's proposal. It will make a huge difference to A LOT of people.
Sorry for the delay in replying, actually, I have a life.
To be honest, no, I have not read the Govt's proposal, cos it is just that, a proposal.
From what I've heard talking to people who know about these things it is GO being just a little too clever for any ones good. It is a potential explosion on a massive scale.
Too many people will get their hands on "their" money and low and behold when the next major economy bust, the one after that plus the one following happen, then too many people will be expecting the state to extract them.
Until approx. 2055, the population of the UK will be out of kilter with the majority being over the age of 60 - unless, of course we have massive immigration to help pay taxes and wipe the bums of the elderly.
OGH, I think you have actually answered your own question. The reason most over 60 year olds are not interested in GO's changes is that they have already taken their 25% tax free cash and there is very little they can change, even if they wanted to (like changing banks, seems to much of a bother). They know what their money in/out is.
That's not true. You have not read the Govt's proposal. It will make a huge difference to A LOT of people.
Too many people will get their hands on "their" money .
How dare they - what a scandal !
Dangerous free thought could emerge from this - high time the government took over all our spending.
"The only Acute hospital run completely by private health firm is Hinchinbrooke run by Circle "
And which has by all accounts been doing a very good job and, of course, the process for them taking over a failed, never mind failing, hospital was set in motion by Labour.
As for the two Mirror articles, I regard them with the same contempt as I would similar pieces in the Daily Mail. There is probably a hint of truth in there somewhere but frankly to unravel the truth from the propaganda would take too much time. Contracts to run acute hospitals, which is what we are talking about, are not, we may be sure, being handed over to Conservative Party donors.
Nearly 10% of al NHS Foundation Trust staff now either temporary or agency 52.000 staff. This percentage has more than trebled since 2010/11
Is that good or bad? How does it compare to the private sector? What sort of staff are we talking about? What are the additional costs of employing temporary or agency staff as opposed to full-time employees on a pensionable contract? What has caused this increase since 2010/11?
The point that struck me from your post, Mr. Owls, was that the NHS FT sector employs more than half a million people.
In my experience anout 80% of agency staff are nursing, agency nurses are working for a 20 to 30% premium compared to the pay frozen NHS ones
But don't have a very expensive defined benefits pension future liability racking up to the taxpayer...
I also think that his idea that agency nurses care less about their patients than full-time employees is very wide of the mark. I have extensive experience of both types and can confidently say their are good and bad (and bloody awful) in both.
That's where the BJO leftie blinkers come down - if your pay is transferred from a govt bank you are a saint and in the job for altruistic reasons. If an evil private sector capitalist firm pays your wages you are making grannies drink out of vases.
Afraid not 32 years experience in the NHS makes me believe private sector involvement usually results in worse standards and higher cost.A senior NHS nurse with 20 years experience costs about £200 per shift including on costs (Your pension point). The same nurse if she decides to work for an agency can earn significantly more and cost the hospital up to £1000 per shift.
The agency tries to make as bigger cut as possible of course
So even if agency nurses are as good as NHS ones they are not 20 to 30% better and then add on the agency cut amounting to over £1m at my local trust. This is not good use of taxpayers money.
Considering the news relating to David Ruffley, Nadhim Zahawi is playing a very dangerous game.
I think he's performing the wonderful service of showing exactly how ridiculous some of our anti-terror laws are.
Sadly any law touching on national security issues is immune to evidence. You could lock up everybody in parliament under their own legislation and they still wouldn't get the issue.
Nearly 10% of al NHS Foundation Trust staff now either temporary or agency 52.000 staff. This percentage has more than trebled since 2010/11
Is that good or bad? How does it compare to the private sector? What sort of staff are we talking about? What are the additional costs of employing temporary or agency staff as opposed to full-time employees on a pensionable contract? What has caused this increase since 2010/11?
The point that struck me from your post, Mr. Owls, was that the NHS FT sector employs more than half a million people.
In my experience anout 80% of agency staff are nursing, agency nurses are working for a 20 to 30% premium compared to the pay frozen NHS ones
But don't have a very expensive defined benefits pension future liability racking up to the taxpayer...
I also think that his idea that agency nurses care less about their patients than full-time employees is very wide of the mark. I have extensive experience of both types and can confidently say their are good and bad (and bloody awful) in both.
That's where the BJO leftie blinkers come down - if your pay is transferred from a govt bank you are a saint and in the job for altruistic reasons. If an evil private sector capitalist firm pays your wages you are making grannies drink out of vases.
The same nurse if she decides to work for an agency can earn significantly more and cost the hospital up to £1000 per shift.
Eh 5 times the cost ? Is this an emergency call out rate ? Either way sounds like poor management and staff planning. No business would operate like that for long.
Perhaps why Hinchingbrook is such a success - some proper cost controls now in place.
No it doesn't. Simply quoting the 93, 97 or 99% myth shows where you get your information from and it sure as hell isn't science.
And the fact that you think the very scattered and partial NOAA data is more accurate than the satellite data also shows your utter ignorance.
By the way Hadley make use of the satellite data. If you actually had the first idea about the science you would know that.
My understanding of the satellite temperature sets (RSS, UAH) is that they measure the temperature of the lower troposphere, rather than the near surface temperature of the most prominent global temperature data sets (Hadley**, GISS, etc).
The satellite data has a number of serious shortcomings (calibration, verification, combining records from different satellites) which are different to the shortcomings of the in-situ observations (coverage, urban heat island, lack of metadata).
There is no such thing as the One True Answer, so one has to take all the data in the round. Given the uncertainties it's not possible to say definitively that a particular month is the warmest on record - this is only true for the central estimate using some observational systems.
Unfortunately, self-identified "sceptics" can be very immature about this uncertainty, misconstruing a lack of statistically significant warming since an arbitrary past date as evidence for a lack of any warming whatsoever - it is impossible to take such people seriously.
And now that we have the lovely ARGO data for the oceans it's all pretty much irrelevant anyway. Far much more heat accumulates in the oceans than the atmosphere, and the oceans show that this heat is continuing to accumulate and the globe is continuing to warm - even if this isn't always obvious from the near-surface and lower troposphere datasets where there is more weather and data-artefact noise.
Of course, I know that when challenged on this you don't dispute that the globe has warmed, so it's a bit odd that you should be so disputatious about it now. And we've just had the weakest solar cycle for many decades. If the warming of recent decades had been solely or mainly due to the sun we should have seen an actual cooling now as a result - but we haven't. Your hypothesis is disproved. Perhaps time to look at carbon dioxide again?
** No-one in the scientific community talks about the "Hadley" dataset, because they have several. Which one uses the satellite data? HadCRUT4 doesn't.
"The only Acute hospital run completely by private health firm is Hinchinbrooke run by Circle "
And which has by all accounts been doing a very good job and, of course, the process for them taking over a failed, never mind failing, hospital was set in motion by Labour.
As for the two Mirror articles, I regard them with the same contempt as I would similar pieces in the Daily Mail. There is probably a hint of truth in there somewhere but frankly to unravel the truth from the propaganda would take too much time. Contracts to run acute hospitals, which is what we are talking about, are not, we may be sure, being handed over to Conservative Party donors.
Sorry you clearly do not have a clue what you are talking about. Acute services are being privatised every week and Tory donors will financially gain from the awards of those contracts.
First you claim an agency nurse costs 30% more,when that argument gets shot down in flames you then move the goal posts and claim that an agency nurse costs 500% more.
Pure comedy gold.
'.A senior NHS nurse with 20 years experience costs about £200 per shift including on costs (Your pension point). The same nurse if she decides to work for an agency can earn significantly more and cost the hospital up to £1000 per shift.'
"The only Acute hospital run completely by private health firm is Hinchinbrooke run by Circle "
And which has by all accounts been doing a very good job and, of course, the process for them taking over a failed, never mind failing, hospital was set in motion by Labour.
As for the two Mirror articles, I regard them with the same contempt as I would similar pieces in the Daily Mail. There is probably a hint of truth in there somewhere but frankly to unravel the truth from the propaganda would take too much time. Contracts to run acute hospitals, which is what we are talking about, are not, we may be sure, being handed over to Conservative Party donors.
Sorry you clearly do not have a clue what you are talking about. Acute services are being privatised every week and Tory donors will financially gain from the awards of those contracts.
If that is true then give us the names and details of the contractors and the contracts. Please don't expect to me to take up the cause on the back of articles in the Daily Mirror.
Whether it's third, fourth or sixth warmest on record is in the noise level. AGW is happening, the evidence is there and is being refined continuously by scientists using what is known as the scientific method ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method ). The vast majority of scientists are not climate change deniers ( http://www.salon.com/2014/03/25/10853_out_of_10855_scientists_agree_man_made_global_warming_is_happening/ ). The scientific method is designed to work out what is happening based on experimentation. When there are contrary indications experiments are made to see if the results are repeatable.If so the theory is refined. Newton wasn't wrong, but Einstein's work extended our knowledge. AGW is an important subject and needs to be talked about logically.
As I have pointed out to you before you are wrong on almost every salient point. Which is what you get for believing blogs.
Oh and as I have also pointed out to you before when you mistakenly tried to make use of it, you clearly do not understand the first thing about the scientific method. Repeatability and experimental confirmation are the basis of that method - but models are not experiments and cannot be used as a verification method. Additionally it is necessary to eliminate completely all other possible mechanisms for a hypothesis to be confirmed. AGW fails as a hypothesis because it has failed to make predictions that are observable by experimentation or observation and has failed to eliminate the many other possible causes of warming.
The Greenhouse gas experiment conducted in a laboratory by my Great Uncle (and the reason they named the Tyndall Centre after him) has only limited application in a global climate setting. Even those who support the AGW hypothesis know the limitations of that set of experiments which is why the argument on both sides is about feedback mechanisms both positive and negative. It is the balance between those mechanisms (forcings in climate study terminology) which determines whether or not man is causing the warming trend. I suggest before you start trying to quote basic scientific principles you actually go and learn something about the science.
Why to AGW deniers insult anyone who disagrees with them? I don't deny that Climate Science is very complex, but the scientific consensus is clear. http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/8/2/024024/article ( I'm sure that there is some raeson why you do not accept this ;-) ) I am not emotionally attached to AGW, I would prefer it not to be happening. In the meantime try not to be rude to people who disagree with you.
"The only Acute hospital run completely by private health firm is Hinchinbrooke run by Circle "
And which has by all accounts been doing a very good job and, of course, the process for them taking over a failed, never mind failing, hospital was set in motion by Labour.
As for the two Mirror articles, I regard them with the same contempt as I would similar pieces in the Daily Mail. There is probably a hint of truth in there somewhere but frankly to unravel the truth from the propaganda would take too much time. Contracts to run acute hospitals, which is what we are talking about, are not, we may be sure, being handed over to Conservative Party donors.
Sorry you clearly do not have a clue what you are talking about. Acute services are being privatised every week and Tory donors will financially gain from the awards of those contracts.
Ludicrous post - putting your words into other people's posts does nothing to alter the accuracy of their argument - are you denying that Labour started the process and do you want Hinchinbrooke Hospital back under state cotrol?
Matthew Goodwin (@GoodwinMJ) 23/07/2014 12:58 New BNP leader Adam Walker says leadership style will be "very different" to Nick Griffin, and "extremist language and dogma is unwelcome".
Mr. Song, 'denier' is a rather loaded term, given its primary use against those who claim the Holocaust never happened.
The Earth's climate has always changed, and I'm yet to be convinced the last blink of a geological eye is due to mankind's activities. As for consensus, that's irrelevant. Science isn't about popularity. One ugly fact can destroy the most beautiful of theories.
Can't quite recall the global warming model that forecast 18 years or so of flat-lining temperatures.
As forecast by yours truly a few weeks back Frank Dobson has now officially said that he will not stand as the Labour candidate for Holborn St Pancras at the next GE. Now the fun will really begin. Given where the seat is and how safe it is, there'll be no end of people putting themselves forward to take over. One line of thought is that whoever is chosen should have the stature to walk straight into a ministerial role. If members take that line then the early favourite would probably be former Director of Public Prosecutions Keir Starmer, who has been running a shadow campaign for a long time. Current Camden council leader Sarah Hayward would also be heavily favoured, as would former leader and current chair of the constituency party, Raj Chada.
If it were down to me, though, then the rank outsider Patrick French would get it. He was born and brought up in the constituency, and knows it inside out. He has practised as a doctor in, among other places, Liverpool, South Africa and London for the last 30 years, so has seen plenty of real life. He is now a consultant specialising in, ahem, downstairs conditions, as well as AIDs/HIV. He would be a strongly independent presence on the Labour benches, but one very wedded to everything that the Labour party should be about. In short, he is exactly the kind of MP that we should have more of in Parliament and that Labour desperately needs. He would, I believe (though cannot say for sure) be the only practising medical doctor in the PLP. He's also a very old friend of mine!
Steven Moffat has confirmed that he still wants Lord of the Rings director Peter Jackson to direct an episode of Doctor Who, and talks are ongoing to make it happen.
ICM was the most accurate at GE2010 (refer to PB rule 1 above)
Well at GE 2010 it understimated Lab by 2% and Con by 1%
ComRes and Populus got the Con % spot on and were both only 2% wrong on Lab. Mori got both main parties within 1%
Despite that PB Rule 1 applies because ICM was less wrong on LD %
Full details on main 2 parties differences between each poll and the actual result?
ICM Guardian: Con -1; Lab -2: ComRes/ITV/Independent: Con 0; Lab -2: Angus Reid/PB: Con -1; Lab -6; Populus/Times: Con 0; Lab -2; YouGov/Sun: Con -2; Lab -2; Harris/Daily Mail: Con -2; Lab -1; MORI/London Evening Standard: Con -1; Lab -1;
But apparently PB rule 1 is not to be challenged.
Good post. My impression over the years is, as others have said, that ICM's weighting makes it less bouncy because they assume, historically correctly, that people tend to drift back to their old parties). By election day the polls are all pretty similar, as you point out - all those figures except Angus Reid are just MOE variation.
My reservation about ICM (and Populus) is that their assumptions about drifting back and certainty to vote may well be out in the current climate. The rise of UKIP has put polling in uncharted waters, and any sort of fix to address past problems in assessing responses may be problematic. Specifically, there are almost no "Former UKIP voters" so the adjustment doesn't necessarily pick up people who don't know and will take them as the "change" option, and many LibDem voters seem so disgruntled this time round that I really doubt if they're going to drift back.
Ha Ha Ha ... Non partisan , what a bunch of fannies. A bunch of cringe making nobodies embarrassing themselves whilst taking Tories money. Pathetic cringe worthy tripe.
I suppose it will keep the male mannequin husbands happy... But shouldn't these female mannequins be raped or lashed for flaunting themselves in shop windows?
Matthew Goodwin (@GoodwinMJ) 23/07/2014 12:58 New BNP leader Adam Walker says leadership style will be "very different" to Nick Griffin, and "extremist language and dogma is unwelcome".
Convicted drink driver
Narrowly avoided prison after driving his Land Rover over a village green in pursuit of 11 year-old children, then slashing their bicycle tyres with a stanley knife. Then working as a secondary school teacher, Walker was banned from the profession for life over this incident.
In a previous standards hearing, Walker was found to have posted racist messages on the internet during a lesson. He used the username “Corporal Fox” to suggest a military link.
Wore military fatigues to falsely suggest he was a member of the British armed forces — before admitting he hadn’t served a day in his life.
First you claim an agency nurse costs 30% more,when that argument gets shot down in flames you then move the goal posts and claim that an agency nurse costs 500% more.
Pure comedy gold.
'.A senior NHS nurse with 20 years experience costs about £200 per shift including on costs (Your pension point). The same nurse if she decides to work for an agency can earn significantly more and cost the hospital up to £1000 per shift.'
I think he meant agency nurses are 30% more expensive but 500% less caring than public sector "angels".
As forecast by yours truly a few weeks back Frank Dobson has now officially said that he will not stand as the Labour candidate for Holborn St Pancras at the next GE. Now the fun will really begin. Given where the seat is and how safe it is, there'll be no end of people putting themselves forward to take over. One line of thought is that whoever is chosen should have the stature to walk straight into a ministerial role. If members take that line then the early favourite would probably be former Director of Public Prosecutions Keir Starmer, who has been running a shadow campaign for a long time. Current Camden council leader Sarah Hayward would also be heavily favoured, as would former leader and current chair of the constituency party, Raj Chada.
If it were down to me, though, then the rank outsider Patrick French would get it. He was born and brought up in the constituency, and knows it inside out. He has practised as a doctor in, among other places, Liverpool, South Africa and London for the last 30 years, so has seen plenty of real life. He is now a consultant specialising in, ahem, downstairs conditions, as well as AIDs/HIV. He would be a strongly independent presence on the Labour benches, but one very wedded to everything that the Labour party should be about. In short, he is exactly the kind of MP that we should have more of in Parliament and that Labour desperately needs. He would, I believe (though cannot say for sure) be the only practising medical doctor in the PLP. He's also a very old friend of mine!
with a beard like that these days he should really be a Tory.
Well, I've messaged you with what I *think* our bets were. I really must write these things down somewhere sometime.
I'll message you our bet as well.
Oh, I wont forget that one in a hurry! Havent had such good value since Mark Senior offered me 8/1 on Caroline Lucas retaining her seat
Wow ...... is that bet for real?
Oh yes.
Not quite in the same league as tim's evens on Osborne apologising to the House for being a bit political (which was just free money) but great value all the same.
I have £50 at evens with @Fluffy_Thoughts of this parish that 1 barrel of Brent Crude Oil will be above £50 at Year End. (He is unders).
Mr. Eagles, be careful for what you wish for. It'll end up as a trilogy, and half the last episode will be a horrendously long goodbye, the bastard lovechild of when Tennant left and the end of Return of the King.
Matthew Goodwin (@GoodwinMJ) 23/07/2014 12:58 New BNP leader Adam Walker says leadership style will be "very different" to Nick Griffin, and "extremist language and dogma is unwelcome".
Convicted drink driver
Narrowly avoided prison after driving his Land Rover over a village green in pursuit of 11 year-old children, then slashing their bicycle tyres with a stanley knife. Then working as a secondary school teacher, Walker was banned from the profession for life over this incident.
In a previous standards hearing, Walker was found to have posted racist messages on the internet during a lesson. He used the username “Corporal Fox” to suggest a military link.
Wore military fatigues to falsely suggest he was a member of the British armed forces — before admitting he hadn’t served a day in his life.
"The only Acute hospital run completely by private health firm is Hinchinbrooke run by Circle "
And which has by all accounts been doing a very good job and, of course, the process for them taking over a failed, never mind failing, hospital was set in motion by Labour.
As for the two Mirror articles, I regard them with the same contempt as I would similar pieces in the Daily Mail. There is probably a hint of truth in there somewhere but frankly to unravel the truth from the propaganda would take too much time. Contracts to run acute hospitals, which is what we are talking about, are not, we may be sure, being handed over to Conservative Party donors.
Sorry you clearly do not have a clue what you are talking about. Acute services are being privatised every week and Tory donors will financially gain from the awards of those contracts.
Ludicrous post - putting your words into other people's posts does nothing to alter the accuracy of their argument - are you denying that Labour started the process and do you want Hinchinbrooke Hospital back under state cotrol?
Myself and more importantly the electorate IMHO would prefer hospitals to be under NHS ownership and not in the hands of the private sector. The franchise was awarded in November 2010 again I would think the electorate would think that means it happened under this Government.
Its deficit for 2013/14 is not included in the £200M posted earlier.
The NHS is an issue that the Tories are not trusted on no matter what posters on here would like so the more it comes op in the election the better.
Labours health policy does have flaws but Lab lead on NHS will remain IMHO.
Matthew Goodwin (@GoodwinMJ) 23/07/2014 12:58 New BNP leader Adam Walker says leadership style will be "very different" to Nick Griffin, and "extremist language and dogma is unwelcome".
Convicted drink driver
Narrowly avoided prison after driving his Land Rover over a village green in pursuit of 11 year-old children, then slashing their bicycle tyres with a stanley knife. Then working as a secondary school teacher, Walker was banned from the profession for life over this incident.
In a previous standards hearing, Walker was found to have posted racist messages on the internet during a lesson. He used the username “Corporal Fox” to suggest a military link.
Wore military fatigues to falsely suggest he was a member of the British armed forces — before admitting he hadn’t served a day in his life.
As forecast by yours truly a few weeks back Frank Dobson has now officially said that he will not stand as the Labour candidate for Holborn St Pancras at the next GE. Now the fun will really begin. Given where the seat is and how safe it is, there'll be no end of people putting themselves forward to take over. One line of thought is that whoever is chosen should have the stature to walk straight into a ministerial role. If members take that line then the early favourite would probably be former Director of Public Prosecutions Keir Starmer, who has been running a shadow campaign for a long time. Current Camden council leader Sarah Hayward would also be heavily favoured, as would former leader and current chair of the constituency party, Raj Chada.
If it were down to me, though, then the rank outsider Patrick French would get it. He was born and brought up in the constituency, and knows it inside out. He has practised as a doctor in, among other places, Liverpool, South Africa and London for the last 30 years, so has seen plenty of real life. He is now a consultant specialising in, ahem, downstairs conditions, as well as AIDs/HIV. He would be a strongly independent presence on the Labour benches, but one very wedded to everything that the Labour party should be about. In short, he is exactly the kind of MP that we should have more of in Parliament and that Labour desperately needs. He would, I believe (though cannot say for sure) be the only practising medical doctor in the PLP. He's also a very old friend of mine!
with a beard like that these days he should really be a Tory.
First you claim an agency nurse costs 30% more,when that argument gets shot down in flames you then move the goal posts and claim that an agency nurse costs 500% more.
Pure comedy gold.
'.A senior NHS nurse with 20 years experience costs about £200 per shift including on costs (Your pension point). The same nurse if she decides to work for an agency can earn significantly more and cost the hospital up to £1000 per shift.'
The argument that an NHS nurse can earn 30% more by working for an agency has not been shot down as it is true. It is also true that an agency shift can cost £1000 and even after all on costs an agency shift will ALWAYS be bad VFM for the taxpayer.
"The only Acute hospital run completely by private health firm is Hinchinbrooke run by Circle "
And which has by all accounts been doing a very good job and, of course, the process for them taking over a failed, never mind failing, hospital was set in motion by Labour.
As for the two Mirror articles, I regard them with the same contempt as I would similar pieces in the Daily Mail. There is probably a hint of truth in there somewhere but frankly to unravel the truth from the propaganda would take too much time. Contracts to run acute hospitals, which is what we are talking about, are not, we may be sure, being handed over to Conservative Party donors.
Sorry you clearly do not have a clue what you are talking about. Acute services are being privatised every week and Tory donors will financially gain from the awards of those contracts.
Ludicrous post - putting your words into other people's posts does nothing to alter the accuracy of their argument - are you denying that Labour started the process and do you want Hinchinbrooke Hospital back under state cotrol?
Myself and more importantly the electorate IMHO would prefer hospitals to be under NHS ownership and not in the hands of the private sector. The franchise was awarded in November 2010 again I would think the electorate would think that means it happened under this Government.
Its deficit for 2013/14 is not included in the £200M posted earlier.
The NHS is an issue that the Tories are not trusted on no matter what posters on here would like so the more it comes op in the election the better.
Labours health policy does have flaws but Lab lead on NHS will remain IMHO.
A sad post, Mr. Owls, very sad. You seem to see the NHS through the eyes of an ex-employee and primarily in terms of politics. I as see it through the eyes of a patient and primarily in terms of care and outcomes for patients. Still I expect your view will make the most noise, and so gather most headlines.
Isn't it a shame that so many people are trying to use something that could unite as a tool of division. Very sad.
The satellite data has a number of serious shortcomings (calibration, verification, combining records from different satellites) which are different to the shortcomings of the in-situ observations (coverage, urban heat island, lack of metadata).
.....[snipped your comment because my answer is too long - apologies]
In have never, as you say, disagreed about the fact that we are warming. Nor is that the basis of the argument with other PB'ers on this thread. The argument is over the claim that this warming is man made to any significant degree. The current pause is a significant problem for those supporting the idea of AGW because it cannot be accounted for within their modelling.
I am somewhat confused by your differentiation between the lower troposphere measurements and surface data given that the lower troposphere includes the surface and is therefore a much better indicator of overall warming than just picking random stations. Overall the satellite data is far more sound than the surface data which is extremely prone to local variation, extrapolation error and - as we have seen with all the data sets - regular revision of the data to match current paradigms.
Your claims about deriving falsification from the weakest sun in decades is also itself false since the weakening is relatively recent - we are probably less than half way through and it will almost certainly include the next cycle as well - and the effects of that are only just starting to be seen. Whilst we may not yet have cooling we certainly have the pause which would indicate the hypothesis is still sound.
In the end I still have to ask, if the science is so sound, then why did the main proponents feel it necessary to try and remove accepted and established data from the record related to earlier warming periods. It was that - which happens to be my area of expertise - which first made me doubt the way in which this hypothesis is being developed and - given that the revisions have now been found to be unjustified - I am even less inclined to agree with a 'consensus' which appears to me to be entirely false and unscientific.
Why to AGW deniers insult anyone who disagrees with them? I don't deny that Climate Science is very complex, but the scientific consensus is clear. http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/8/2/024024/article ( I'm sure that there is some raeson why you do not accept this ;-) ) I am not emotionally attached to AGW, I would prefer it not to be happening. In the meantime try not to be rude to people who disagree with you.
Scientific consensus is an oxymoron. Science does not and never has operated by consensus. I suspect good old Richard Feynman would be utterly scornful of that claim were he not too polite (and of course dead).
By the way, the use of the phrase 'denier' negates any need for me to be polite to you as you have already disregarded any pretense of politeness.
Leave that shovel alone,or you'll never make it out of that hole.
Think you should have given that advice to Dave re Lansley the HSC Act unfortunately now the financial hole its created is too big for the Tories not to lose votes on the NHS.
I know he might have sacked him now but he should have taken the shovel to him in 2011
I want Peter Jackson to get on and remake the Dambusters. He's been sitting on that one since forever.
What would the dog be called?
The dog should be called "Athos" and should be recast from a black-labrador (itself surely a grave insult) to being a liver and white English springer spaniel.
JHurstLama - its a pity one cannot give a post an approivalmmarking because i fully agree with your comment on the NHS. its a great pity the NHS use the NHS as a political football.
Whilst I am at it a fully agree with Mr Tyndall's comment re man made global warming. there has been none for 8 years and the satellite record is not unsound. The land based record where warmists cherry pick and interpolate readings is far from satisfactory.
I want Peter Jackson to get on and remake the Dambusters. He's been sitting on that one since forever.
What would the dog be called?
The dog should be called "Athos" and should be recast from a black-labrador (itself surely a grave insult) to being a liver and white English springer spaniel.
Oh, and the story should be changed that the dog doesn't get run over because that is too sad.
"The only Acute hospital run completely by private health firm is Hinchinbrooke run by Circle "
And which has by all accounts been doing a very good job and, of course, the process for them taking over a failed, never mind failing, hospital was set in motion by Labour.
As for the two Mirror articles, I regard them with the same contempt as I would similar pieces in the Daily Mail. There is probably a hint of truth in there somewhere but frankly to unravel the truth from the propaganda would take too much time. Contracts to run acute hospitals, which is what we are talking about, are not, we may be sure, being handed over to Conservative Party donors.
Sorry you clearly do not have a clue what you are talking about. Acute services are being privatised every week and Tory donors will financially gain from the awards of those contracts.
Ludicrous post - putting your words into other people's posts does nothing to alter the accuracy of their argument - are you denying that Labour started the process and do you want Hinchinbrooke Hospital back under state cotrol?
"The only Acute hospital run completely by private health firm is Hinchinbrooke run by Circle "
And which has by all accounts been doing a very good job and, of course, the process for them taking over a failed, never mind failing, hospital was set in motion by Labour.
As for the two Mirror articles, I regard them with the same contempt as I would similar pieces in the Daily Mail. There is probably a hint of truth in there somewhere but frankly to unravel the truth from the propaganda would take too much time. Contracts to run acute hospitals, which is what we are talking about, are not, we may be sure, being handed over to Conservative Party donors.
Sorry you clearly do not have a clue what you are talking about. Acute services are being privatised every week and Tory donors will financially gain from the awards of those contracts.
Ludicrous post - putting your words into other people's posts does nothing to alter the accuracy of their argument - are you denying that Labour started the process and do you want Hinchinbrooke Hospital back under state cotrol?
A committment to more privatisation in the NHS was in Labour's 2010 manifesto.
'Think you should have given that advice to Dave re Lansley the HSC Act unfortunately now the financial hole its created is too big for the Tories not to lose votes on the NHS.'
Such a disaster that Labour claim they won't reverse the reforms or has their policy changed to-day? After all it was Ed that told us a couple of years ago that there was only 10 weeks left to save the NHS.
Remind us how much of the NHS trusts budgets are being spent on interest payments for New Labour's PFI's
Ethnic Athos the spaniel helps a cast of black women to rescue the tree frogs, a film in white and black. Hmm...not quite what I was hoping to see...bit lacking in Lancasters, explosions, floods and derring-do by the sound of it....
Athos The Spaniel sounds more like Harriet Harman's sort of film.
Myself and more importantly the electorate IMHO would prefer hospitals to be under NHS ownership and not in the hands of the private sector. The franchise was awarded in November 2010 again I would think the electorate would think that means it happened under this Government.
Its deficit for 2013/14 is not included in the £200M posted earlier.
The NHS is an issue that the Tories are not trusted on no matter what posters on here would like so the more it comes op in the election the better.
Labours health policy does have flaws but Lab lead on NHS will remain IMHO.
A sad post, Mr. Owls, very sad. You seem to see the NHS through the eyes of an ex-employee and primarily in terms of politics. I as see it through the eyes of a patient and primarily in terms of care and outcomes for patients. Still I expect your view will make the most noise, and so gather most headlines.
Isn't it a shame that so many people are trying to use something that could unite as a tool of division. Very sad.
Its because I love the NHS and can see patients directly suffering from Government policy that i am so passionate about it.
I care more about the NHS than i care about Labour, Ed and politics in general and almost everything else. I have spent my life trying to make sure patients receive top class care. . One of the most efficient Health systems in the world with some of the best patient outcomes in the world is been hacked to death for political purposes IMHO.
Labours health policy, particularly what looks like an extension of the disastorous better care fund is pretty crap too and I will say so if they introduce it but it not an ideological attack on NHS values which I believe is the case by some on the right.
Its because I love the NHS and can see patients directly suffering from Government policy that i am so passionate about it.
I care more about the NHS than i care about Labour, Ed and politics in general and almost everything else. I have spent my life trying to make sure patients receive top class care. . One of the most efficient Health systems in the world with some of the best patient outcomes in the world is been hacked to death for political purposes IMHO.
Labours health policy, particularly what looks like an extension of the disastorous better care fund is pretty crap too and I will say so if they introduce it but it not an ideological attack on NHS values which I believe is the case by some on the right.
Comments
Not quite in the same league as tim's evens on Osborne apologising to the House for being a bit political (which was just free money) but great value all the same.
That's a good time in his heat.
How do you propose to make experiments to see if your results are repeatable? Hint: how many spare earths do you have access to, for your subjects and controls?
I guarantee the NHS acute hospital financial crisis will be an election issue.
Shut A&E and its suddenly profitable to be an Acute Trust (cherry picking opportunity there for the Tory donors who are being handed contracts)
Not the end of the civilised world for non NHS users i suppose
Would probably make him fav in a match w Sturridge who is about 6/1 I think
Is that good or bad? How does it compare to the private sector? What sort of staff are we talking about? What are the additional costs of employing temporary or agency staff as opposed to full-time employees on a pensionable contract? What has caused this increase since 2010/11?
The point that struck me from your post, Mr. Owls, was that the NHS FT sector employs more than half a million people.
Thanks....had a twenty minute lie down on the back of it so must have been hard work!
I pointed this out to you last month when you repeated this idiotic claim and you were strangely silent.
On the two main satellite systems May was either the 3rd or 6th warmest on record. June was the 4th warmest.
Given that everyone knows the world has been warming slowly (and naturally) since the end of the last Maunder minimum it is no surprise that the highest temperatures are the most recent. Of course that says nothing about cause in spite of what the scientifically illiterate like yourself might like to claim.
Whether it's third, fourth or sixth warmest on record is in the noise level.
AGW is happening, the evidence is there and is being refined continuously by scientists using what is known as the scientific method ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method ). The vast majority of scientists are not climate change deniers ( http://www.salon.com/2014/03/25/10853_out_of_10855_scientists_agree_man_made_global_warming_is_happening/ ).
The scientific method is designed to work out what is happening based on experimentation. When there are contrary indications experiments are made to see if the results are repeatable.If so the theory is refined. Newton wasn't wrong, but Einstein's work extended our knowledge.
AGW is an important subject and needs to be talked about logically.
Almost wholly irrelevant. AGW isn't a fundamental theory reducible to nice simple equations like Newton's and Einstein's, it's about the best way to model and predict a highly complex and chaotic system. We know that this is an almost intractably difficult proceeding with any other system of equivalent complexity (like the human body, or the british electorate). Why is it uniquely easy in climate modelling (which it must be if it produces one answer which convinces virtually everybody)?
How do you propose to make experiments to see if your results are repeatable? Hint: how many spare earths do you have access to, for your subjects and controls?
I'll ignore the sarcasm.
I never said that it was easy to model the climate, but it is being done and conclusions are being drawn. Governments, not least the Chinese government ( http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/globalwarming/10804221/Global-warming-China-and-US-in-crucial-talks-on-cutting-carbon-dioxide-emissions.html ) are spending a lot of money on attempting to ameliorate AGW.
Experiments on individual aspects of climate change are repeatable and I'm sure you could name a few. For example the amount of CO2 absorbed by the oceans.
Obviously we only have one Earth, which is a good reason to get the science right, and to accept the best estimates we have.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/peaches-geldof-inquest-tragic-final-moments-of-socialites-life-revealed-9622553.html
http://www.yourthurrock.com/2014/07/23/jackie-doyle-price-and-polly-billington-defiant-on-ukip-poll/
In all seriousness, although there do not seem to be many Labour posters in here who actually bet, if you seriously think Ukip are going to implode, 8/11 Labour in Thurrock can't be a bad bet
569,000 voters ( i mean workers) in the Acute sector alone
http://www.itv.com/news/update/2014-07-23/tory-mp-writes-to-met-over-lib-dem-mps-gaza-rocket-tweet/
Really? I care very much about the NHS (wouldn't be here without it )and am fascinated by this claim. Who are these Tory donors who are being handed contracts to run acute hospitals? Please give me the names and details of the contracts and I'll be on to my MP and everyone else I can reach like a shot.
As for closing A&E units, we locally have, for many years, been fighting an insane plan first introduced under Labour to push all Mid-Sussex A&E customers down to Brighton. Did Labour want to close A&E units so that Tory donors could be handed NHS contracts?
Why on earth would anyone be surprised that you can find issues in such a massive organisation? It would nothing short of a miracle if there weren't. But, like all Labour supporters, you seem curiously uninterested in the fact that there were problems before May 2010 as well, and even less interested in the fact that one of the worst of those inherited problems - Hinchingbrooke - has been turned around. By Circle Health.
The ideological obsessiveness of the Left regarding the NHS - actively objecting to efficiency improvements, if they come via sensible use of private providers - never ceases to amaze me. After all, GP services are run almost entirely by for-profit private providers, but no-one on the Left seems to have noticed that.
Edit: Corrected figures
'In my experience anout 80% of agency staff are nursing, agency nurses are working for a 20 to 30% premium compared to the pay frozen NHS ones and care much less for the patients at the various hospitals where they work than the permanent ones'
If you take out the employer NI contributions,pension payments,sick leave,holiday pay etc.there's probably not much difference.
1. To share them openly and transparently with absolute clarity on what the inputs, process and outputs are - they need to be clearly understood by anyone who is interested to check.
2. To share openly and transparently where the input data comes from.
3. They need to explain the past accurately. Over a long timeframe.
I'm not sure current cliamte models, incl those used by the IPCC, meet such scientific criteria.
23/07/2014 12:54
Danish Met Office satellite readings show Arctic Sea Ice Extent approaching 10 year summer maximum.
Oh and as I have also pointed out to you before when you mistakenly tried to make use of it, you clearly do not understand the first thing about the scientific method. Repeatability and experimental confirmation are the basis of that method - but models are not experiments and cannot be used as a verification method. Additionally it is necessary to eliminate completely all other possible mechanisms for a hypothesis to be confirmed. AGW fails as a hypothesis because it has failed to make predictions that are observable by experimentation or observation and has failed to eliminate the many other possible causes of warming.
The Greenhouse gas experiment conducted in a laboratory by my Great Uncle (and the reason they named the Tyndall Centre after him) has only limited application in a global climate setting. Even those who support the AGW hypothesis know the limitations of that set of experiments which is why the argument on both sides is about feedback mechanisms both positive and negative. It is the balance between those mechanisms (forcings in climate study terminology) which determines whether or not man is causing the warming trend. I suggest before you start trying to quote basic scientific principles you actually go and learn something about the science.
Mind you, I think Big John is underestimating the additional cost of employing agency nurses. Those agencies have to take their wack out of the system. I also think that his idea that agency nurses care less about their patients than full-time employees is very wide of the mark. I have extensive experience of both types and can confidently say their are good and bad (and bloody awful) in both.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/10983406/Ed-Miliband-must-rouse-himself-from-the-chloroform-of-caution.html
"Should he shirk the challenge, in the year that family life was sucked into the vortex of global war, then his epitaph would be a damning one: that he proved too small a figure for this perilous age."
Hopefully one of them can get their scoring boots on !
And the fact that you think the very scattered and partial NOAA data is more accurate than the satellite data also shows your utter ignorance.
By the way Hadley make use of the satellite data. If you actually had the first idea about the science you would know that.
'BBC News ticker suggests The Queen tested positive for morphine'
http://tinyurl.com/ofgw6hs
F1: BBC gossip column has David Davis and Ming Campbell requesting the Russian Grand Prix be cancelled [not sure they know Ecclestone only speaks in currency].
There's also a rumour Mexico will get its race back next year. Wouldn't be a shock, but with Azerbaijan likely on the calendar as well something will have to give.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/nhs-hospital-corporation-america-donates-2246513
or this one http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/fury-tory-party-donors-handed-3123469
Was Andy B upset that having sold of Hinchinbrooke, he wasn't getting any of the reward?
"But a spokesman said: “Circle has never made any donations to a political party. The vast majority of Circle’s NHS contracts actually started under the last Labour government.”
And a Tory spokesman added: “The decision to contract out Hinchingbrooke was taken by Andy Burnham.”
To be honest, no, I have not read the Govt's proposal, cos it is just that, a proposal.
From what I've heard talking to people who know about these things it is GO being just a little too clever for any ones good. It is a potential explosion on a massive scale.
Too many people will get their hands on "their" money and low and behold when the next major economy bust, the one after that plus the one following happen, then too many people will be expecting the state to extract them.
Until approx. 2055, the population of the UK will be out of kilter with the majority being over the age of 60 - unless, of course we have massive immigration to help pay taxes and wipe the bums of the elderly.
Dangerous free thought could emerge from this - high time the government took over all our spending.
"The only Acute hospital run completely by private health firm is Hinchinbrooke run by Circle "
And which has by all accounts been doing a very good job and, of course, the process for them taking over a failed, never mind failing, hospital was set in motion by Labour.
As for the two Mirror articles, I regard them with the same contempt as I would similar pieces in the Daily Mail. There is probably a hint of truth in there somewhere but frankly to unravel the truth from the propaganda would take too much time. Contracts to run acute hospitals, which is what we are talking about, are not, we may be sure, being handed over to Conservative Party donors.
The agency tries to make as bigger cut as possible of course
So even if agency nurses are as good as NHS ones they are not 20 to 30% better and then add on the agency cut amounting to over £1m at my local trust. This is not good use of taxpayers money.
Perhaps why Hinchingbrook is such a success - some proper cost controls now in place.
The satellite data has a number of serious shortcomings (calibration, verification, combining records from different satellites) which are different to the shortcomings of the in-situ observations (coverage, urban heat island, lack of metadata).
There is no such thing as the One True Answer, so one has to take all the data in the round. Given the uncertainties it's not possible to say definitively that a particular month is the warmest on record - this is only true for the central estimate using some observational systems.
Unfortunately, self-identified "sceptics" can be very immature about this uncertainty, misconstruing a lack of statistically significant warming since an arbitrary past date as evidence for a lack of any warming whatsoever - it is impossible to take such people seriously.
And now that we have the lovely ARGO data for the oceans it's all pretty much irrelevant anyway. Far much more heat accumulates in the oceans than the atmosphere, and the oceans show that this heat is continuing to accumulate and the globe is continuing to warm - even if this isn't always obvious from the near-surface and lower troposphere datasets where there is more weather and data-artefact noise.
Of course, I know that when challenged on this you don't dispute that the globe has warmed, so it's a bit odd that you should be so disputatious about it now. And we've just had the weakest solar cycle for many decades. If the warming of recent decades had been solely or mainly due to the sun we should have seen an actual cooling now as a result - but we haven't. Your hypothesis is disproved. Perhaps time to look at carbon dioxide again?
** No-one in the scientific community talks about the "Hadley" dataset, because they have several. Which one uses the satellite data? HadCRUT4 doesn't.
First you claim an agency nurse costs 30% more,when that argument gets shot down in flames you then move the goal posts and claim that an agency nurse costs 500% more.
Pure comedy gold.
'.A senior NHS nurse with 20 years experience costs about £200 per shift including on costs (Your pension point). The same nurse if she decides to work for an agency can earn significantly more and cost the hospital up to £1000 per shift.'
I don't deny that Climate Science is very complex, but the scientific consensus is clear.
http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/8/2/024024/article ( I'm sure that there is some raeson why you do not accept this ;-) )
I am not emotionally attached to AGW, I would prefer it not to be happening. In the meantime try not to be rude to people who disagree with you.
23/07/2014 12:58
New BNP leader Adam Walker says leadership style will be "very different" to Nick Griffin, and "extremist language and dogma is unwelcome".
The Earth's climate has always changed, and I'm yet to be convinced the last blink of a geological eye is due to mankind's activities. As for consensus, that's irrelevant. Science isn't about popularity. One ugly fact can destroy the most beautiful of theories.
Can't quite recall the global warming model that forecast 18 years or so of flat-lining temperatures.
If it were down to me, though, then the rank outsider Patrick French would get it. He was born and brought up in the constituency, and knows it inside out. He has practised as a doctor in, among other places, Liverpool, South Africa and London for the last 30 years, so has seen plenty of real life. He is now a consultant specialising in, ahem, downstairs conditions, as well as AIDs/HIV. He would be a strongly independent presence on the Labour benches, but one very wedded to everything that the Labour party should be about. In short, he is exactly the kind of MP that we should have more of in Parliament and that Labour desperately needs. He would, I believe (though cannot say for sure) be the only practising medical doctor in the PLP. He's also a very old friend of mine!
Steven Moffat has confirmed that he still wants Lord of the Rings director Peter Jackson to direct an episode of Doctor Who, and talks are ongoing to make it happen.
http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/news/the-hobbits-peter-jackson-will-probably-direct-doctor-who-episode-says-steven-moffat-9623483.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2702545/Now-ISIS-cracks-MANNEQUINS-Shopkeepers-told-Muslim-extremists-cover-faces-window-models-veils.html
Narrowly avoided prison after driving his Land Rover over a village green in pursuit of 11 year-old children, then slashing their bicycle tyres with a stanley knife. Then working as a secondary school teacher, Walker was banned from the profession for life over this incident.
In a previous standards hearing, Walker was found to have posted racist messages on the internet during a lesson. He used the username “Corporal Fox” to suggest a military link.
Wore military fatigues to falsely suggest he was a member of the British armed forces — before admitting he hadn’t served a day in his life.
http://politicalscrapbook.net/2014/07/adam-walker-new-bnp-leader-convictions/
Lefties and numbers are never a good mix..
Look at this !
It's going to be like Spain here come 2050
I shall enjoy my retirement sunbathing on the Costa Del England.
Its deficit for 2013/14 is not included in the £200M posted earlier.
The NHS is an issue that the Tories are not trusted on no matter what posters on here would like so the more it comes op in the election the better.
Labours health policy does have flaws but Lab lead on NHS will remain IMHO.
No need to take my word for it.
Lets talk NHS more with the electorate.
May 2015 would be excellent timing.
CPS charges former MEP, Nicole "Nikki" Sinclaire, with money laundering and misconduct in public office
Leave that shovel alone,or you'll never make it out of that hole.
Isn't it a shame that so many people are trying to use something that could unite as a tool of division. Very sad.
In have never, as you say, disagreed about the fact that we are warming. Nor is that the basis of the argument with other PB'ers on this thread. The argument is over the claim that this warming is man made to any significant degree. The current pause is a significant problem for those supporting the idea of AGW because it cannot be accounted for within their modelling.
I am somewhat confused by your differentiation between the lower troposphere measurements and surface data given that the lower troposphere includes the surface and is therefore a much better indicator of overall warming than just picking random stations. Overall the satellite data is far more sound than the surface data which is extremely prone to local variation, extrapolation error and - as we have seen with all the data sets - regular revision of the data to match current paradigms.
Your claims about deriving falsification from the weakest sun in decades is also itself false since the weakening is relatively recent - we are probably less than half way through and it will almost certainly include the next cycle as well - and the effects of that are only just starting to be seen. Whilst we may not yet have cooling we certainly have the pause which would indicate the hypothesis is still sound.
In the end I still have to ask, if the science is so sound, then why did the main proponents feel it necessary to try and remove accepted and established data from the record related to earlier warming periods. It was that - which happens to be my area of expertise - which first made me doubt the way in which this hypothesis is being developed and - given that the revisions have now been found to be unjustified - I am even less inclined to agree with a 'consensus' which appears to me to be entirely false and unscientific.
By the way, the use of the phrase 'denier' negates any need for me to be polite to you as you have already disregarded any pretense of politeness.
I know he might have sacked him now but he should have taken the shovel to him in 2011
Whilst I am at it a fully agree with Mr Tyndall's comment re man made global warming. there has been none for 8 years and the satellite record is not unsound. The land based record where warmists cherry pick and interpolate readings is far from satisfactory.
They just slur their words. How big a role does this dog have to play?
'Think you should have given that advice to Dave re Lansley the HSC Act unfortunately now the financial hole its created is too big for the Tories not to lose votes on the NHS.'
Such a disaster that Labour claim they won't reverse the reforms or has their policy changed to-day? After all it was Ed that told us a couple of years ago that there was only 10 weeks left to save the NHS.
Remind us how much of the NHS trusts budgets are being spent on interest payments for New Labour's PFI's
Athos The Spaniel sounds more like Harriet Harman's sort of film.
"Comrades! This is your Captain. It is an honour to sail with you today! The order is engage the Commonwealth Games drive!"
I care more about the NHS than i care about Labour, Ed and politics in general and almost everything else. I have spent my life trying to make sure patients receive top class care.
.
One of the most efficient Health systems in the world with some of the best patient outcomes in the world is been hacked to death for political purposes IMHO.
Labours health policy, particularly what looks like an extension of the disastorous better care fund is pretty crap too and I will say so if they introduce it but it not an ideological attack on NHS values which I believe is the case by some on the right.