Mr. Stodge, disagree entirely. Also, an English Parliament is not something that would necessarily be exclusive of giving more power to local councils.
If Scotland gets devomax, the only way for England to have equality is through an English Parliament. We can't have taxes levelled at a smaller scale, it'd divide England into puny, pathetic little regions.
I struggle with the concept of treating England as though it was one homogenous entity. London is very different from rural Devon for example and that has to be recognised. Having power devolved to lower levels doesn't make anyone less "English" - that's absurd.
I have no issue with different tax rates or cities and counties setting their own taxes - New York does it, Stockholm does it - nobody thinks of them as being less American or Swedish respectively. All those who are arguing for an English Parliament really want is perpetual Conservative Government and that would mean, for areas like East Ham, perpetual Opposition (unless of course anyone is advocating having the English Parliament elected under STV in which case that's a very different kettle of worms).
We had a referendum in the North East for a regional assembly, it lost, despite the Labour tendencies they rejected Labour gerrymandering.
I find England to be very homogenous, indeed England is one of the very oldest nation states, if the other countries of the UK have national representation why should England not?
I haven't read the comments on the thread but I have to say yesterday morning's thread header on the expected demise of Nick Clegg must go down as one of the strangest and most inaccurate ones in PB history.
These things happen.
You should see the "Will Ebola effect the outcome of the next General Election" thread I've got planned.
Mr. Stodge, disagree entirely. Also, an English Parliament is not something that would necessarily be exclusive of giving more power to local councils.
If Scotland gets devomax, the only way for England to have equality is through an English Parliament. We can't have taxes levelled at a smaller scale, it'd divide England into puny, pathetic little regions.
I struggle with the concept of treating England as though it was one homogenous entity. London is very different from rural Devon for example and that has to be recognised. Having power devolved to lower levels doesn't make anyone less "English" - that's absurd.
I have no issue with different tax rates or cities and counties setting their own taxes - New York does it, Stockholm does it - nobody thinks of them as being less American or Swedish respectively. All those who are arguing for an English Parliament really want is perpetual Conservative Government and that would mean, for areas like East Ham, perpetual Opposition (unless of course anyone is advocating having the English Parliament elected under STV in which case that's a very different kettle of worms).
Do you struggle with the concept of treating Scotland as though it was one homogenous entity? Glasgow is very different from the rural Highlands. Should that be recognised?
Until one of these "divide England up" people supports dividing up Scotland on a similar basis, it's pretty obvious they're a huge hypocrite.
PM Ed and English first minister Boris? It would be totally destabilising.
Not necessarily. Boris would worry about schools n hospitals and EICIPM would worry about foreign and defence etc. English devolution is coming in some form or other. We're going to have to get used to power residing in diverse places.
So, after years of happily believing the consensus view on warming (i.e. it's happening), I'm beginning to waver a bit. Hard to explain stuff like this...
Note also that arctic ice (if this report is correct) is "back to normal", and there is, apparently, no deep ocean warming to explain the 15 year pause in atmospheric warming.
"We have more to learn" say scientists. Well, yeah. DUH.
Meanwhile the Warmist lobby marches on, though they are possibly marching over a cliff, as confidence in their predictions collapses. Which it must, in the end, if this failure of their model continues.
Guido showed the chart the other day of satellite global surface temperature averages flat for last 18 years now. The IPCC's real problem is that their models can't explain the past, let alone the future.
stodge -no reason to think an English parliament would provide perpetual Tory rule. The main problem with it is that the union couldn't survive. PM Ed and English first minister Boris? It would be totally destabilising. I don't think we can now be complacent about the union. The demographics in Scotland are clear, the NO campaign was completely uninspiring and the coup de grace delivered to Mr Salmond was a 'vow', the outcome from which is not at all clear - though there will be big expectations in Scotland. An increased chance of the Tories staying in power in Westminster won't help either. More than that, the arteries down south are hardening. The English now sense that the Scots don't much like them and are only in this marriage for the money. An antipathy that will no doubt reinforce itself both ways.
Boris would want to be a UK MP running for UK Prime Minister. It would be someone more focused on local issues as English First Minister. What would be destabilising would be PM Ed controlling English-only education and healthcare even though he does not have a mandate in England, or being perpetually defeated on domestic bills. A different UK PM and English first minister would be more stable as they would be dealing with different issues.
So, after years of happily believing the consensus view on warming (i.e. it's happening), I'm beginning to waver a bit. Hard to explain stuff like this...
Note also that arctic ice (if this report is correct) is "back to normal", and there is, apparently, no deep ocean warming to explain the 15 year pause in atmospheric warming.
"We have more to learn" say scientists. Well, yeah. DUH.
Meanwhile the Warmist lobby marches on, though they are possibly marching over a cliff, as confidence in their predictions collapses. Which it must, in the end, if this failure of their model continues.
Guido showed the chart the other day of satellite global surface temperature averages flat for last 18 years now. The IPCC's real problem is that their models can't explain the past, let alone the future.
You can only possibly get 18 years flatness from that graph if you don't know anything about statistics and are arbitrarily picking years. You can claim it has been flat for 11 years, but not for 18.
And, of course, ocean temperatures are also important in calculating overall global temperatures.
So, after years of happily believing the consensus view on warming (i.e. it's happening), I'm beginning to waver a bit. Hard to explain stuff like this...
Note also that arctic ice (if this report is correct) is "back to normal", and there is, apparently, no deep ocean warming to explain the 15 year pause in atmospheric warming.
"We have more to learn" say scientists. Well, yeah. DUH.
Meanwhile the Warmist lobby marches on, though they are possibly marching over a cliff, as confidence in their predictions collapses. Which it must, in the end, if this failure of their model continues.
Climate Change is a better description than Global Warming because of this sort of effect. There isn't a 'Warmist lobby' although I believe there are 'deniers'. Scientists are after the truth. The scientific method is where theories are tested all the time and refined. It IS complicated.
Mr. Stodge, disagree entirely. Also, an English Parliament is not something that would necessarily be exclusive of giving more power to local councils.
If Scotland gets devomax, the only way for England to have equality is through an English Parliament. We can't have taxes levelled at a smaller scale, it'd divide England into puny, pathetic little regions.
I struggle with the concept of treating England as though it was one homogenous entity. London is very different from rural Devon for example and that has to be recognised. Having power devolved to lower levels doesn't make anyone less "English" - that's absurd.
I have no issue with different tax rates or cities and counties setting their own taxes - New York does it, Stockholm does it - nobody thinks of them as being less American or Swedish respectively. All those who are arguing for an English Parliament really want is perpetual Conservative Government and that would mean, for areas like East Ham, perpetual Opposition (unless of course anyone is advocating having the English Parliament elected under STV in which case that's a very different kettle of worms).
Do you struggle with the concept of treating Scotland as though it was one homogenous entity? Glasgow is very different from the rural Highlands. Should that be recognised?
Until one of these "divide England up" people supports dividing up Scotland on a similar basis, it's pretty obvious they're a huge hypocrite.
As one of those people, the simple fact is that I have lived all my life in [southern] England. In London, East Anglia, Berkshire, the Forest (of Dean) and Devon. I feel that I know a bit about England, and as an English person I have opinions on it - which would favour independence for Wessex from London.
I haven't lived in Scotland. I don't know Scotland. If Scotland wishes to devolve power to its counties, or by some other division, then that is a matter for them.
I don't see why you are so intent on insisting that my opinion is invalid, rather than that you disagree with it.
Indeed - we are starting to see it with the London Boroughs talking about a Common Investment Vehicle (or similar) for their Pension Funds. What is interesting and less analogous to your devolution comment is that the combinations seem to be different for different services, so that it is still at Council level where decisions have to be made and influence taken.
Districts are financially small potatoes whereas a county like Surrey has an economy and population similar to that of Birmingham.
And the Surrey borough of Elmbridge (the beating heart of Middle England) pays more income tax than Manchester!
Most of that would be down to John O, Lord of Walton on Thames.
So, after years of happily believing the consensus view on warming (i.e. it's happening), I'm beginning to waver a bit. Hard to explain stuff like this...
Note also that arctic ice (if this report is correct) is "back to normal", and there is, apparently, no deep ocean warming to explain the 15 year pause in atmospheric warming.
"We have more to learn" say scientists. Well, yeah. DUH.
Meanwhile the Warmist lobby marches on, though they are possibly marching over a cliff, as confidence in their predictions collapses. Which it must, in the end, if this failure of their model continues.
The end of the world is nigh. Recurring theme throughout history, 1666 was a big worry, eclipses, volcanic eruptions etc. Just old superstitions dressed up in the modern religious garb of science.
I haven't read the comments on the thread but I have to say yesterday morning's thread header on the expected demise of Nick Clegg must go down as one of the strangest and most inaccurate ones in PB history.
These things happen.
You should see the "Will Ebola effect the outcome of the next General Election" thread I've got planned.
Ross Noble did a 2 hour routine mainly based on Ebola coming to the UK as well as funny references to SINDY last night. He was touring Scotland for 2 weeks of SINDY
Had a great day yesterday.
Hugh Grant quite funny playing Hugh Grant
Dracula shite your pants time in 3D still have bats in my eyes
Mr Noble very funny
And won £400 on WI in cricket ODI
Hope some of you took advantage of my betting post where WI were available at 11/8 when shouldve been well odds on. Went on to win by well over 100 runs
Big John, your cricket tip was widely appreciated.
So, after years of happily believing the consensus view on warming (i.e. it's happening), I'm beginning to waver a bit. Hard to explain stuff like this...
Note also that arctic ice (if this report is correct) is "back to normal", and there is, apparently, no deep ocean warming to explain the 15 year pause in atmospheric warming.
"We have more to learn" say scientists. Well, yeah. DUH.
Meanwhile the Warmist lobby marches on, though they are possibly marching over a cliff, as confidence in their predictions collapses. Which it must, in the end, if this failure of their model continues.
The end of the world is nigh. Recurring theme throughout history, 1666 was a big worry, eclipses, volcanic eruptions etc. Just old superstitions dressed up in the modern religious garb of science.
The difference between Science and Religion is that Science works even if you don't believe.
Mr. Stodge, disagree entirely. Also, an English Parliament is not something that would necessarily be exclusive of giving more power to local councils.
If Scotland gets devomax, the only way for England to have equality is through an English Parliament. We can't have taxes levelled at a smaller scale, it'd divide England into puny, pathetic little regions.
I struggle with the concept of treating England as though it was one homogenous entity. London is very different from rural Devon for example and that has to be recognised. Having power devolved to lower levels doesn't make anyone less "English" - that's absurd.
I have no issue with different tax rates or cities and counties setting their own taxes - New York does it, Stockholm does it - nobody thinks of them as being less American or Swedish respectively. All those who are arguing for an English Parliament really want is perpetual Conservative Government and that would mean, for areas like East Ham, perpetual Opposition (unless of course anyone is advocating having the English Parliament elected under STV in which case that's a very different kettle of worms).
Do you struggle with the concept of treating Scotland as though it was one homogenous entity? Glasgow is very different from the rural Highlands. Should that be recognised?
Until one of these "divide England up" people supports dividing up Scotland on a similar basis, it's pretty obvious they're a huge hypocrite.
As one of those people, the simple fact is that I have lived all my life in [southern] England. In London, East Anglia, Berkshire, the Forest (of Dean) and Devon. I feel that I know a bit about England, and as an English person I have opinions on it - which would favour independence for Wessex from London.
I haven't lived in Scotland. I don't know Scotland. If Scotland wishes to devolve power to its counties, or by some other division, then that is a matter for them.
I don't see why you are so intent on insisting that my opinion is invalid, rather than that you disagree with it.
I feel it's an inconsistent opinion because of arguments like this "If Scotland wishes to devolve power to its counties, or by some other division, then that is a matter for them."
So consistency demands if ENGLAND wishes to devolve power to its counties or some other division (e.g. regions) then that is a matter for the English. But most people are arguing that the UK government should immediately skip the English national decision, and devolve power to regions over the heads of the English.
'I struggle with the concept of treating England as though it was one homogenous entity. London is very different from rural Devon for example and that has to be recognised. '
Edinburgh is very different from the Shetlands and a lot further than London is from Devon,but that's ok as long as it perpetuates the status quo.
I struggle with the concept of treating England as though it was one homogenous entity. London is very different from rural Devon for example and that has to be recognised. Having power devolved to lower levels doesn't make anyone less "English" - that's absurd.
I have no issue with different tax rates or cities and counties setting their own taxes - New York does it, Stockholm does it - nobody thinks of them as being less American or Swedish respectively. All those who are arguing for an English Parliament really want is perpetual Conservative Government and that would mean, for areas like East Ham, perpetual Opposition (unless of course anyone is advocating having the English Parliament elected under STV in which case that's a very different kettle of worms).
Do you struggle with the concept of treating Scotland as though it was one homogenous entity? Glasgow is very different from the rural Highlands. Should that be recognised?
Until one of these "divide England up" people supports dividing up Scotland on a similar basis, it's pretty obvious they're a huge hypocrite.
As one of those people, the simple fact is that I have lived all my life in [southern] England. In London, East Anglia, Berkshire, the Forest (of Dean) and Devon. I feel that I know a bit about England, and as an English person I have opinions on it - which would favour independence for Wessex from London.
I haven't lived in Scotland. I don't know Scotland. If Scotland wishes to devolve power to its counties, or by some other division, then that is a matter for them.
I don't see why you are so intent on insisting that my opinion is invalid, rather than that you disagree with it.
I feel it's an inconsistent opinion because of arguments like this "If Scotland wishes to devolve power to its counties, or by some other division, then that is a matter for them."
So consistency demands if ENGLAND wishes to devolve power to its counties or some other division (e.g. regions) then that is a matter for the English. But most people are arguing that the UK government should immediately skip the English national decision, and devolve power to regions over the heads of the English.
Well, I don't think that's really what I've argued. I've mostly been talking about the ends rather than the means - and as an English person resident in England then I'm part of that national decision.
As you've just indicated, 'facts' can be interpreted differently and used in different ways.
I'm more interested in how easy you find it to slip into casual smear territory with your use of 'ideological' -Cameroon speak for 'embrace the new left wing political consensus or be painted as a half crazed right wing nutter'. As someone who furiously denounces such tactics when on the wrong side of them (such as over Rotherham), I would have expected better from you.
Mr. Stodge, disagree entirely. Also, an English Parliament is not something that would necessarily be exclusive of giving more power to local councils.
If Scotland gets devomax, the only way for England to have equality is through an English Parliament. We can't have taxes levelled at a smaller scale, it'd divide England into puny, pathetic little regions.
I struggle with the concept of treating England as though it was one homogenous entity. London is very different from rural Devon for example and that has to be recognised. Having power devolved to lower levels doesn't make anyone less "English" - that's absurd.
I have no issue with different tax rates or cities and counties setting their own taxes - New York does it, Stockholm does it - nobody thinks of them as being less American or Swedish respectively. All those who are arguing for an English Parliament really want is perpetual Conservative Government and that would mean, for areas like East Ham, perpetual Opposition (unless of course anyone is advocating having the English Parliament elected under STV in which case that's a very different kettle of worms).
Do you struggle with the concept of treating Scotland as though it was one homogenous entity? Glasgow is very different from the rural Highlands. Should that be recognised?
Until one of these "divide England up" people supports dividing up Scotland on a similar basis, it's pretty obvious they're a huge hypocrite.
As one of those people, the simple fact is that I have lived all my life in [southern] England. In London, East Anglia, Berkshire, the Forest (of Dean) and Devon. I feel that I know a bit about England, and as an English person I have opinions on it - which would favour independence for Wessex from London.
I haven't lived in Scotland. I don't know Scotland. If Scotland wishes to devolve power to its counties, or by some other division, then that is a matter for them.
I don't see why you are so intent on insisting that my opinion is invalid, rather than that you disagree with it.
I'm a Wessex Boy (thanks Frank Turner), as well, but I can't see how that would ever work. London isn't just London, it's the entire south east/south central which services and feeds and energises London and visa versa.
You can't untangle the two. But places like Wales, and Scotland, and certain English regions are distinct both culturally and geographically. They already have good borders in both the heart and in the land.
So, after years of happily believing the consensus view on warming (i.e. it's happening), I'm beginning to waver a bit. Hard to explain stuff like this...
Note also that arctic ice (if this report is correct) is "back to normal", and there is, apparently, no deep ocean warming to explain the 15 year pause in atmospheric warming.
"We have more to learn" say scientists. Well, yeah. DUH.
Meanwhile the Warmist lobby marches on, though they are possibly marching over a cliff, as confidence in their predictions collapses. Which it must, in the end, if this failure of their model continues.
The end of the world is nigh. Recurring theme throughout history, 1666 was a big worry, eclipses, volcanic eruptions etc. Just old superstitions dressed up in the modern religious garb of science.
The difference between Science and Religion is that Science works even if you don't believe.
Oh I don't for a moment think that scientists would falsify their findings to suit their beliefs....
Franz Boas Piltdown Man Lysenko Fraud, I mean Freud Stephen Jay Gould
Nay, they are Gods amongst men, who's pronouncements us mere mortals must accept blindly.
Nick Clegg’s Real Speech to Conference, Glasgow 2014
My name is Deputy Prime Minister Aldo Clegg and I'm putting together a special team, and I need me eight soldiers. Eight Liberal Democrat soldiers. Now, y'all might've heard rumours about the General Election happening soon. Well, we'll be leaving a little earlier. We're gonna be dropped into middle England, dressed as civilians. And once we're in enemy territory, as a bushwhackin' guerrilla army, we're gonna be doin' one thing and one thing only... killin' Tories. Now, I don't know about y'all, but I sure as hell didn't come down from the goddamn Sheffield Mountains, cross 300 miles of England, fight my way through half of Scotland and jump out of a feckin' election battle-bus to teach the Tories lessons in humanity. Tories ain't got no humanity. They're the foot soldiers of a lefty-hatin', NHS-murderin' Bullingdon Boy and they need to be dee-stroyed. That's why any and every son of a bitch we find wearin' a Tory rosette, they're gonna die. Now, I'm the direct descendant of the Dutch merchant Abram van Rijckevorsel. That means I got a little privateer in me. And our battle plan will be that of a whole squadron of privateers. We will be cruel to the Conservatives, and through our cruelty they will know who we are. And they will find the evidence of our cruelty in the disembowelled, dismembered, and disfigured bodies of their brothers we leave behind us. And the Tory won't not be able to help themselves but to imagine the cruelty their brothers endured at our hands, and our boot heels, and the edge of our knives. And the Tory will be sickened by us, and the Tory will talk about us, and the Tory will fear us. And when the Tory closes their eyes at night and they're tortured by their subconscious for the evil they have done, it will be with thoughts of us they are tortured with. Sound good? Sgt. Donny “Danny” Alexander (the "Bear Lib-Dem"), Pfc. Tim Farron, Pfc. Vince Cable, Pfc. Simon Hughes, Pfc. Norman Lamb, Pfc. Mike Smithson, Cpl. Paddy Ashdown, Pfc. Jo Swinson: YES, SIR! DPM Aldo Clegg: That's what I like to hear. But I got a word of warning for all you would-be warriors. When you join my command, you take on debit. A debit you owe me personally. Each and every man (and woman!) under my command owes me one hundred Tory scalps. And I want my scalps. And all y'all will git me one hundred Tory scalps, taken from the heads of one hundred defeated Tories. Or you will die tryin'!
So, after years of happily believing the consensus view on warming (i.e. it's happening), I'm beginning to waver a bit. Hard to explain stuff like this...
Note also that arctic ice (if this report is correct) is "back to normal", and there is, apparently, no deep ocean warming to explain the 15 year pause in atmospheric warming.
"We have more to learn" say scientists. Well, yeah. DUH.
Meanwhile the Warmist lobby marches on, though they are possibly marching over a cliff, as confidence in their predictions collapses. Which it must, in the end, if this failure of their model continues.
Climate Change is a better description than Global Warming because of this sort of effect. There isn't a 'Warmist lobby' although I believe there are 'deniers'. Scientists are after the truth. The scientific method is where theories are tested all the time and refined. It IS complicated.
Good Morning. Looks like a good day for by-elections. A year ago the vast majority of PBers and the MSM were still saying that UKIP would be lucky to reach 5% in a GE and that 99% of tories would return home. They aren't saying it now.....
Two years ago I put £90 at 9/1 on UKIP winning the Euro elections. I do not recall saying anything about under "5% at the GE and 99% returning home". As I have a good track record in predicting UKIP, my thoughts are that the odds are still in favour of UKIP helping bring in an Ed Miliband Govt at GE2015 and as a direct result we have no european referendum this side of 2020.
And of course you would still be wrong. What will bring in a Labour government is the ineptitude of Cameron and his ability ti alienate great swathes of his natural support. That UKIP has been one of the beneficiaries of this is great for them but the blame lies squarely on Cameron's shoulders.
Is Cameron one of the biggest causes of UKIP's growth? Answer Yes. Will the size and distribution of UKIP's vote bring in an Ed Miliband Govt Answer Yes. Just because Cameron did make mistakes does not give UKIP a free pass at killing off the chances of a referendum this side of 2020 or beyond. There is also the fact that UKIP have conveniently forgotten their primary purpose - a referendum. One of those inconvenient truths.
The argument that a Labour government will be all Cameron's fault, even though UKIP voters refuse to help him prevent one, is akin to arguing that it was all the pub's fault you drove home drunk.
Obviously you had to drive home with no regard for the consequences to the bus queue you took out. It was the pub's fault for selling you all that lager.
The most leftist thing about UKIP - and what may yet deliver them a few Labour votes - is a sincere and visceral conviction that everything is somebody else's fault and nothing is ever their own fault.
So, after years of happily believing the consensus view on warming (i.e. it's happening), I'm beginning to waver a bit. Hard to explain stuff like this...
Note also that arctic ice (if this report is correct) is "back to normal", and there is, apparently, no deep ocean warming to explain the 15 year pause in atmospheric warming.
"We have more to learn" say scientists. Well, yeah. DUH.
Meanwhile the Warmist lobby marches on, though they are possibly marching over a cliff, as confidence in their predictions collapses. Which it must, in the end, if this failure of their model continues.
Global temperatures are still trending up - we really need to look at 10 or even 30 year blocks, instead of cherry picking individual years.
Globally, the period 2004-2013 is the warmest 10 year period ever recorded according to NOAA.and 2014 and 2015 are likely to be 'top 5' years temperature-wise.
The globe is undoubtedly warming and will continue to warm - the models may have overstimated the temperature increases but rise they do....
As for extent of summer arctic sea ice, the trend is down even though 2014 was not a record breaker. To say 2014 was normal is a falsehood!
I haven't read the comments on the thread but I have to say yesterday morning's thread header on the expected demise of Nick Clegg must go down as one of the strangest and most inaccurate ones in PB history.
These things happen.
You should see the "Will Ebola effect the outcome of the next General Election" thread I've got planned.
Oh God - we're not going to hear that bloody "No time for a novice" type crap are we ?
Lynton's campaigning will have me voting UKIP, can feel it in the waters.
The most different bit of the UK (by far) is London. Devomax for London, please.
Where do you draw the boundary of London, considering the large number of people who commute long distances to work there?
Cross-border commuting is quite normal in many parts of the world. Should the people of Malmo have a vote in Denmark?
You'd simply leave the border where it is now, then? I would think that a major shake-up of the devolution settlement within the UK would be a great opportunity to modify a boundary that was created nearly fifty years ago - which is both long enough ago that it no longer matches the reality on the ground now and recent enough that changing it wouldn't upset too many people.
The most different bit of the UK (by far) is London. Devomax for London, please.
Where do you draw the boundary of London, considering the large number of people who commute long distances to work there?
Cross-border commuting is quite normal in many parts of the world. Should the people of Malmo have a vote in Denmark?
Yes, they should, if they'd rather vote there than in Malmo. If you spend most of your time in Place A but go to Place B to sleep, it makes more sense to vote in Place A, even though your official residence would be Place B. Since there's no reliable top-down principle that can be guaranteed to make sense here, it would be better just to let people choose.
The most different bit of the UK (by far) is London. Devomax for London, please.
Where do you draw the boundary of London, considering the large number of people who commute long distances to work there?
Cross-border commuting is quite normal in many parts of the world. Should the people of Malmo have a vote in Denmark?
Depends if taxation from Malmo is funding Denmark, or visa versa.
And that's where regionalism falls down. Unless it's a complete split, then tax receipts from one area will have to fund other areas, so no region is really in control of anything at all.
So, after years of happily believing the consensus view on warming (i.e. it's happening), I'm beginning to waver a bit. Hard to explain stuff like this...
Note also that arctic ice (if this report is correct) is "back to normal", and there is, apparently, no deep ocean warming to explain the 15 year pause in atmospheric warming.
"We have more to learn" say scientists. Well, yeah. DUH.
Meanwhile the Warmist lobby marches on, though they are possibly marching over a cliff, as confidence in their predictions collapses. Which it must, in the end, if this failure of their model continues.
Climate Change is a better description than Global Warming because of this sort of effect. There isn't a 'Warmist lobby' although I believe there are 'deniers'. Scientists are after the truth. The scientific method is where theories are tested all the time and refined. It IS complicated.
This is either disingenuous or alarmingly naive.
Because I'd rather believe the scientists than you?
Good Morning. Looks like a good day for by-elections. A year ago the vast majority of PBers and the MSM were still saying that UKIP would be lucky to reach 5% in a GE and that 99% of tories would return home. They aren't saying it now.....
Two years ago I put £90 at 9/1 on UKIP winning the Euro elections. I do not recall saying anything about under "5% at the GE and 99% returning home". As I have a good track record in predicting UKIP, my thoughts are that the odds are still in favour of UKIP helping bring in an Ed Miliband Govt at GE2015 and as a direct result we have no european referendum this side of 2020.
And of course you would still be wrong. What will bring in a Labour government is the ineptitude of Cameron and his ability ti alienate great swathes of his natural support. That UKIP has been one of the beneficiaries of this is great for them but the blame lies squarely on Cameron's shoulders.
Is Cameron one of the biggest causes of UKIP's growth? Answer Yes. Will the size and distribution of UKIP's vote bring in an Ed Miliband Govt Answer Yes. Just because Cameron did make mistakes does not give UKIP a free pass at killing off the chances of a referendum this side of 2020 or beyond. There is also the fact that UKIP have conveniently forgotten their primary purpose - a referendum. One of those inconvenient truths.
The argument that a Labour government will be all Cameron's fault, even though UKIP voters refuse to help him prevent one, is akin to arguing that it was all the pub's fault you drove home drunk.
Obviously you had to drive home with no regard for the consequences to the bus queue you took out. It was the pub's fault for selling you all that lager.
The most leftist thing about UKIP - and what may yet deliver them a few Labour votes - is a sincere and visceral conviction that everything is somebody else's fault and nothing is ever their own fault.
No it's your fault you drove home drunk in much the same way as the buck stops with Cameron.
The most different bit of the UK (by far) is London. Devomax for London, please.
Where do you draw the boundary of London, considering the large number of people who commute long distances to work there?
Cross-border commuting is quite normal in many parts of the world. Should the people of Malmo have a vote in Denmark?
Depends if taxation from Malmo is funding Denmark, or visa versa.
And that's where regionalism falls down. Unless it's a complete split, then tax receipts from one area will have to fund other areas, so no region is really in control of anything at all.
Hence Devomax for London please.
It will be a shock to the system for the rest of the UK, but I'm sure they'd recover eventually.
Good Morning. Looks like a good day for by-elections. A year ago the vast majority of PBers and the MSM were still saying that UKIP would be lucky to reach 5% in a GE and that 99% of tories would return home. They aren't saying it now.....
Two years ago I put £90 at 9/1 on UKIP winning the Euro elections. I do not recall saying anything about under "5% at the GE and 99% returning home". As I have a good track record in predicting UKIP, my thoughts are that the odds are still in favour of UKIP helping bring in an Ed Miliband Govt at GE2015 and as a direct result we have no european referendum this side of 2020.
And of course you would still be wrong. What will bring in a Labour government is the ineptitude of Cameron and his ability ti alienate great swathes of his natural support. That UKIP has been one of the beneficiaries of this is great for them but the blame lies squarely on Cameron's shoulders.
Is Cameron one of the biggest causes of UKIP's growth? Answer Yes. Will the size and distribution of UKIP's vote bring in an Ed Miliband Govt Answer Yes. Just because Cameron did make mistakes does not give UKIP a free pass at killing off the chances of a referendum this side of 2020 or beyond. There is also the fact that UKIP have conveniently forgotten their primary purpose - a referendum. One of those inconvenient truths.
The argument that a Labour government will be all Cameron's fault, even though UKIP voters refuse to help him prevent one, is akin to arguing that it was all the pub's fault you drove home drunk.
Obviously you had to drive home with no regard for the consequences to the bus queue you took out. It was the pub's fault for selling you all that lager.
The most leftist thing about UKIP - and what may yet deliver them a few Labour votes - is a sincere and visceral conviction that everything is somebody else's fault and nothing is ever their own fault.
That's what Tories are doing by blaming Ukip if Miliband wins isn't it?
So, after years of happily believing the consensus view on warming (i.e. it's happening), I'm beginning to waver a bit. Hard to explain stuff like this...
Note also that arctic ice (if this report is correct) is "back to normal", and there is, apparently, no deep ocean warming to explain the 15 year pause in atmospheric warming.
"We have more to learn" say scientists. Well, yeah. DUH.
Meanwhile the Warmist lobby marches on, though they are possibly marching over a cliff, as confidence in their predictions collapses. Which it must, in the end, if this failure of their model continues.
Guido showed the chart the other day of satellite global surface temperature averages flat for last 18 years now. The IPCC's real problem is that their models can't explain the past, let alone the future.
2004 Global Warming prediction failures.
Major Global temperature increase. Increased sea levels. Southern England resembles French Riviera. Indigenous specious migrate north. Dead polar bears.
The most different bit of the UK (by far) is London. Devomax for London, please.
Where do you draw the boundary of London, considering the large number of people who commute long distances to work there?
Cross-border commuting is quite normal in many parts of the world. Should the people of Malmo have a vote in Denmark?
Depends if taxation from Malmo is funding Denmark, or visa versa.
And that's where regionalism falls down. Unless it's a complete split, then tax receipts from one area will have to fund other areas, so no region is really in control of anything at all.
Hence Devomax for London please.
It will be a shock to the system for the rest of the UK, but I'm sure they'd recover eventually.
re public sector: Socrates your guesses are pretty good in terms of order, but slightly low in terms of quantum: The order is
Denmark, 33% UK, 30.5% France, 30% Germany, 26% Spain, 21.5%
What about Portugal?
Where are your numbers from? After I guessed I did a quick Google and found public sector employment of 5.4 million, and total employment of 30.2 million. That gets you to 18%.
Denmark surprised me. I wonder what all their extra public sector workers are doing.
I haven't read the comments on the thread but I have to say yesterday morning's thread header on the expected demise of Nick Clegg must go down as one of the strangest and most inaccurate ones in PB history.
These things happen.
You should see the "Will Ebola effect the outcome of the next General Election" thread I've got planned.
Oh God - we're not going to hear that bloody "No time for a novice" type crap are we ?
Lynton's campaigning will have me voting UKIP, can feel it in the waters.
No, it'll be we have an outbreak of Ebola.
Everyone rushes to the NHS, the NHS collapses under the strain.
Note also that arctic ice (if this report is correct) is "back to normal"
You misread the report. It says that global ice area is "back to normal", which means that Arctic sea ice is still below normal.
But WTF is "normal"? That's really the point, isn't it? Who defines normality, over what timescale? Was the medieval warming period "normal"?
Well, no, it's not the point for the purpose of my minor correction. For the purpose of my minor correction there's an accepted standard of "normal", which is equal to the average during the period of satellite observations.
You can't argue that the Antarctic is above normal compared to one period, and that the Arctic is normal compared to a different period, because that would be completely absurd.
So you have to use a common period.
You misread the report. It's not a big deal. I just thought it was worth correcting for those people who didn't bother to click through to read it themselves.
The most different bit of the UK (by far) is London. Devomax for London, please.
Where do you draw the boundary of London, considering the large number of people who commute long distances to work there?
Cross-border commuting is quite normal in many parts of the world. Should the people of Malmo have a vote in Denmark?
Depends if taxation from Malmo is funding Denmark, or visa versa.
And that's where regionalism falls down. Unless it's a complete split, then tax receipts from one area will have to fund other areas, so no region is really in control of anything at all.
You don't necessarily have to do that by pooling the money and running services centrally - you can do the whole thing with explicit regional transfers. In this case the UK could say, "London need to pay x billion to Wales", then London would be free to work out what taxes to use to raise that money and Wales would be free to decide what it most needed to spend it on.
The most different bit of the UK (by far) is London. Devomax for London, please.
Where do you draw the boundary of London, considering the large number of people who commute long distances to work there?
Cross-border commuting is quite normal in many parts of the world. Should the people of Malmo have a vote in Denmark?
Depends if taxation from Malmo is funding Denmark, or visa versa.
And that's where regionalism falls down. Unless it's a complete split, then tax receipts from one area will have to fund other areas, so no region is really in control of anything at all.
Hence Devomax for London please.
It will be a shock to the system for the rest of the UK, but I'm sure they'd recover eventually.
You're sounding like a Cybernat.
Sadly, London doesn't have a Bannockburn to celebrate - it's given in to just about every army that ever got to its doorstep.
The most different bit of the UK (by far) is London. Devomax for London, please.
Where do you draw the boundary of London, considering the large number of people who commute long distances to work there?
Cross-border commuting is quite normal in many parts of the world. Should the people of Malmo have a vote in Denmark?
Malmo is part of Sweden, different country. Bit like England is its own country.
The rest of England is a foreign country for many, perhaps most Londoners.
So? Why should the current transient population of London decide its long-term future alone?
London is the ancient capital of England. It belongs to England. In many ways, it represents England. A fundamental part of its success is it's Englishness. I see no reason why it's current success and the cultural distinctions accentuated by mass immigration (particularly in the last 60 years) should mean it is permanently cut out from the country that made it.
I haven't read the comments on the thread but I have to say yesterday morning's thread header on the expected demise of Nick Clegg must go down as one of the strangest and most inaccurate ones in PB history.
These things happen.
You should see the "Will Ebola effect the outcome of the next General Election" thread I've got planned.
Oh God - we're not going to hear that bloody "No time for a novice" type crap are we ?
Lynton's campaigning will have me voting UKIP, can feel it in the waters.
No, it'll be we have an outbreak of Ebola.
Everyone rushes to the NHS, the NHS collapses under the strain.
Everything will collapse under the strain, not just the NHS.
Expect the army on the streets in Noddy suits with loaded guns.
Didn't the Turkish Parliament vote a few days ago to permit Turkish troops to take action against ISIS?
Turkey is fighting for an invasion of Syria. End of. It is therefore in their interests for the situation to deteriorate, and if it kills off some troublesome Kurds on their doorstep, so much the better.
To which end, they have stationed troops at their border, which incidentally remains porous to ISIS, but they have forbidden Kurds from crossing the border to fight ISIS.
A wholly unjustified use of our military resources, which Parliament has voted down.
I think it's time to acknowledge that our mainstream domestic news sources have deliberately misled the public from the beginning of this conflict (and in all probability others). The BBC is not something I would look to for news on this situation.
The most different bit of the UK (by far) is London. Devomax for London, please.
Where do you draw the boundary of London, considering the large number of people who commute long distances to work there?
Cross-border commuting is quite normal in many parts of the world. Should the people of Malmo have a vote in Denmark?
Malmo is part of Sweden, different country. Bit like England is its own country.
The rest of England is a foreign country for many, perhaps most Londoners.
So? Why should the current transient population of London decide its long-term future alone?
London is the ancient capital of England. It belongs to England. In many ways, it represents England. A fundamental part of its success is it's Englishness. I see no reason why it's current success and the cultural distinctions accentuated by mass immigration (particularly in the last 60 years) should mean it is permanently cut out from the country that made it.
Why should London wish to stay tied to the rest of a country that increasingly despises what it represents even as it increasingly funds it?
The most different bit of the UK (by far) is London. Devomax for London, please.
Where do you draw the boundary of London, considering the large number of people who commute long distances to work there?
Cross-border commuting is quite normal in many parts of the world. Should the people of Malmo have a vote in Denmark?
Depends if taxation from Malmo is funding Denmark, or visa versa.
And that's where regionalism falls down. Unless it's a complete split, then tax receipts from one area will have to fund other areas, so no region is really in control of anything at all.
You don't necessarily have to do that by pooling the money and running services centrally - you can do the whole thing with explicit regional transfers. In this case the UK could say, "London need to pay x billion to Wales", then London would be free to work out what taxes to use to raise that money and Wales would be free to decide what it most needed to spend it on.
That's a feasible way of it working, but it'll cause problems and resentment, as the transfers will be much greater and more transparent than say the Barnett formula currently is.
For example, say Wales wanted to cut corporation rate rates, or business rates to get investment. The rest of the UK would then say 'why are we paying for tax cuts whilst we have to have pay for your schoolsnhospitals as well....'
The most different bit of the UK (by far) is London. Devomax for London, please.
Where do you draw the boundary of London, considering the large number of people who commute long distances to work there?
Cross-border commuting is quite normal in many parts of the world. Should the people of Malmo have a vote in Denmark?
Depends if taxation from Malmo is funding Denmark, or visa versa.
And that's where regionalism falls down. Unless it's a complete split, then tax receipts from one area will have to fund other areas, so no region is really in control of anything at all.
Hence Devomax for London please.
It will be a shock to the system for the rest of the UK, but I'm sure they'd recover eventually.
You're sounding like a Cybernat.
Sadly, London doesn't have a Bannockburn to celebrate - it's given in to just about every army that ever got to its doorstep.
Indeed. No one has ever been given the title Malleus Londinium either
So, after years of happily believing the consensus view on warming (i.e. it's happening), I'm beginning to waver a bit. Hard to explain stuff like this...
Note also that arctic ice (if this report is correct) is "back to normal", and there is, apparently, no deep ocean warming to explain the 15 year pause in atmospheric warming.
"We have more to learn" say scientists. Well, yeah. DUH.
Meanwhile the Warmist lobby marches on, though they are possibly marching over a cliff, as confidence in their predictions collapses. Which it must, in the end, if this failure of their model continues.
Climate Change is a better description than Global Warming because of this sort of effect. There isn't a 'Warmist lobby' although I believe there are 'deniers'. Scientists are after the truth. The scientific method is where theories are tested all the time and refined. It IS complicated.
This is either disingenuous or alarmingly naive.
Because I'd rather believe the scientists than you?
Ah, Climate Change. Politics masquerading as science.
I haven't read the comments on the thread but I have to say yesterday morning's thread header on the expected demise of Nick Clegg must go down as one of the strangest and most inaccurate ones in PB history.
Imagine you're Nick Clegg's people. How are you going to get anybody to pay attention to his speech, other than floating the idea that he might be resigning in it? SO.... they trot off down to the bookies, splash a bit of cash to get the market moving... job done.
Aargh - bleeding iPhone. Lost 2 x comments in a row. Anyone else got that thing where your comments 'overlap' the links on the RHS of the blog, such that you can't post without accidentally hitting one and thus losing your comment?
I haven't read the comments on the thread but I have to say yesterday morning's thread header on the expected demise of Nick Clegg must go down as one of the strangest and most inaccurate ones in PB history.
These things happen.
You should see the "Will Ebola effect the outcome of the next General Election" thread I've got planned.
Oh God - we're not going to hear that bloody "No time for a novice" type crap are we ?
Lynton's campaigning will have me voting UKIP, can feel it in the waters.
Ross Noble did a 2 hour routine mainly based on Ebola coming to the UK as well as funny references to SINDY last night.
I had a colleague who was a star turn at a Ross Noble show. I think it was when my colleague admitted he had fallen off the bridge over the RIver Kwai....
"I'll get back to you later..."
On cricket betting, sorry, but any slightly out of the way result these days and I just assume "FIX!!"
The most different bit of the UK (by far) is London. Devomax for London, please.
Where do you draw the boundary of London, considering the large number of people who commute long distances to work there?
Cross-border commuting is quite normal in many parts of the world. Should the people of Malmo have a vote in Denmark?
Depends if taxation from Malmo is funding Denmark, or visa versa.
And that's where regionalism falls down. Unless it's a complete split, then tax receipts from one area will have to fund other areas, so no region is really in control of anything at all.
You don't necessarily have to do that by pooling the money and running services centrally - you can do the whole thing with explicit regional transfers. In this case the UK could say, "London need to pay x billion to Wales", then London would be free to work out what taxes to use to raise that money and Wales would be free to decide what it most needed to spend it on.
That's a feasible way of it working, but it'll cause problems and resentment, as the transfers will be much greater and more transparent than say the Barnett formula currently is.
For example, say Wales wanted to cut corporation rate rates, or business rates to get investment. The rest of the UK would then say 'why are we paying for tax cuts whilst we have to have pay for your schoolsnhospitals as well....'
I have an idea of how you could fix that problem, so that if Wales were to cut their taxes it would also cut their subsidy from London, and the various other permutations so as not to encourage bad behaviour, but this comment box is too small to elucidate the system in detail.
I haven't read the comments on the thread but I have to say yesterday morning's thread header on the expected demise of Nick Clegg must go down as one of the strangest and most inaccurate ones in PB history.
These things happen.
You should see the "Will Ebola effect the outcome of the next General Election" thread I've got planned.
Oh God - we're not going to hear that bloody "No time for a novice" type crap are we ?
Lynton's campaigning will have me voting UKIP, can feel it in the waters.
No, it'll be we have an outbreak of Ebola.
Everyone rushes to the NHS, the NHS collapses under the strain.
Everything will collapse under the strain, not just the NHS.
Expect the army on the streets in Noddy suits with loaded guns.
That wouldn't be far wrong wrong in my opinion. We're trained in mass decontamination, a legacy of the New Dimensions programme. We've been training with the kit a lot recently, due to the heightened security level. During inter agency exercises, the "victims" always comply, sheep like, with our instructions to strip off and enter the decontamination stuctures, while we're dressed in full bright green gas-tight suits and breathing apparatus, and the Police in their black cbrn suits. In reality, I suspect it would be chaos.
The first time since Isle of Ely, 1973 that the victorious party had not contested the previous election (in an English seat).
An interesting counter-factual piece of history there, Rod. Assumes:
1. The SDP fought the 1979 GE. and/or 2. The SDP won no by-elections. and/or 3. Wirral isn't in England. You have heard of Crosby, RodCrosby?
1. The other half of the Alliance (the Liberals) had fought the seats in 1979. 2. The SDP half of the Alliance won by-elections. 3. Crosby ain't on the Wirral, although I can see it through the drizzle from my window!
The most different bit of the UK (by far) is London. Devomax for London, please.
Where do you draw the boundary of London, considering the large number of people who commute long distances to work there?
Cross-border commuting is quite normal in many parts of the world. Should the people of Malmo have a vote in Denmark?
Depends if taxation from Malmo is funding Denmark, or visa versa.
And that's where regionalism falls down. Unless it's a complete split, then tax receipts from one area will have to fund other areas, so no region is really in control of anything at all.
Hence Devomax for London please.
It will be a shock to the system for the rest of the UK, but I'm sure they'd recover eventually.
You're sounding like a Cybernat.
Sadly, London doesn't have a Bannockburn to celebrate - it's given in to just about every army that ever got to its doorstep.
When I lived in Thornhill Crescent, Islington, I noticed a mysterious hillock a couple of streets away. Research showed it was a chunk of the vast Cromwellian ramparts, surrounding London, thrown up during the Civil War.
It's the unofficial flag for Greater London (adapted from the GLC's emblem).
Presumably, a post-global warming London. When all that remains of London is the top of the flagpole over Buck House, sticking out above the Thames....
The most different bit of the UK (by far) is London. Devomax for London, please.
Where do you draw the boundary of London, considering the large number of people who commute long distances to work there?
Cross-border commuting is quite normal in many parts of the world. Should the people of Malmo have a vote in Denmark?
Depends if taxation from Malmo is funding Denmark, or visa versa.
And that's where regionalism falls down. Unless it's a complete split, then tax receipts from one area will have to fund other areas, so no region is really in control of anything at all.
You don't necessarily have to do that by pooling the money and running services centrally - you can do the whole thing with explicit regional transfers. In this case the UK could say, "London need to pay x billion to Wales", then London would be free to work out what taxes to use to raise that money and Wales would be free to decide what it most needed to spend it on.
That's a feasible way of it working, but it'll cause problems and resentment, as the transfers will be much greater and more transparent than say the Barnett formula currently is.
For example, say Wales wanted to cut corporation rate rates, or business rates to get investment. The rest of the UK would then say 'why are we paying for tax cuts whilst we have to have pay for your schoolsnhospitals as well....'
I have an idea of how you could fix that problem, so that if Wales were to cut their taxes it would also cut their subsidy from London, and the various other permutations so as not to encourage bad behaviour, but this comment box is too small to elucidate the system in detail.
The issue would then be that the regions aren't really in control of their own budgets (in much the same way the Scottish government has the power to change income tax I think, but never used it).
So it's in risk of just changing to faux devolution, and expensive talking shops.
The most different bit of the UK (by far) is London. Devomax for London, please.
Where do you draw the boundary of London, considering the large number of people who commute long distances to work there?
Cross-border commuting is quite normal in many parts of the world. Should the people of Malmo have a vote in Denmark?
Depends if taxation from Malmo is funding Denmark, or visa versa.
And that's where regionalism falls down. Unless it's a complete split, then tax receipts from one area will have to fund other areas, so no region is really in control of anything at all.
You don't necessarily have to do that by pooling the money and running services centrally - you can do the whole thing with explicit regional transfers. In this case the UK could say, "London need to pay x billion to Wales", then London would be free to work out what taxes to use to raise that money and Wales would be free to decide what it most needed to spend it on.
That's a feasible way of it working, but it'll cause problems and resentment, as the transfers will be much greater and more transparent than say the Barnett formula currently is.
For example, say Wales wanted to cut corporation rate rates, or business rates to get investment. The rest of the UK would then say 'why are we paying for tax cuts whilst we have to have pay for your schoolsnhospitals as well....'
I have an idea of how you could fix that problem, so that if Wales were to cut their taxes it would also cut their subsidy from London, and the various other permutations so as not to encourage bad behaviour, but this comment box is too small to elucidate the system in detail.
The issue would then be that the regions aren't really in control of their own budgets (in much the same way the Scottish government has the power to change income tax I think, but never used it).
So it's in risk of just changing to faux devolution, and expensive talking shops.
The situation you want to avoid is one where, say, Wales can merrily cut its taxes because of a subsidy from London without having to cut spending on services. And similarly in the opposite direction and from the opposite end. You don't want London forced to increase its taxes because Wales has decided to increase its spending.
I'm pretty sure that there's a set of rules that can encompass all these requirements, but I've yet to find a simple way of stating it.
So, after years of happily believing the consensus view on warming (i.e. it's happening), I'm beginning to waver a bit. Hard to explain stuff like this...
Note also that arctic ice (if this report is correct) is "back to normal", and there is, apparently, no deep ocean warming to explain the 15 year pause in atmospheric warming.
"We have more to learn" say scientists. Well, yeah. DUH.
Meanwhile the Warmist lobby marches on, though they are possibly marching over a cliff, as confidence in their predictions collapses. Which it must, in the end, if this failure of their model continues.
Guido showed the chart the other day of satellite global surface temperature averages flat for last 18 years now. The IPCC's real problem is that their models can't explain the past, let alone the future.
2004 Global Warming prediction failures.
Major Global temperature increase. Increased sea levels. Southern England resembles French Riviera. Indigenous specious migrate north. Dead polar bears.
The model is not broke - it just never worked.
Come come, how could you forget the best one of all, from 2000:
Note also that arctic ice (if this report is correct) is "back to normal"
You misread the report. It says that global ice area is "back to normal", which means that Arctic sea ice is still below normal.
By contrast, avoiding dirty, polluting, finite fossil fuels and switching to nuclear, shale gas, solar and renewables just seems sensible, and we should continue doing this, with vigour.
Much of which would have already happened had it not been for the environmental movement.
The most different bit of the UK (by far) is London. Devomax for London, please.
Where do you draw the boundary of London, considering the large number of people who commute long distances to work there?
Cross-border commuting is quite normal in many parts of the world. Should the people of Malmo have a vote in Denmark?
Depends if taxation from Malmo is funding Denmark, or visa versa.
And that's where regionalism falls down. Unless it's a complete split, then tax receipts from one area will have to fund other areas, so no region is really in control of anything at all.
You don't necessarily have to do that by pooling the money and running services centrally - you can do the whole thing with explicit regional transfers. In this case the UK could say, "London need to pay x billion to Wales", then London would be free to work out what taxes to use to raise that money and Wales would be free to decide what it most needed to spend it on.
That's a feasible way of it working, but it'll cause problems and resentment, as the transfers will be much greater and more transparent than say the Barnett formula currently is.
For example, say Wales wanted to cut corporation rate rates, or business rates to get investment. The rest of the UK would then say 'why are we paying for tax cuts whilst we have to have pay for your schoolsnhospitals as well....'
I have an idea of how you could fix that problem, so that if Wales were to cut their taxes it would also cut their subsidy from London, and the various other permutations so as not to encourage bad behaviour, but this comment box is too small to elucidate the system in detail.
The issue would then be that the regions aren't really in control of their own budgets (in much the same way the Scottish government has the power to change income tax I think, but never used it).
So it's in risk of just changing to faux devolution, and expensive talking shops.
I'm pretty sure that there's a set of rules that can encompass all these requirements, but I've yet to find a simple way of stating it.
Possibly, although any solution with change would have to be accepted by people, and the more complex you make the changes the less likely that it.
What you want to avoid is horse-trading, or politicians playing up regional biases for people. you can just imagine labour in Wales talking about those evil bankers in the South East, or Tories moaning about poor people in Liverpool etc etc for example.
Good Morning. Looks like a good day for by-elections. A year ago the vast majority of PBers and the MSM were still saying that UKIP would be lucky to reach 5% in a GE and that 99% of tories would return home. They aren't saying it now.....
Two years ago I put £90 at 9/1 on UKIP winning the Euro elections. I do not recall saying anything about under "5% at the GE and 99% returning home". As I have a good track record in predicting UKIP, my thoughts are that the odds are still in favour of UKIP helping bring in an Ed Miliband Govt at GE2015 and as a direct result we have no european referendum this side of 2020.
And of course you would still be wrong. What will bring in a Labour government is the ineptitude of Cameron and his ability ti alienate great swathes of his natural support. That UKIP has been one of the beneficiaries of this is great for them but the blame lies squarely on Cameron's shoulders.
Is Cameron one of the biggest causes of UKIP's growth? Answer Yes. Will the size and distribution of UKIP's vote bring in an Ed Miliband Govt Answer Yes. Just because Cameron did make mistakes does not give UKIP a free pass at killing off the chances of a referendum this side of 2020 or beyond. There is also the fact that UKIP have conveniently forgotten their primary purpose - a referendum. One of those inconvenient truths.
The argument that a Labour government will be all Cameron's fault, even though UKIP voters refuse to help him prevent one, is akin to arguing that it was all the pub's fault you drove home drunk.
Obviously you had to drive home with no regard for the consequences to the bus queue you took out. It was the pub's fault for selling you all that lager.
The most leftist thing about UKIP - and what may yet deliver them a few Labour votes - is a sincere and visceral conviction that everything is somebody else's fault and nothing is ever their own fault.
That's what Tories are doing by blaming Ukip if Miliband wins isn't it?
No, because voting Conservative cannot result in a Miliband win, whereas voting for any other party can. Whoever votes for UKIP, therefore, is failing to oppose Miliband, in the same way that by failing to curb your drinking it's your fault you took out the bus queue, not the pub's or that of the mate who lent you his car.
So, after years of happily believing the consensus view on warming (i.e. it's happening), I'm beginning to waver a bit. Hard to explain stuff like this...
Note also that arctic ice (if this report is correct) is "back to normal", and there is, apparently, no deep ocean warming to explain the 15 year pause in atmospheric warming.
"We have more to learn" say scientists. Well, yeah. DUH.
Meanwhile the Warmist lobby marches on, though they are possibly marching over a cliff, as confidence in their predictions collapses. Which it must, in the end, if this failure of their model continues.
Guido showed the chart the other day of satellite global surface temperature averages flat for last 18 years now. The IPCC's real problem is that their models can't explain the past, let alone the future.
2004 Global Warming prediction failures.
Major Global temperature increase. Increased sea levels. Southern England resembles French Riviera. Indigenous specious migrate north. Dead polar bears.
The model is not broke - it just never worked.
Come come, how could you forget the best one of all, from 2000:
On topic.Farage may be determining his own downfall.It is clear Ukip is increasingly a totalitarian party where Führerprinzip is in evidence.There is no possible way Ukip can define themselves as anything other than a right wing party.If you want to know what Ukip policy is or isn't ,it's "ask Nigel".2010 Manifesto dismissed out of hand by the man who signed it. Put all the above together into 20th century historical perspective and Ukip inspires the same forces which defeated the BNP.
So, after years of happily believing the consensus view on warming (i.e. it's happening), I'm beginning to waver a bit. Hard to explain stuff like this...
Note also that arctic ice (if this report is correct) is "back to normal", and there is, apparently, no deep ocean warming to explain the 15 year pause in atmospheric warming.
"We have more to learn" say scientists. Well, yeah. DUH.
Meanwhile the Warmist lobby marches on, though they are possibly marching over a cliff, as confidence in their predictions collapses. Which it must, in the end, if this failure of their model continues.
Climate Change is a better description than Global Warming because of this sort of effect. There isn't a 'Warmist lobby' although I believe there are 'deniers'. Scientists are after the truth. The scientific method is where theories are tested all the time and refined. It IS complicated.
This is either disingenuous or alarmingly naive.
Because I'd rather believe the scientists than you?
Even after leaked emails showed systematic fraud perpetrated by University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit?
So, after years of happily believing the consensus view on warming (i.e. it's happening), I'm beginning to waver a bit. Hard to explain stuff like this...
On topic.Farage may be determining his own downfall.It is clear Ukip is increasingly a totalitarian party where Führerprinzip is in evidence.There is no possible way Ukip can define themselves as anything other than a right wing party.If you want to know what Ukip policy is or isn't ,it's "ask Nigel".2010 Manifesto dismissed out of hand by the man who signed it. Put all the above together into 20th century historical perspective and Ukip inspires the same forces which defeated the BNP.
The Heywood by election is another instance of how you can damage a party you dislike by voting for it.
The example of this I have always previously given is Brent East, where I voted Labour in order to keep it as winnable as possible for the two evil parties. They then waste resources fighting each other to no different effect; meanwhile, hopefully, they lose elsewhere to Conservatives because they have their boots on the wrong ground.
Heywood's another example. One could either vote Labour to keep Miliband in post, which is bad for Labour, hence voting for them harms them. Or one could vote fruitcake because that way the buffoons will think it's winnable and will waste resources on fighting it, with the same consequences as in the Brent East scenario.
It would be a tough call but on balance I would vote Labour, as the greater actual threat to the country today. On balance I would rather have Labour in power than UKIP, since the former is a legitimate political perspective, whereas the latter would for Brand UK be just utterly shameful.
I haven't read the comments on the thread but I have to say yesterday morning's thread header on the expected demise of Nick Clegg must go down as one of the strangest and most inaccurate ones in PB history.
These things happen.
You should see the "Will Ebola effect the outcome of the next General Election" thread I've got planned.
Oh God - we're not going to hear that bloody "No time for a novice" type crap are we ?
Lynton's campaigning will have me voting UKIP, can feel it in the waters.
No, it'll be we have an outbreak of Ebola.
Everyone rushes to the NHS, the NHS collapses under the strain.
Given the stupidity on display about Ebola in certain corners of the internet, that's not too far fetched. A badly handled case,and a dollop of media hysteria (I noticed The Metro trying to use very dubious quotes to convince us it was going airborne) coinciding with the flu season could certainly spark off a curious alliance of hypochondria and tin foil millinery.
"Nigel Farage, the party leader, believes his party is on track to win about five MPs in the general election next May, including Thurrock, also in Essex."
So, after years of happily believing the consensus view on warming (i.e. it's happening), I'm beginning to waver a bit. Hard to explain stuff like this...
Note also that arctic ice (if this report is correct) is "back to normal", and there is, apparently, no deep ocean warming to explain the 15 year pause in atmospheric warming.
"We have more to learn" say scientists. Well, yeah. DUH.
Meanwhile the Warmist lobby marches on, though they are possibly marching over a cliff, as confidence in their predictions collapses. Which it must, in the end, if this failure of their model continues.
Guido showed the chart the other day of satellite global surface temperature averages flat for last 18 years now. The IPCC's real problem is that their models can't explain the past, let alone the future.
'I struggle with the concept of treating England as though it was one homogenous entity. London is very different from rural Devon for example and that has to be recognised. '
Edinburgh is very different from the Shetlands and a lot further than London is from Devon,but that's ok as long as it perpetuates the status quo.
One of the "problems" over the past century has been the continuing centralisation of political powers of the UK. That this occurred is understandable considering that there were 2 world wars and a cold war where centralisation of the control of resources of material as well as man power was required. Of course, one of the main arguments of this centralisation was the reduction of costs and the maintenance of standards.
Nowadays, this centralisation is being questioned. Not just by the Scots in Scotland but by the islands, regions, towns and cities in Scotland.
It has also started a conversation in England. Not just in the regions, but also the cities and towns and villages.
One of the main problems of the centralisation process is that it has removed access from citizens to their local representatives and via them to the responsibility of their surroundings.
OK, we do have councillors at city or regional level, but, for example, you have a pothole in your road and you want it repaired. You get in contact with your local council, who add your request to a list. Over time your pot hole complaint rises up the list to where, after a period of time, it gets to the top, work put out to tender, agreement of the terms and costs, time schedule for the repair to be completed, etc..
Rare newts have been spotted breeding in the pot hole and the area around it has been declared a potential Site of Scientific Interest
You could, of course, complain to your Councillor, who will send a letter to the repairs department, where in the due process of time, it will be responded to and an answer sent to you. Saying it is being looked into.
Ducks have decided that the pothole is their new home.
You may then consider that this is taken too long and sent a letter to your MP. If you are lucky, your MP might be one of the conscientious ones and even luckier, your letter will be picked out of the couple of thousand they have received that day. They will write off to your council road repairs department, where, in the due process of time, it will be answered along the lines that the work is in the process queue and will be completed in due course.
Ospreys are spotted hunting for fish while on their migratory route.
Of course, you could be even luckier and have your local councillor/MP live a few doors down from you, in which case you don't need to do anything as the pot hole will be repaired very shortly. Amazing what effect having a local representative can be?
So, after years of happily believing the consensus view on warming (i.e. it's happening), I'm beginning to waver a bit. Hard to explain stuff like this...
Note also that arctic ice (if this report is correct) is "back to normal", and there is, apparently, no deep ocean warming to explain the 15 year pause in atmospheric warming.
"We have more to learn" say scientists. Well, yeah. DUH.
Meanwhile the Warmist lobby marches on, though they are possibly marching over a cliff, as confidence in their predictions collapses. Which it must, in the end, if this failure of their model continues.
Guido showed the chart the other day of satellite global surface temperature averages flat for last 18 years now. The IPCC's real problem is that their models can't explain the past, let alone the future.
2004 Global Warming prediction failures.
Major Global temperature increase. Increased sea levels. Southern England resembles French Riviera. Indigenous specious migrate north. Dead polar bears.
The model is not broke - it just never worked.
Come come, how could you forget the best one of all, from 2000:
So, after years of happily believing the consensus view on warming (i.e. it's happening), I'm beginning to waver a bit. Hard to explain stuff like this...
Note also that arctic ice (if this report is correct) is "back to normal", and there is, apparently, no deep ocean warming to explain the 15 year pause in atmospheric warming.
"We have more to learn" say scientists. Well, yeah. DUH.
Meanwhile the Warmist lobby marches on, though they are possibly marching over a cliff, as confidence in their predictions collapses. Which it must, in the end, if this failure of their model continues.
Guido showed the chart the other day of satellite global surface temperature averages flat for last 18 years now. The IPCC's real problem is that their models can't explain the past, let alone the future.
@ Plato
If the present refuses to warm, then the past is going to have to get colder.
As notorious alarmist Jonathan Overpeck is reputed to have said, "We have to get rid of the Mediaeval Warm Period".
What you want to avoid is horse-trading, or politicians playing up regional biases for people. you can just imagine labour in Wales talking about those evil bankers in the South East, or Tories moaning about poor people in Liverpool etc etc for example.
You get that already - my hope would be that by devolving decision-making and responsibility you would reduce that sort of carping.
I agree with you that if it's done in the wrong way it could make it worse, though, and you can see with the current devolution settlement exactly how.
What you want to avoid is horse-trading, or politicians playing up regional biases for people. you can just imagine labour in Wales talking about those evil bankers in the South East, or Tories moaning about poor people in Liverpool etc etc for example.
You get that already - my hope would be that by devolving decision-making and responsibility you would reduce that sort of carping.
I agree with you that if it's done in the wrong way it could make it worse, though, and you can see with the current devolution settlement exactly how.
It is done already, of course. But the difference is that England is effectively as one, and we have common bonds linking us, weaken those bonds, and you break that oneness, which will lead to those issues.
I wish I could find the epically funny CRU formula piss-take > the one that fixed all the results irrespective of the actual data.
I had a looksee for it a while ago and couldn't track it down. I saw it in the comments at Watt's Up just after ClimateGate Mk I, and just adored it. Probably like you, I went through all the emails too and some of the antics were quite shocking even for an old cynic like me.
Whoever released all that into the Wild via those Russian servers deserves a medal.
So, after years of happily believing the consensus view on warming (i.e. it's happening), I'm beginning to waver a bit. Hard to explain stuff like this...
Note also that arctic ice (if this report is correct) is "back to normal", and there is, apparently, no deep ocean warming to explain the 15 year pause in atmospheric warming.
"We have more to learn" say scientists. Well, yeah. DUH.
Meanwhile the Warmist lobby marches on, though they are possibly marching over a cliff, as confidence in their predictions collapses. Which it must, in the end, if this failure of their model continues.
Guido showed the chart the other day of satellite global surface temperature averages flat for last 18 years now. The IPCC's real problem is that their models can't explain the past, let alone the future.
@ Plato
If the present refuses to warm, then the past is going to have to get colder.
As notorious alarmist Jonathan Overpeck is reputed to have said, "We have to get rid of the Mediaeval Warm Period".
And of course you would still be wrong. What will bring in a Labour government is the ineptitude of Cameron and his ability ti alienate great swathes of his natural support. That UKIP has been one of the beneficiaries of this is great for them but the blame lies squarely on Cameron's shoulders.
Is Cameron one of the biggest causes of UKIP's growth? Answer Yes. Will the size and distribution of UKIP's vote bring in an Ed Miliband Govt Answer Yes. Just because Cameron did make mistakes does not give UKIP a free pass at killing off the chances of a referendum this side of 2020 or beyond. There is also the fact that UKIP have conveniently forgotten their primary purpose - a referendum. One of those inconvenient truths.
The argument that a Labour government will be all Cameron's fault, even though UKIP voters refuse to help him prevent one, is akin to arguing that it was all the pub's fault you drove home drunk.
Obviously you had to drive home with no regard for the consequences to the bus queue you took out. It was the pub's fault for selling you all that lager.
The most leftist thing about UKIP - and what may yet deliver them a few Labour votes - is a sincere and visceral conviction that everything is somebody else's fault and nothing is ever their own fault.
You are of course failing to either see the fatal flaw in your argument.
Unlike drinking lots then driving the voting decision for most 2010 conservative voters you lost is done in two steps
Step 1 dislike what Cameron has done since elected in 2010 and deciding hell will freeze over before you lend such a charlatan your vote again
Step 2 If I am not voting conservative then who shall I vote for? Perhaps UKIP
While there are many voters who have followed both steps there are also many like me who have so far only done step 1. Therefore the loss of conservative votes is entirely due to the conservative party.
UKIP hasn't attracted people from the conservatives directly it has attracted those who have already been driven away by disgust of your party. No one else to blame but the tory party and Cameron in particular
So, after years of happily believing the consensus view on warming (i.e. it's happening), I'm beginning to waver a bit. Hard to explain stuff like this...
" This is 1.54 million square kilometers (595,000 square miles) above the 1981 to 2010 average extent, which is nearly four standard deviations above average."
That's not normal.
4 SDs is a huge variation in statistical terms.
Is AGW happening ?
I don't know and am not sure - it's certainly something that is neither proven nor disproven despite what people on both sides come out with.
One problem is that the pure science of the matter has crept it's way into political decisions with the pursuit of a green agenda which we've paid for in fuel bills and so forth; max limits on vacuum cleaner power (ffs...); justification for pump duty rises etc etc etc.
That takes this stuff from the realm of science to politics which is why even if it gets proved in the full scientific meaning of the word (It is far from yet) people simply won't believe it.
Mr. Pulpstar, quite agree the politicisation of science is a bad thing.
Worth noting that there are certain areas (most obviously more efficient technology) which make sense from an economic and environmental perspective, regardless of whether global warming is going on or not.
So, after years of happily believing the consensus view on warming (i.e. it's happening), I'm beginning to waver a bit. Hard to explain stuff like this...
Comments
I find England to be very homogenous, indeed England is one of the very oldest nation states, if the other countries of the UK have national representation why should England not?
Until one of these "divide England up" people supports dividing up Scotland on a similar basis, it's pretty obvious they're a huge hypocrite.
Not necessarily. Boris would worry about schools n hospitals and EICIPM would worry about foreign and defence etc. English devolution is coming in some form or other. We're going to have to get used to power residing in diverse places.
And, of course, ocean temperatures are also important in calculating overall global temperatures.
Climate Change is a better description than Global Warming because of this sort of effect. There isn't a 'Warmist lobby' although I believe there are 'deniers'.
Scientists are after the truth. The scientific method is where theories are tested all the time and refined.
It IS complicated.
I haven't lived in Scotland. I don't know Scotland. If Scotland wishes to devolve power to its counties, or by some other division, then that is a matter for them.
I don't see why you are so intent on insisting that my opinion is invalid, rather than that you disagree with it.
http://jonova.s3.amazonaws.com/graphs/ocean/global-ocean-temperature-0-700m.gif
So consistency demands if ENGLAND wishes to devolve power to its counties or some other division (e.g. regions) then that is a matter for the English. But most people are arguing that the UK government should immediately skip the English national decision, and devolve power to regions over the heads of the English.
'I struggle with the concept of treating England as though it was one homogenous entity. London is very different from rural Devon for example and that has to be recognised. '
Edinburgh is very different from the Shetlands and a lot further than London is from Devon,but that's ok as long as it perpetuates the status quo.
I'm more interested in how easy you find it to slip into casual smear territory with your use of 'ideological' -Cameroon speak for 'embrace the new left wing political consensus or be painted as a half crazed right wing nutter'. As someone who furiously denounces such tactics when on the wrong side of them (such as over Rotherham), I would have expected better from you.
You can't untangle the two. But places like Wales, and Scotland, and certain English regions are distinct both culturally and geographically. They already have good borders in both the heart and in the land.
Franz Boas
Piltdown Man
Lysenko
Fraud, I mean Freud
Stephen Jay Gould
Nay, they are Gods amongst men, who's pronouncements us mere mortals must accept blindly.
@matt
That was precisely what I thought when I read those bits of The Plan
My name is Deputy Prime Minister Aldo Clegg and I'm putting together a special team, and I need me eight soldiers. Eight Liberal Democrat soldiers. Now, y'all might've heard rumours about the General Election happening soon. Well, we'll be leaving a little earlier. We're gonna be dropped into middle England, dressed as civilians. And once we're in enemy territory, as a bushwhackin' guerrilla army, we're gonna be doin' one thing and one thing only... killin' Tories. Now, I don't know about y'all, but I sure as hell didn't come down from the goddamn Sheffield Mountains, cross 300 miles of England, fight my way through half of Scotland and jump out of a feckin' election battle-bus to teach the Tories lessons in humanity. Tories ain't got no humanity. They're the foot soldiers of a lefty-hatin', NHS-murderin' Bullingdon Boy and they need to be dee-stroyed. That's why any and every son of a bitch we find wearin' a Tory rosette, they're gonna die. Now, I'm the direct descendant of the Dutch merchant Abram van Rijckevorsel. That means I got a little privateer in me. And our battle plan will be that of a whole squadron of privateers. We will be cruel to the Conservatives, and through our cruelty they will know who we are. And they will find the evidence of our cruelty in the disembowelled, dismembered, and disfigured bodies of their brothers we leave behind us. And the Tory won't not be able to help themselves but to imagine the cruelty their brothers endured at our hands, and our boot heels, and the edge of our knives. And the Tory will be sickened by us, and the Tory will talk about us, and the Tory will fear us. And when the Tory closes their eyes at night and they're tortured by their subconscious for the evil they have done, it will be with thoughts of us they are tortured with. Sound good?
Sgt. Donny “Danny” Alexander (the "Bear Lib-Dem"), Pfc. Tim Farron, Pfc. Vince Cable, Pfc. Simon Hughes, Pfc. Norman Lamb, Pfc. Mike Smithson, Cpl. Paddy Ashdown, Pfc. Jo Swinson: YES, SIR!
DPM Aldo Clegg: That's what I like to hear. But I got a word of warning for all you would-be warriors. When you join my command, you take on debit. A debit you owe me personally. Each and every man (and woman!) under my command owes me one hundred Tory scalps. And I want my scalps. And all y'all will git me one hundred Tory scalps, taken from the heads of one hundred defeated Tories. Or you will die tryin'!
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0361748/quotes
Obviously you had to drive home with no regard for the consequences to the bus queue you took out. It was the pub's fault for selling you all that lager.
The most leftist thing about UKIP - and what may yet deliver them a few Labour votes - is a sincere and visceral conviction that everything is somebody else's fault and nothing is ever their own fault.
Globally, the period 2004-2013 is the warmest 10 year period ever recorded according to NOAA.and 2014 and 2015 are likely to be 'top 5' years temperature-wise.
The globe is undoubtedly warming and will continue to warm - the models may have overstimated the temperature increases but rise they do....
As for extent of summer arctic sea ice, the trend is down even though 2014 was not a record breaker. To say 2014 was normal is a falsehood!
http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/
Lynton's campaigning will have me voting UKIP, can feel it in the waters.
And that's where regionalism falls down. Unless it's a complete split, then tax receipts from one area will have to fund other areas, so no region is really in control of anything at all.
If he can't attract votes who else is to blame ?
It will be a shock to the system for the rest of the UK, but I'm sure they'd recover eventually.
Major Global temperature increase.
Increased sea levels.
Southern England resembles French Riviera.
Indigenous specious migrate north.
Dead polar bears.
The model is not broke - it just never worked.
My numbers are from the ILO and therefore pretty credible, I'd have thought (http://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---ed_protect/---protrav/---travail/documents/meetingdocument/wcms_184239.pdf)
I'm afraid my information on Denmark is limited :-)
Everyone rushes to the NHS, the NHS collapses under the strain.
You can't argue that the Antarctic is above normal compared to one period, and that the Arctic is normal compared to a different period, because that would be completely absurd.
So you have to use a common period.
You misread the report. It's not a big deal. I just thought it was worth correcting for those people who didn't bother to click through to read it themselves.
London is the ancient capital of England. It belongs to England. In many ways, it represents England. A fundamental part of its success is it's Englishness. I see no reason why it's current success and the cultural distinctions accentuated by mass immigration (particularly in the last 60 years) should mean it is permanently cut out from the country that made it.
Expect the army on the streets in Noddy suits with loaded guns.
To which end, they have stationed troops at their border, which incidentally remains porous to ISIS, but they have forbidden Kurds from crossing the border to fight ISIS.
And as I told you all, ISIS is not being defeated, and it is now becoming clear that this is merely a pretext for the ousting of Assad: http://nsnbc.me/2014/10/05/obama-reconsiders-attacking-assad/
A wholly unjustified use of our military resources, which Parliament has voted down.
I think it's time to acknowledge that our mainstream domestic news sources have deliberately misled the public from the beginning of this conflict (and in all probability others). The BBC is not something I would look to for news on this situation.
For example, say Wales wanted to cut corporation rate rates, or business rates to get investment. The rest of the UK would then say 'why are we paying for tax cuts whilst we have to have pay for your schoolsnhospitals as well....'
Ah, Climate Change. Politics masquerading as science.
https://twitter.com/CCHQPress
"I'll get back to you later..."
On cricket betting, sorry, but any slightly out of the way result these days and I just assume "FIX!!"
In reality, I suspect it would be chaos.
2. The SDP half of the Alliance won by-elections.
3. Crosby ain't on the Wirral, although I can see it through the drizzle from my window!
Charles II took over in 1660...
Or the Sea of London, as it will then be known.
Perhaps.
So it's in risk of just changing to faux devolution, and expensive talking shops.
http://order-order.com/2014/10/09/big-oil-freebie-for-conflicted-energy-committee-baronet/
He also has Parkinson's, so there maybe health reasons should he change his mind and step down at the GE.
I'm pretty sure that there's a set of rules that can encompass all these requirements, but I've yet to find a simple way of stating it.
What you want to avoid is horse-trading, or politicians playing up regional biases for people. you can just imagine labour in Wales talking about those evil bankers in the South East, or Tories moaning about poor people in Liverpool etc etc for example.
Put all the above together into 20th century historical perspective and Ukip inspires the same forces which defeated the BNP.
The example of this I have always previously given is Brent East, where I voted Labour in order to keep it as winnable as possible for the two evil parties. They then waste resources fighting each other to no different effect; meanwhile, hopefully, they lose elsewhere to Conservatives because they have their boots on the wrong ground.
Heywood's another example. One could either vote Labour to keep Miliband in post, which is bad for Labour, hence voting for them harms them. Or one could vote fruitcake because that way the buffoons will think it's winnable and will waste resources on fighting it, with the same consequences as in the Brent East scenario.
It would be a tough call but on balance I would vote Labour, as the greater actual threat to the country today. On balance I would rather have Labour in power than UKIP, since the former is a legitimate political perspective, whereas the latter would for Brand UK be just utterly shameful.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/7b1f5e18-4fa0-11e4-a0a4-00144feab7de.html?ftcamp=published_links/rss/brussels/feed//product&siteedition=uk#axzz3FeQkVH1V
"Nigel Farage, the party leader, believes his party is on track to win about five MPs in the general election next May, including Thurrock, also in Essex."
But some will persist in claiming they're right, no matter what the facts are. A most peculiar mental tick.
Nowadays, this centralisation is being questioned. Not just by the Scots in Scotland but by the islands, regions, towns and cities in Scotland.
It has also started a conversation in England. Not just in the regions, but also the cities and towns and villages.
One of the main problems of the centralisation process is that it has removed access from citizens to their local representatives and via them to the responsibility of their surroundings.
OK, we do have councillors at city or regional level, but, for example, you have a pothole in your road and you want it repaired. You get in contact with your local council, who add your request to a list. Over time your pot hole complaint rises up the list to where, after a period of time, it gets to the top, work put out to tender, agreement of the terms and costs, time schedule for the repair to be completed, etc..
Rare newts have been spotted breeding in the pot hole and the area around it has been declared a potential Site of Scientific Interest
You could, of course, complain to your Councillor, who will send a letter to the repairs department, where in the due process of time, it will be responded to and an answer sent to you. Saying it is being looked into.
Ducks have decided that the pothole is their new home.
You may then consider that this is taken too long and sent a letter to your MP. If you are lucky, your MP might be one of the conscientious ones and even luckier, your letter will be picked out of the couple of thousand they have received that day. They will write off to your council road repairs department, where, in the due process of time, it will be answered along the lines that the work is in the process queue and will be completed in due course.
Ospreys are spotted hunting for fish while on their migratory route.
Of course, you could be even luckier and have your local councillor/MP live a few doors down from you, in which case you don't need to do anything as the pot hole will be repaired very shortly. Amazing what effect having a local representative can be?
If the present refuses to warm, then the past is going to have to get colder.
As notorious alarmist Jonathan Overpeck is reputed to have said, "We have to get rid of the Mediaeval Warm Period".
I agree with you that if it's done in the wrong way it could make it worse, though, and you can see with the current devolution settlement exactly how.
The aim of the majority of Arabs and Muslims.
I wish I could find the epically funny CRU formula piss-take > the one that fixed all the results irrespective of the actual data.
I had a looksee for it a while ago and couldn't track it down. I saw it in the comments at Watt's Up just after ClimateGate Mk I, and just adored it. Probably like you, I went through all the emails too and some of the antics were quite shocking even for an old cynic like me.
Whoever released all that into the Wild via those Russian servers deserves a medal.
Unlike drinking lots then driving the voting decision for most 2010 conservative voters you lost is done in two steps
Step 1 dislike what Cameron has done since elected in 2010 and deciding hell will freeze over before you lend such a charlatan your vote again
Step 2 If I am not voting conservative then who shall I vote for? Perhaps UKIP
While there are many voters who have followed both steps there are also many like me who have so far only done step 1. Therefore the loss of conservative votes is entirely due to the conservative party.
UKIP hasn't attracted people from the conservatives directly it has attracted those who have already been driven away by disgust of your party. No one else to blame but the tory party and Cameron in particular
That's not normal.
4 SDs is a huge variation in statistical terms.
Is AGW happening ?
I don't know and am not sure - it's certainly something that is neither proven nor disproven despite what people on both sides come out with.
One problem is that the pure science of the matter has crept it's way into political decisions with the pursuit of a green agenda which we've paid for in fuel bills and so forth; max limits on vacuum cleaner power (ffs...); justification for pump duty rises etc etc etc.
That takes this stuff from the realm of science to politics which is why even if it gets proved in the full scientific meaning of the word (It is far from yet) people simply won't believe it.
Mr. Pulpstar, quite agree the politicisation of science is a bad thing.
Worth noting that there are certain areas (most obviously more efficient technology) which make sense from an economic and environmental perspective, regardless of whether global warming is going on or not.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22329871.800-record-sea-ice-around-antarctica-due-to-global-warming.html#.VDaK_fldUac
Climate Change is not simple, the scientists aren't in a global conspiracy. BTW the Earth isn't flat although it may appear so.
Breaking: Sources claim Govt about to announce they will start screening for Ebola at the border http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/5983441/Ministers-WILL-screen-for-Ebola-at-British-borders.html …
Good!!