Methinkshe

Okay, thanks. I understand where you were coming from now. Thanks for elaborating.

I think the argument is along the lines of: the effects on the planet and human population of AGW will be so detrimental to both that we owe it to our grandchildren and great grandchildren etc to take action so as to hand over to them a world in at least as good a state as we found it, but certainly not in a worse state. Having said that, there is a peculiar contradiction in Steve Cook's postings to the extent that while he advocates action to prevent AGW, he is also of the opinion that the world is over-populated and that we need to limit population growth. I'd have thought that he might embrace the prospect of global warming if the results are forecast to be so detrimental to the human population - it would certainly solve his perceived over-population problem.

Sorry, I took it that you were advocating careful analysis of all evidence in a general sense and not specifically addressing the latent problem that can occur - the building of empires on dodgy data. Apologies.

At a guess, I'd say it's still probably the latter, although the usual culprits have yet to respond to Bardon's post #5787. But, for the reasons given in my previous two posts, I do not for one moment expect them to renounce the theory of AGW even in the face of this new evidence.

Sure, but there's another problem you have overlooked: the consequence of falsified data (as with the hockey stick graph) being used as the starting point for further research. Eventually it is possible to find that a whole edifice has been built on a foundation of falsified data. One of the most interesting examples of a whole edifice being built on a foundation of falsified data is Recapitulation theory. The falsified drawings still appear in text books to this day - 150 years later - even though it is acknowledged that Haeckel falsified the drawings of embryos to support his theory. (Btw, I use the example of Recapitulation theory since it is one of the most blatant examples of falsification of data and how very difficult it is, once established, to remove from popular consciousness a theory built on false data, and not because I want to divert this thread to a debate about evolution.) I expect it to be equally difficult to remove from popular consciousness the theory of AGW - even if it is indisputably proved to be based on false/incomplete data and is thoroughly disproved and discredited. Once a theory is established as fact in the collective consciousness it is incredibly difficult to dislodge it.

How strange that you should just resurrect this thread! I had just finished looking up online an article I read recently concerning an admission by some scientists that they falsify results. I was reminded of the notorious hockey stick graph. I had just found and bookmarked the article just in case this thread was ever resurrected and, lo and behold, you made the above post! Some scientists admit to 'false' results Those who have an unshakeable faith in "peer-reviewed papers" should take note.

Interesting p.o.vs - thanks for posting. I, too, wondered whether the North Korea nuclear tests could turn out to be a Black Swan - and I don't think the possibility has gone away - and was surprised that there was so little reaction from the markets to the news. The stock market rally defies logic - at least, the only logic that can be applied is a fear of missing out on a rally so everyone piles in for that reason alone. It makes for a very fragile rally, though. The first bit of bad news that actually sinks into the general consciouness could cause a total rout. Edited for typo.

A lot of the demand was driven by btl investors buying off-plan and selling to other speculators before the property was fully-built, never mind let. And many btl properties were never let - just resold and resold and resold. Do you for one minute think that the demand for tulip bulbs had anything to do with people's desire to plant them and actually grow tulips? How many bulbs purchased by speculators in the Tulip Bulb Bubble do you think were actually planted and grew into tulips? Sure, the commercial growers would have continued planting and growing as they always had, but the speculators just bought and sold the bulbs. Now apply the same reasoning to the btl bubble and tell us what percentage of btls purchased by speculators were actually let as homes?

You what.........?

Thank-you! I appreciate your gift.

You do........??

Too right he has a mixed business record. Why Alan Sugar, who is more barrow-boy than businessman, as opposed to, say, one of the "Dragons" if it is a TV personality that is required? (Although for what reason Gordon should want a TV celeb as an adviser, beats me). As for the contract and the peerage - sounds like a total stitch up to me. Just more evidence that this government is motivated more by mutual back-scratching than by serving the interests of the country.

finite finitely definite definitely Now I'm just going to duck behind the sofa for cover and try to dodge all those "pedant" missiles that will, no doubt, come flying my way!

Thanks for drawing my attention to that. I've always wondered how politicians manage to stay so on-message and some even more so than others. Yvette Copper always sound like an automaton - now I know why. She doesn't even seem capable of giving her responses an individual slant or her voice some kind of varied expression; it's just a near monotone drone, drone, drone - or nag, even. I'd feel sorry for her other half if it wasn't Ed Balls! As it is, they fully deserve each other.

Apart from any other wooliness, it seems to me that the article fails on its assumption of the rise and rise of individuals, cultures and nations without making any reference to recidivism and the decline and fall of civilisations, nations and empires. The path from primitivism to civilisation is not quite such a predictable trajectory as the author claims, imo.

Constitutionally the Queen has the power to dissolve parliament. However, by convention she only exercises this power on the advice of her ministers. But that doesn't mean that she COULDN'T dissolve parliament APART from the advice of her ministers. But I think things would have to be pretty bad for HM to exercise that power.

With a new mandate David Cameron could afford to take the axe to public spending. In any event, think of all the unnecessary spending that could be cut without affecting services; all those quangos and special consultants for a start.

Strange, isn't it, but Sentamu has done more to preserve our Christian heritage than Canterbury. In any event, no-one can understand what the hec Canterbury is going on about! I've never encountered a more verbose, convoluted and ultimately empty form of expression than is exhibited by Canterbury.

Oh dear, oh dear! Are you going to apply to be taken into care on the grounds of child abuse?!

This is where you and I part company. I personally know some wonderful Nigerians and their children who would put to shame some indigenous English families. Tbh, I'd prefer to have a few million of their type in the country than some of our indigenous feral kids and their parents. But maybe that's because the Nigerian families I know are Christian and adhere to the principles of a Christian British culture and would not dream of imposing on Britain the corrupt political culture that is extant in Nigeria and from which they sought refuge.

BNP debate and other tangential issues aside. I have just been to vote with my 18 yr old first-time voter son. I have always been somewhat suspicious of the ticking off of addreses and the associated ballot-paper with counterfoil. So, when I was offered my ballot-paper I handed it to my son. I was told that that was my particular ballot-paper. When I suggested that since ballots were secret it didn't matter which ballot paper I or my son completed, I was told that they would prefer it if I filled in the one designated to me. Needless to say I objected and when my son was proffered his ballot-paper, I took mine and his and did a shuffle. They said that of course since it was a secret ballot we could do what we wished. In that case, why protest in the first instance that I should complete my ballot-paper connected to my address and my counterfoil? Can anyone shed any light?

Are you a product of NuLab education because you seem as incapable of reading as any educated under NuLab? I have maintained from the outset that I do not support the BNP albeit for different reaons than others' non-support of the BNP.

Don't be so silly! How old are you? I'd expect a more intelligent response from my thirteen year old. It has absolutely nothing to do with insecurity and everything to do with (amongts other things) an encroaching attitude backed up by law that now makes it impossible for a Christian to faithfully maintain his beliefs which are that Jesus is THE truth (i.e the ONLY truth and no man comes to the Father (God) EXCEPT through Jesus) since to make such a proclamation of faith is now considered incitement to religious hatred. This has nothing to do with insecurity and everything to do with loss of freedom due to the cultural incursions and overthrow of British culture on which our legal system is based, and all in the name of multiculturalism. In short, although I was born and live in an ostensibly Christian country whose laws are based on Judeao-Christian ethics, I am no longer allowed to openly practice my Christian faith without being labelled an inciter of religious hatred.

Yes, my culture is in the process of being destroyed and no, I do not read the Daily Mail.

Interesting pov. It is true that we have not become the most sought after destination for asylum seekers apart from the blood shed by our ancestors. Consider the loss of life in WW1 and WW2 - a personal sacrifice on the part of every individual to preserve our British freedoms, hard won over centuries of blood and tears. And, as you say, it is also worthy of debate whether those who seek asylum would not be doing a better job shedding their blood for their own country, as did our forebears, so as to secure a better place for their descendants.