BBC Blog Network

User Profile

MrSkipp

Listed below are comments made by MrSkipp between Sunday, 21st June 2009 and Saturday, 12th December 2009.

«Newer
Older»

COP15 Copenhagen climate summit: Day 5 6:54pm on 12 Dec 2009 #82 Bowlegsthebard

Why do you say "computer"? Shows you know nothing. The computer is just a means. It's like saying you live in a "cement mixer house" although from your remarks about health perhaps you live in a mud hut
COP15 Copenhagen climate summit: Day 5 4:45pm on 12 Dec 2009 Anyway whether the science is right or wrong is irrelevant because the UN framework convention says so:

Article 3
3. The Parties should take precautionary measures to anticipate, prevent or minimize the causes of climate change and mitigate its adverse effects. Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty should not be used as a reason for postponing such measures, taking into account that policies and measures to deal with climate change should be cost-effective so as to ensure global benefits at the lowest possible cost. To achieve this, such policies and measures should take into account different socio-economic contexts, be comprehensive, cover all relevant sources, sinks and reservoirs of greenhouse gases and adaptation, and comprise all economic sectors. Efforts to address climate change may be carried out cooperatively by interested Parties.
COP15 Copenhagen climate summit: Day 5 09:21am on 12 Dec 2009 Has anyone actually defined what they mean by the "pre-industrial temperature"? According to IPCC it is the temperature before 1750. But IPCC also say this was all over the place. What is more, the 3 main temperature anomaly series, as well as differing from each other, only go back to about 1850. So no-one knows what is supposed to be measured - and certainly not to within half a °C.
Europe's top jobs 11:52am on 28 Nov 2009 Gavin

In the Commission's press release that you refer to, could you explain what you think this means:

"Baroness Ashton will be the 1 st Vice-President. However, having regard to her specific functions, notably in the Council, the replacement of the President in his absence will be assured by the other Vice-Presidents, in the order of precedence defined by the President. The order of precedence is: Viviane Reding, Joaquín Almunia, Siim Kallas, Neelie Kroes, Antonio Tajani, Maro š Š ef č ovi č ."

This looks to me as though Baroness Ashton's vice-presidency is purely titular. She has, in effect, been downgraded and the real role has been given to Viviane Reding - perhaps as a sop to Juncker for not being given the Council President role. Would you agree with this interpretation?

Reding has been one of the more effective commissioners over recent years, so there is little doubt about her abilities. But, like Juncker, she is federalist at heart and has no understanding of the British legal system and how it differs from the continental. this is at the origin of much of the British antagonism to te EU. With the Justice portfolio she could create problems for the UK.
Which names in the EU hat? 09:29am on 12 Nov 2009 It's interesting that you say "The Swedish prime minister is very keen to have a consensus candidate who has the full backing of all 27 leaders. He is desperate to avoid a row or reverting to majority voting". This means it can neither be Blair, who has too many opponents, or, if Brown does his job and uses the veto to protect British interests, a committed federalist like Juncker or Van Rompuy. There can then only be a compromise candidate, i.e. another lowest common denominator like Barrosso, or those other Commission Presidents whose names have already been forgotten, i.e. another poodle.

When does the Lisbon treaty actually come into force? Because at this point the procedure becomes "qualified majority" - whatever that means?
Magnetic attraction of climate 'scepticism' 2:41pm on 01 Nov 2009 If I am driving my car and I want to overtake the car in front, I use all the available evidence to assess whether it is safe or not. I may not know 100% that it is safe, and my decision is therefore weighted by the scale of the possible outcome - in this case death for me and my passengers and others. I therefore err on the side of caution. If I am walking along the street and the worst that can happen if I try to pass the person in front is that I collide with another pedestrian, I am not so cautious.
In the case of AWG, I am very happy that in the absence of solid evidence either way, those who govern us are erring on the side of caution. I don't actually care about the truth one way or the other - I just care about my children (and yours) and their future.
Magnetic attraction of climate 'scepticism' 8:21pm on 31 Oct 2009 There seems to be a confusion on this blog between political decision making (e.g. the precautionary principle), which govern societies, and science, which seeks to understand the world
Copenhagen Countdown: 45 days 1:11pm on 25 Oct 2009 There would seem to be 2 important questions for Copenhagen:
1) How much GHGs can the World safely emit ?
2) How can these emissions be divided fairly amongst (and within) the different countries of the World ?
Does climate cloud the bigger picture? 9:24pm on 08 Jul 2009 Rio Declaration - 1992:
"Principle 8
To achieve sustainable development and a higher quality of life for all people, States should reduce and eliminate unsustainable patterns of production and consumption and promote appropriate demographic policies."
http://www.un.org/documents/ga/conf151/aconf15126-1annex1.htm
Climate 'meltdown', yet fusion lags 8:58pm on 21 Jun 2009 To peroxisome2009 #75

Virtually everything in my message #71 was a quote from George Box - most of the quote marks disappeared in the moderation!
Firstly stochastic testing, then hindcasts. Haven't read the reports, but presume these have been done.
Then, it's really a matter of whether the decision maker thinks the results are worth gambling on. In my view it's too soon now. If I personally risked being affected I would consider the results very seriously, taking into account whatever testing had been done. If I lived near a river basin that looked at risk I would think of selling up some years down the road.
Modelling is science, but decision making is haphazard.

«Newer
Older»

^ Back to top

BBC MMVI

The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites

BBC.co.uk

BBC Blog Network

Find and talk to the BBC's bloggers.

User Profile

MrSkipp