´óÏó´«Ã½

Milibabble wow that should be enlightening - Not!

Has he ever had any thoughts in his life of actually getting a job he can do?

I suppose with his life experiences, there is only Politics for both him and his Brother. Shame init.

Now then Global warming.
If the problem was a serious as they the Politicians say - then why not for example simply instruct airlines to reduce their flight numbers by say 5% or so.
But no - the whole thing is just another Tax Cash Cow and nothing more!
In the case of Britain - tax's are all that counts, solely to get the country out of the skint state it is in.
If he says it is not skint, then who would be surprised - we had to deal with WMD in Iraq didn't we, so there!

What does "legally binding targets to cut CO2 emissions by 2050" mean? Will the 80 year old Milliband and his successors be dragged to justice for their proportion of the failure? This is band-wagonning.

best regards - David Webb

What does "legally binding targets to cut CO2 emissions by 2050" mean? Will the 80 year old Milliband and his successors be dragged to justice for their proportion of the failure? This is band-wagonning.

best regards - David Webb

What does "legally binding targets to cut CO2 emissions by 2050" mean? Will the 80 year old Milliband and his successors be dragged to justice for their proportion of the failure? This is band-wagonning.

best regards - David Webb

Can the Justin Rowlatt "Ethical Man" thing be ethically dumped?

It's getting old.

Why no comment from any of the many scientists who don't support any of this? Are we all expected to believe anything Miliband says with his party's history?

This is unilateralism of a kind even old Labour would find frightening!

Are these policies a real attempt to do something about global warming or just an effort to make sure Cameron doesn't steal this issue for himself?
The UK has met its Kyoto CO2 target since 1997 because we switched electricity generation to natural gas. This will reveres in a few years so its not a permanent gain. Nuclear sounds great until you work out how little fuel there will be if several large economies make the same decision. No wonder hedge funds have already started investing in nuclear fuel resources.
We will have to face the facts - reduce energy consumption. This includes flights - because The New Scientist (which I trust more than the political parties) says aircraft emissions in the air are 4x as damaging as on the ground.
Energy is going to be very expensive so it makes sense anyway.
Oh and it would be great if Paxman actually knew enough about this ubject to conduct a worthwhile interview.

Stop pandering to these morons like MILLIBAND and now CONSERVATIVE DAVE, climate change is getting warped out all proportion. I am now looking for somewhere else to put my VOTE in the next election - all this is just total rubbish and just a excuse to put up taxes. And if these fools insist on going through with these stupid climate laws good old GB is and will be a third world country in 20 years.
I don't KNOW anybody who believes this rubbish so where are the real public on this issue (and I don't mean focus groups) and Universities with vested interests in getting funding for so call research!!!!!

Justin Pursell

Michael Crick's follow-up comments in the studio relating to his report on newspaper scratch card scams - stated that you can enter and claim the prize for free by post. I tried this and never heard from them again despite sending a stamped addressed envelope!

Why has everybody suddenly realised that premium phone lines are a ripoff ? it has always seemed obvious to me. Anyway, a good one is the "dial a date" for all those sad single people out there, the adverts you see in the free local papers. Not only do they make you hang on the phone for ages but they also try to catch you via internet subscriptions too.Now thats worth Michael Crick Investigating.

It is distressing to see so much attention being given to reducing CO2 emissions, with all the unnecessary effort and costs involved. Carbon dioxide is not the culprit it is being made out to be.

It can be shown that the average increase in the Earth’s surface temperature due to the effect of doubling CO2 is probably less than 0.86 deg C. Please refer to my post in the physorg forum. (1)

This calculation independently supports the work of Hans Erren, who obtained a figure of 0.6833 deg C. (2)

The climate models produce substantially larger values for the temperature rise, which are founded on the idea that a small rise in temperature in the upper layers of greenhouse gases due to CO2 will result in a larger positive feedback from extra water vapour. However, according to Prof W M Gray of Colorado State University, and of hurricane prediction fame, this is exactly the opposite of what happens in reality. I should be interested to see a rational explanation of this contradiction.

Another point which the CO2 believers need to explain is the fall in the Earth’s surface temperature from 1940 to 1975, when CO2 emissions were increasing.

These points alone seem to indicate that the observed warming is due to another and more significant cause.

(1)https://forum.physorg.com/index.php?showtopic=7157&st=30
(2)https://members.lycos.nl/ErrenWijlens/co2/howmuch.htm

Something like 0.54% of the C02 in the atmosphere is generated by human activity. Of that the UK contributes 2% - around 0.01% of the total and a minute proportion compared to that emitted from natural sources. The fact that water vapour is the only major 'greenhouse gas' and that the science doesn't back the idea Man actually makes any difference to global warming was, as usual, ignored by Mr Snow on tonight's programme.

Rather than peddling the kind of scientific orthodoxy which underpins the populist Blairite agenda, why doesn't the ´óÏó´«Ã½ present a more balanced view? Why aren't the real questions being asked? Why does Newsnight's Mr Snow (who clearly relishes his role as a condescending avuncular authority on the subject) adopt such a one-sided view?

Please, Newsnight, let's have some informed debate on the topic of Global Warming - or is Newsnight's audience to be relegated to the twilight zone of tabloid myths & half-truths untested by quality journalism?

Nice to note that Milliband refuses to acknowledge International air travel in the CO2 target reduction, whilst he DOES acknowledge that air travel is a significant in the production of CO2. However he does acknowledge that companies may relocate outside of Britain as a consequence of the tougher internal carbon production regulations but then does not rule out buying carbon credits Internationally...to reduce Britain's carbon output... Contradictions abound!

I've just seen Paxo letting the Treasury Minister for the 'reform' of National Statistics completely off the hook where pre-realease to politicians is concerned.

The Minister claimed that pre-release is an established international practice. This is a barefaced half-truth, so why did Paxo use the least damaging comparison, namely the US, to rebut this claim?

The fact (on which Paxo should have been briefed) is that international best practice - in Scandinavia, for example - is for statisitcs to be published to politicians at exactly the same time as to everyone else ...with no lead time at all; in most other European countries, the lead time is no more than 1-2 hours. Is anything less than best practice likely to re-establish public confidence?

And the Minister's lame excuse when half-pushed by Paxo? Words to the effect that our media and the expectations of the public are to blame because they demand instant comment from politicians ...and politicians therefore they need to time to - in effect - prepare their spin. Chicken or egg?

The comment in this week's Economist was more to the point and uncharacteristically blunt: "Mr Blair and Mr Brown should be ashamed of themselves".

COURT MARTIAL:

Just watched both NN segment & Panorama special about Iraq & the Court Martial ref Iraqi prisoners. As ex serving Airborne Warrior (cold war variety) been very interested in background, case & judgement

It's been highly enlightening as to differences between what is TRUE torture v & irregular abuse/ beating & torture LITE (the expanded version) & on reflection which regimes/organisation engage such (per/temp state of affairs against backgrounds of different context).

The sad things is one more unaccountable death in Iraq (against background of Islamic Fracticide & that nations history) does not change anything, except the UK & its military falling from somewhat higher standards we hold ourselves too (but regrettable things happen in wartime).

Not going into the rights/wrongs of the case as £20 million spent, its been several years & its been judged by the court.

GRIPE & GROAN:

Would bet that sum of money, that the groups with biggest gripe about the successive NOT GUILTY verdicts are the anti war / Left / liberal left / ultra liberal battalions of the irrational.

Now these groups get an insight to how the rest of mainstream British Society feels, when our CJS lets victims, community & society get let down … on a regular basis - Welcome too our World *

* where toe-rags (without a context of war) regularly 'get away with it'

UNCIVIL RIGHTS:

The biggest form of influencing corrosive ethos in British Society since 1960's, is the never ending calls for further RIGHTS issues.This has near fatally undermined our state/society/community/citizens/parents ability to discipline & control disruptive elements around them & is the responsibility of the above mentioned groups & their burgeoning agendas & causes.

That is why, we see continuing calls & measures aimed at a 'Renaissance of Rights' whereby a rebalance of individual rights v society right to exist & govern is re-achieved.

And if anyone needed a reminder, in War sh*t happens but in Society it happens for a reason.

vikingar

I've just read Justin Pursell's comment, about the Newsnight interview with Milliband, that "if these fools (the politicians) insist on going thorugh with these stupid climate laws, good old GB will be a third world country in 20 years."

Why 20 years? We already have a worse health service than Cuba; a worse education system than most East European and many third world countries; a worst public transport system than the brand new metro systems in Delhi and Clacutta; and a civil service whose only service to the country, it seems, is to provide employment for the badly-eudcated half of our population ("40% functionally illiterate and annumerate") who are unemployable in the private sector economy ...and who have been betrayed by past Education Ministers, including Milliband, who kept telling us that standards in education are always rising. GB indeed!

The trial of service-men in Iraq certainly raises a very interesting conundrum.

In western societies, the military is and must be under civilian control. Yet that does not and cannot mean that exactly the same standards used in civilian life (that is, outside a combat zone) can be applied to the regulation of the armed forces. Nevertheless, surely some principles from liberal, deomocratic society must apply (?)

Herein lies the problem. At the very least, it seems that the hooding of prisoners has become widespread in Iraq. Now, this has been banned practice in the UK military for many, many years, without (so far as we know) the armed forces objecting to such retraint. It may well be that tht view has changed - but can we (following the necessary principle of civilian control) allow this to change on the ground without the necessary consultation and civilian approval? If we cannot, the matter requires investigation.

If that investigation uncovers the death of a prisoner in custody (not exactly how things transpired, I know - but given the widespread use of an illegal technique, we might say it may and ought to have been investigated) surely that, too, must be investigated. If that uncovers a story of violence towards inmates (such that one soldier admitted committing a war crime in his treatment of detainees) surely that must be investigated.

But we are returned to the original problem: to what extent can civilian control apply civilian (liberal, deomocratic) mores in relation to the armed forces? If it cannot, what meaning does 'civilian control' have in relation to the armed forces? We cannot have recourse to the argument that, in times of war, civilian control must in some way lapse - otherwise civilian control (only in peace time) has no meaning.

As I said, a conundrum to which I would not pretend to have all the answers.

It does seem, on this occasion, that a line may have been crossed - or more than one line, in fact - and that (predictably and understandably) the army has closed ranks around this issue.

What to do?

I am the very model of a modern Major-General,
I've punishments corporal, astral, and antiscriptural,
I'm very well acquainted, too, with matters interogational,
I understand stressing, both the simple and the hoodical,
But I never saw or heard anything, most categorical;
upon my honour as an officer and a gentlemantical

About people dying I'll post on the army rumour board all my views ,
But with nothing that any pc court martial could ever use.

John moore @19 ..To a degree,i agree with your comments,especially regarding the education system failings.
1997 and the catchy tune "things can only get better"was ringing in our ears after the labour landslide win,We were all taken along with the hope that new labour were going to give us a brighter new future, especially after the dire major years.How are things now?
You can liken the last 10 yrs of this labour govt to a six week medication course,you take the pills but you dont get any better,only to find out later your pharmacist is a dyslectic

(i was going to sell that joke ,but you can have that one for free)

You need a break Newsnight (and ´óÏó´«Ã½); your daily preaching about global warming and CO2 emissions are becoming quite nauseating now, what with your silly Ethical Man... and yes, Blair's last ditch at doing something, alas the wrong way...

For some REAL (Non-PaCman) science watch this Channel 4 (UK) special - The Great Global Warming Swindle... you will realise that CO2 emission is not the cause but the effect - the cause of global warming has nothing to do with us humans!

Correct me if I'm wrong, but did Milliband say something like: some business, or industry will go abroad as they are free to do so. So all of our heavy industry can go abroad, as it will not be able to afford, and be remotely able to meet these standards in this Country. These companies will fold, and the area's become business parks etc, or go abroad where the standards are not as high. Then we can import what we used to make, from these dirty Countries, and probably a lot more dirty than from here, but a little bit cheaper, yes. So in fact, there will be more pollution, especially of the carbon emissions.

Or does this mean we will lose all our foriegn exports, and tax to the hilt, the products from Countries not as clean as us, who will now export to us. Or instead of cheap imports, we will have a great manufacturing industry again, because we may not be as cheap because of the cost of houses, and living in general, but that we are cleaner, and the US, a lot of European, and the far east countries will not get a look in, I doubt that somehow. I'm sure they are really worried now, because of our lead.

2% Carbon emissions from this Country, and we try to influence big carbon producers not to pollute. I do not think so. This is manufacturing industry martyrdom.

Millions of people travelling a good few miles to work in offices, be it call centres, or insurance etc, cannot be that good either. Let alone the offices themselve's. Surely heavy industry could provide some of the help and answers to this problem, instead of expensive think tanks.

BALANCE?

Talking of burgeoning agendas …..

But the realities of British Military SoP from civilian life (which saves lives & ensures why we are the best) is always under threat from officious bodies & PC birdcages latest encroachments:

1) the latest development ref rationing/banning of Bag Pipes from Health & Safety perspective … you could not make it up [1]

2) aahhhh diddums ….. "a number of changes had been made to assault courses, such as lower climbing walls and mats under some obstacles to reduce the chance of injury. The changes were ridiculed as the first stage in developing a "cotton-wool army". [1]

Ethos & Culture on every level essential to British Military life.

vikingar

SOURCES:

[1]