Click images for more details
A few sites I've stumbled across recently....
JamesP was on at 2:53 in (I set the autostart)
- Another 1:54pm Weird radio prog interviewing Dutch energy dealing company that claims it connects customers to whichever wind farm they select. Claim that many people are moving cos it's so much cheaper than buying from "Big Energy Corps". Either he's fibbing or someone is paying a vast subsidy somewhere.It's Lalaland for the BBC to imply someone guarantee YOU 24 hour electricity from wind and it really be anything other than mega expensive before subsidies.
jamesp: I heard you on the radio. Well done.
Harry Passfield: yes... I caught a similar programme the other day, on BBC 1, about the Pennine Way. As usual, they managed to lever in “climate change”, with a moorland park-keeper (or whatever…) bemoaning that the industrial revolution created the worst pollution in that area than the world has evah seen, before or since, with acid rain corroding and eroding the precious moors away. (Cue scenes of ruined moorland, etc, etc…) “How odd,” I thought, “that they seem to be ignoring the pea-soupers of old London; surely, they were a good example of worse pollution? Also, how long ago is it since the pollution was controlled; and, aren’t moorlands naturally acidic, anyway; by how much can it be shown that this acid rain reduced the pH? Could not the wastage shown be more likely to have been caused by the tramping boots of the thousands of walkers attracted to that path? Finally, even odder that they are not showing the egregious wind “farms” that are probably doing far, far more damage than past industrialisation ever did." (While I have not travelled the Pennines greatly, there must be a large number of these bird-choppers extant up there by now, it being such a notoriously windy place.) My mind then fell foul of the teeth-grindingly dreadful poetry of another local “artist”, and it took some time to disentangle it and resume normal life.
Don't want to go on about Farming Today (R4 05:45) but, yet again, this morning's AGW scare story was about banning driven Grouse shoots. Why? Because in order to maintain the moors for the Grouse (and lots of other endangered flora and fauna) the game-keepers burn off the scrub (I don't know how often: bi-annnually?). Apparently, the burning increases the carbon in the atmosphere so leading to more dangerous climate change. (note to self: get some Nytol!)
I see one of Bob Ward's colleagues at Grantham Inst has a letter in the DM about the loss of Arctic ice. All the same platitudes from her governor, Ward. What it is to sell your soul to such a man.
£310K a year for "CEO" of housing "charity"...
They're predictably engaged with climate and carbon issues.... quick search brings up predictable tosh
a few years ago I got chugger-ed by a nice young lady on Tottenham Court Road and since it wasn't much and I thought Amnesty was OK (at the time...) I continued for a while. One thing that precipitated my departure was the blizzard of glossy mail marketing which I really didn't like - to the point of contacting them.... they flat refused to stop it. Then there were repeated telephone calls which were the last straw ("climate change" was affecting political prisoners apparently).
I'm with Bill Hicks on marketing .... Dressing up as a charity is a common scam and using a charity as a vehicle to fill your own pockets likewise - one example popped up on BBC R4 the other day Charitdees need tightening up and enforcement needs to happen - but that won't happen while the sector is being roundly abused by peculating public servants and multinational, politically active NGOs....
Solar Impulse: It's worse than we thought: (From the DT)
But engineers discovered the taxing flight had caused irreversible damage to the single-seat aircraft’s batteries.There wasn’t time to repair the damage before winter sets in, according to the Swiss-led team, so the aircraft has been grounded until favourable weather returns next April.
I see that Solar Impulse is having more trouble: This from The DT: "A team attempting the first solar-powered flight around the world say they need to raise €20m (£14m) to go on, after their aircraft was grounded in Hawaii for nine months."
This is the beast that a troll on a Booker item on the DT tried to argue was fully powered, able to handle storm and turbulence and was, in no way a powered glider. I thought: they really do get some young trolls on the DT.
Mike Jackson mentions bad behaviour by GP, WWF and related charities on the 'Overriding the Benefits' item on the main blog. Charities in general seem to be a bit out of control lately, and I'm contributing to a piece on the subject on 'You and Yours' tomorrow (BBC, I know, but I still like R4 most of the time). The background is this:
A close friend of mine died recently and his house was full of charity mailshots - so many, in fact, that I spread 100 or so of them on the floor and photographed them. The odd thing is that they were mainly from charities he had already given to, but because he didn't tick the 'opt-out' boxes, his address got circulated. It seems a bit cynical of the charities to see donors as a soft touch, rather than to say thank-you and hope for further support in the future, but it seems now to be as much a dog-eat-dog world as any other business. It would be interesting to know how much of their income is now spent on marketing compared to, say, ten years ago...
Notify me of follow-up comments via email.