Click images for more details



Recent comments
Recent posts
Currently discussing

A few sites I've stumbled across recently....

Powered by Squarespace



100MW (0.2%) now, not including any consumption by the stationary windmills to keep their shafts straight and electronics warm...

Dec 11, 2012 at 1:16 PM | Registered Commenterjamesp


"large standing charge and smaller rate"

That's probably so they can claim to have put you on the lowest rate, as dictated by that nice Mr Cameron. Before long, we'll be getting £500 standing charges and free fuel...

Dec 11, 2012 at 1:11 PM | Registered Commenterjamesp

I got my Eon letter today too, but my predicted rise is only £45 a year. I see they've moved me to large standing charge and smaller rate, which is welcome, I have to admit. A while to go before I'm in fuel poverty, but I suspect for many people they are having to think about not heating parts of their homes fir the first time since the middle of the last century.

Dec 11, 2012 at 12:21 PM | Unregistered CommenterTheBigYinJames

At new prices E.ON tells me my energy costs are to go up to £1,848 a year from January 2013. Not long before I'm in fuel poverty with no prospect of increased income. For the first time in my life the prospect of going cold in winter is on the horizon. Maybe not this year, or next, but soon.

Dec 11, 2012 at 12:05 PM | Unregistered CommenterTony Jackson

Cold today. And all those wind turbines are contributing only 200 MW to a total UK demand of 50,330 MW - i.e. 0.4%. Evil coal is contributing 23,820 MW - i.e. 47.3%.

Dec 11, 2012 at 11:11 AM | Registered CommenterRobin Guenier

The Bish removing someone from his own blog is quite different from trying to get someone banned from someone else's.

Dec 11, 2012 at 9:00 AM | Unregistered CommenterTheBigYinJames


I've been sucked into ZDB's 'discussions' a few times, but it's like wrestling with a pig - you both get filthy and only the pig enjoys it. Resist!

Dec 11, 2012 at 8:59 AM | Registered Commenterjamesp

RKS et al. If someone is annoying you, disengage. Starve them of the oxygen of your response. Trying to get people banned is warmie tactics, not ours. If the person is talking nonsense, it will be obvious to the audience.

Dec 10, 2012 at 8:13 PM | TheBigYinJames>>>>>

Warmie tactics?

The Bish has banned disruptive trolls from his threads on more than one occasion because, no matter how much we want to ignore them, we all end up being drawn into the troll's web with the resultant wrecked threads. [snip]

Dec 11, 2012 at 3:06 AM | Registered CommenterRKS

Latest on FOI requests on Lewandowsky's putrid 'research' here (scroll down a bit):

An excerpt:

This has resulted in a release this week of more than 300 pages of correspondence, although the applicant, "Australian Climate Madness" blogger Simon Turnill, has yet to publish the files. Lewandowsky said:

"There will have been easily more than 100 person hours of publicly-funded time spent dealing with this request, which cost the applicant only $30 to submit - although I understand there was an charge of $400. Putting in FOI requests seems to be common practice now. There is no question in my mind that the intent is to intimidate and slow down research. These kinds of requests discourage scientists from doing their work."

Yes, it cost me over $400, and like anyone else I am fully entitled to apply for documents under the Freedom of Information Act without having to give any justification, because I was curious to see how such a piece of research was ever agreed to by University of WA's ethics department.

And no, the intention was never to "intimidate and slow down research", it is to subject academics who vilify sceptics to proper scrutiny. I have only ever submitted FOI requests when a highly questionable claim is made in the mainstream media, as was the case here, namely that sceptics believed the moon landings were faked. In total, I have submitted just four FOI requests in two and a half years on just two news stories - hardly what can be regarded as vexatious."


Just like the sleazes and prevaricators at UEA, Lewandowsky is claiming that he is being harassed by FOI requests. Just like in that case, the numbers of requests were laughably small, and anyway the numbers are irrelevant.

h/t Simon, who is fighting the good fight. You will note, if you read his post, that he gives credit where credit is due to FOI officers. He's no foaming-mouthed conspiracy theorist.

These bozos apparently only have one, unconvincing, script.

Dec 10, 2012 at 10:42 PM | Registered Commenterjohanna

RKS et al. If someone is annoying you, disengage. Starve them of the oxygen of your response. Trying to get people banned is warmie tactics, not ours. If the person is talking nonsense, it will be obvious to the audience.

Dec 10, 2012 at 8:13 PM | Unregistered CommenterTheBigYinJames

PostCreate a New Post

Enter your information below to create a new post.
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>