Addendum from the Telegraph,

Overall Defra will have to cut £700 million, the largest cut of any department outside the Treasury. Environment campaigners are relieved funding for conservation was not harder hit. But the fact remains that money for wildlife will be squeezed. Also flooding and animal disease prevention, despite the risks to public safety.

£7 billion to be sent overseas!!!!

5,000 UK companies to be hit with green stealth tax hidden in the detail of Treasury documents.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/8076822/Fury-over-1bn-green-stealth-tax-in-spending-review.html

So the ConDems want the private sector to stimulate employment and take up those that will be released from the public sector but the priority is to pay tax on a gaseous emission that the dangers from which are under dispute.

This falls into the disgracefull catagory of ring fencing £7 billion charity payments to other countries, due to increase to £12 billion in the foreseable future, at the same time as increasing the working life of the female population to 66 years old.

Hhhmm

New Scientist: Thermogededon (23 Oct 2010 issue)

Words actually do fail me....

It wasn't Jo Nova asking, it was a commenter.

Messenger: Re Jo Nova.

Jo Nova has a very simple and very effective Standard Operating Procedure.

1. Find a 'victim' of the opposite side - in this case the opposition is Green / Establishment repressives.

2. Support the 'victim' as publicly as possible.

3. If the support works - St Jo has triumphed. If the support fails, St Jo has done her best but the evil [insert respondent here] has made us all a victim.

Whichever result it's a win-win situation for St Jo.

http://joannenova.com.au/

A commenter on Jo Nova' post, "Is the Western Science Establisment Corrupt, part 8", is asking for referenced instances of people who have been fired or otherwise had their career hindered (eg. publishing, promotions, funding) through expressing disagreement with the AGW theory,

Hi Gortonborn, it is good that you have taken down the poll it is the right thing to do. Not sure about the numerous flips, having watched along with others, the poll fairly closely for the preceding 24 hours, it just moved inexorably in one direction. But I see no gain for anybody in going back over that period.

Just in case you are wondering I am a lot further north than "the South East and in Cambridgeshire", lets just say I know Gorton well. But that is one of the issues with this web thingy, it does not have geographic boundaries, well maybe China & North Korea.

I understand people promoting their business; that was my vocation. The problem here is that the promotion is seen to be at the expense of people who will never be able to take up your "free solar" initiative. The people that live in inner city apartments, the ones whose roof isn't big enough to support your business model, the ones whose roof faces in the wrong direction, those with obstructions etc. I am sure you know the issues. This cannot therefore be considered to be a fair and equitable government initiative.

The government is on record saying that the feed in tariff and other green initiatives will result in increased electricity unit costs. Increases will erode the savings your clients make. It also has another detrimental effect, the sure-fire result of increasing the cost of fuel and energy is inflation. The sure-fire result of increased inflation is increased interest rates, not normally good for society as a whole. (Also not a good scenario for certain business models.)

You now have my reasons for wanting a true and representative conclusion to your poll. Not just the views of your friends.

I would like to be able to wish you well with your enterprise, and maybe I should, it is the government that has set the scene, not you. But I will find it difficult until you and the government find a way for your business model to produce a benefit for all UK citizens, not just the ones with big houses that face south. Please do not cite the benefits that all UK citizens will get from the reduced CO2, we both know...

Regards

PS It is the Bishop - Andrew Montford that you should thank for the opportunity to post

Green Sand - I appreciate what your concerns are and believe me, they are ours as well, we have taken down the Poll and it will remain that way, you mention a flip of the results - this was not by us but by another (or the same) source that flipped the results twice before in the previous 24 hours - because we invited guests to vote (i.e. unregistered) we have no precise way of identifying the individual - what we do know is there are a couple of registered users who are on the same IP address (using the same machine to post against Chatmaster) - this is no surprise after the weekends activities - what started innocently as an invitation for our 'Friends' to join a forum for Green discussion has turned into a painful experience for us and our Friends - finally, the really interesting point is this, the majority of our friends are Yorkshire based, the main protagonists are based in the South East and in Cambridgeshire - Make of this what you will...Google will fill in the gaps - Thank you for the opportunity to post...

Hi Gortonborn, you are quite right in saying that posters have been boasting about the ease of manipulation. I am a very old bear with no understanding of such machinations, so cannot comment either way. I understand that the poll was manipulated by both sides of the "divide" and I truly find this disappointing.

Commissioning an open poll on such an important matter carries responsibilities. Especially if "The results will be passed to the decision makers at the highest level and we can only hope they will take on board the positive nature of the overwhelming response we have enjoyed so far!"

The people who initiated the poll, commenced by emailing "friends" and asking them to "have your say". (you know the wording of your email). This can only be seen in one light, an attempt to stack the poll in the direction you wanted. There can be no other interpretation. So I have a problem with your final comment "I will let you decide (which is all we wanted our Poll to do)".

Also, an instant flip of the result and leaving it at that position does not put this issue in a good light. If the poll has been manipulated then it should be withdrawn and the numbers taken down. But it is your poll.

However, I am disappointed that the poll was manipulated, It was never my wish to compromise or manipulate the poll I wanted to see the poll finish with a true representation. As one of your commentators has said, there is a lot of feelings on both sides of the "divide" and as business people I am sure you are aware of the need to understand the depth of those feelings.

Maybe you could go again, with registration, with security and with adequate unbiased publicity? Possibly with a comment here, I am sure the Bishop would not mind. If he does I am sure I will soon find out.

Regards

I sent this to the PR dept at the Hospital for Sick Children at Great Ormond Street (GOS) today.

.....I was absolutely appalled to read that GOS has signed up to the 10:10 campaign. Apart from the questionable nature of the idea that CO2 is causing Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming, which you surely must know is not accepted by a growing number of people, are you not aware of the recent disastrous publicity campaign undertaken by the doyens of 10: 10, in producing a film which involved graphically blowing up small children who did not agree to reduce their CO2 "footprint"? See below, for example.
http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2010/10/enemys-true-face.html

Were you not aware of this film? If so, how can you ignore it? Is this really the sort of campaign you, of all institutions, would wish to associate yourself with? I am am frankly ashamed of the Hospital for making this decision.