Seen elsewhere

Click images for more details



Recent comments
Recent posts
Currently discussing

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

Powered by Squarespace


Apropos of nothing.

Tucked under the garage overhang, smoking a ciggy while a gentle rain fell, a plane flew overhead. For some reason I thought of LOT Polish and was reminded of the many times we waited for a LOT representative to show up and unlock the cargo doors of whatever Ilyushin/Starship Lada was being used that day.

Then one day we discovered Volkswagen car keys unlocked the whole Soviet fleet.

After that, by the time the LOT/Cubana Rep showed up we had already stripped the aircraft and were back to our game of euchre/poker/girl chasing.

Oct 9, 2015 at 3:07 AM | Unregistered Commenterclipe

Talking of colder, I've seen a number of times in comments on various blogs a figure for the F10.7 flux above which the world is in warming phase and below which it is in cooling phase. The figures most often seen are 100 or 120 but could anyone point me to research that backs this up. NOAA do a prediction service which firmly puts the flux in this area now, and for the foreseeable future. In fact the prediction is for it to continue to fall.

Oct 8, 2015 at 8:35 PM | Registered CommenterLord Beaverbrook

Now the nights are getting colder, thanks to a high pressure system keeping the clouds at bay, it is fun to see the effect on the Green fantasy - 1.3% wind contribution at the time of writing, and no solar, as it's dark!


I hope Amber Rudd learns what the coal contribution is before she outlaws all those power stations...

Oct 8, 2015 at 7:27 PM | Registered Commenterjamesp

Notable article in current issue of 'Nature' - link below. On the difficulty of reproducing results, and the ease with which scientists can deceive themselves - and hence others. Article does not specifically point out the pressure to get results that a) will conform to important memes b) will provide a basis for seeking more funding. Obvious application to 'global warming' research is not commented on.

Oct 8, 2015 at 6:49 PM | Unregistered Commenterosseo

Stuck, the head bursting has started already

On the Golan Heights, a prolonged illusion is feared, because production of 20-100 million barrels of oil at the rate of 10,000 barrels a day will continue for 5.5-27.5 years. Experience accumulated around the world shows that prolonged oil production significantly increases the risk of severe pollution events, leaking of hazardous materials, accidents, sabotage, earthquakes, and air pollution. It is frightening to think of such disasters and others like them (such as the oil disaster in the Arava in December 2014) happening in a sensitive region like the Golan Heights, destroying the nature reserves in the area; polluting Lake Kinneret (the Sea of Galilee), the groundwater, and the rivers; and damaging health, agriculture, and tourism.

Oct 8, 2015 at 5:33 PM | Registered CommenterBreath of Fresh Air

Re the oil discovery in the Golan heights.

Imagine the following scenario. Dilemma for progressives.

1. Israel drills. In SJW this is bad, because Israel is evil. BOOOO!
2. Arabs should have oil. Arabs are oppressed. HOORAY!
3. Hold on... oil is fossil fuel, hurts Gaia. BOOOO!
4. Stop the arabs drilling. HOORAY!
5. Arabs angry. Arabs oppressed. Guilt. BOOOO!
6. Repeat until head explodes.

Oct 8, 2015 at 4:02 PM | Unregistered CommenterStuck-Record


for me that video feed of The Supreme Court never seems to progress beyond the "heraldic device logo" - anybody had more luck?

This is the court that rubber stamped any challenge to the BBC's Israel coverage.

Oct 8, 2015 at 2:57 PM | Registered Commentertomo

Sometimes nature is a couple of billion years ahead of humans in using free energy.

Oct 8, 2015 at 2:55 PM | Unregistered CommenterSandyS

From Roger Helmer (UKIP) MEP:

Preposterous climate idiocy
"I have just received an e-mail from Michaela Koller of “Insurance Europe” [link in article, Insurance Europe is the European (re)insurance federation] asking me to sign up to a petition ahead of the Paris Climate Conference demanding that climate change be kept within a 2oC limit. The absurdity is mind-blowing. When the predictions of the climate models on which the alarmists rely have already been demonstrably wrong by several degrees, the idea that we can define policies which will achieve such a precise result is preposterous. I have replied as follows:

Dear Michaela,

Surely you don’t believe this arrant and unscientific nonsense?

It is not clear that the rise in atmospheric CO2 is anthropogenic, nor that atmospheric CO2 has anything like the effect postulated by the IPCC. Nor is it clear that the policies advocated by climate alarmists would have any material effect on atmospheric CO2 levels or on climate. What is absolutely clear is that we are utterly unable to predict precise changes (all the predictions so far have be falsified by events), and that these policies will do far more economic damage than anything that could be envisaged as a result of climate change.

Let’s stop this nonsense.


Oct 8, 2015 at 2:49 PM | Registered CommenterRobert Christopher

It's a nightmare, the Beauly-Denny line passes within about a mile of the house where I grew up. There have been a few plans for wind follies to take advantage of the fact. In fact the line passes through a tax evasion forest at its closest point. Although not particularly good for the environment the forest is a bit easier on the eye and they left a very old bit of Scots Pine wood untouched. During the 1970/80s some much earlier commercial pine forests in Glen Artney were harvested and then left and last time I was there had been taken over by nature to a large extent. So, although we may not live to see it, there is hope for the area now forested.

Oct 8, 2015 at 2:48 PM | Unregistered CommenterSandyS

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>