A while back there was talk of a massive El Nino –
Scientists warn of likely El Niño event in 2014
it quickly spread through the news, and then almost before we sceptics had started commenting it was gone.
Then recently, there was a similar “premature ejaculation” of press releases about a massive El Nino – and again when I go to look, we actually find that just a few weeks in the alarmists are back peddling furiously.
This may well get a nomination as the most boring video ever – it shows almost nothing happening except a few grains of sand being moved down a slope. But in doing so, it has formed this hugely complex series of river channels and I’m impressed with it.
The next one [still uploading – and will post when done] is from an earlier stage when more is happening and shows a river valley actually forming in my back garden. So hopefully, those who don’t appreciate trying to see grains of sand moving will find it more interesting.
Above shows the experimental river channel. The channel is fed by a constant flow which feeds into a tipping bucket which pulses the water. The video starts at a bend showing how the changing water level changes the part of the channel holding the flow and how the sediment is moved. it then goes to the corner when the flow is diverted out. Next we have a braided section where the stream spreads out and has many small islands, and finally a delta, where if you look carefully you can see the sediment being swept into the water where it creates sharp edge as the sediment settles out.
For info, the video was taken in my back garden. All “debris” such as leaves is natural – and so I’ve left it in because debris is an important factor causing pool formation and diverting flow.
This is a longer video. Hence I suggest watching the above speeded up version. It shows the start of my experimental setup with a massive bulk of sand at one end. I start with a constant flow of water. Very quickly the water eats down into the sand creating a deep gorge. I presume at some critical slope, the gorge then starts widening undermining the sides causing multiple collapses and a debris flow with a very characteristic fluvial fan. These are just the kinds of features one sees in places like Glen Coe so I’m really impressed. Eventually it starts settling down and a kind of “upland” river valley is formed with a V shaped valley and a meandering river occupying the base.
In my last blog post I suggested a change in the Labour party whereby the referendum caused some internal divisions between separatists and unionists.
However, checking the last Scottish electoral results, it struck me how similar people in Scotland cast their vote – particularly if we include the general swing of Labour → Tory. So rather than there being a change in the Scottish vote, I might now argue their was a lack of the normal change in voting behaviour between Holyrood and Westminster elections.
So, now, hopefully my final hypothesis is this:
Voters didn’t change their vote – instead rather than switching from the SNP to English based parties as they have done in previous elections – they chose to vote for the same first choice party they always vote for in Holyrood.
The reasons this might have occurred is because firstly that the SNP were less than happy with the way Labour behaved (although it was clearly SNP supporters who were the most obnoxious). And secondly, after what must be seen as a very good campaign by the SNP it might have been felt to be a “kick in the teeth” for the SNP to sneakily vote for an English party when it suited SNP supporters.
Implications
If true, it would appear there are next to no implications from this vote. It is five years to the next Westminster vote (assuming no referendum before that) and in the meantime, if this hypothesis is correct, the voters will be voting in Scotland where the SNP were not the same wasted vote as the Westminster election.
Indeed, if this is correct, the most significant change is an INCREASE in Libdem support compared to the last Holyrood election.
The libdem vote collapse UK wide, the Tories have long been a toxic brand in Scotland, so what marked out this last election was the collapse of the labour vote and the rise of the SNP.
The left one must understand is largely about “collective action” and opposed to people thinking for themselves. And it works so long as people have a common goal and purpose.
What I would like to suggest, is that the left of Scottish politics was not as unified as those south of the border would like on Scottish independence. (And a few other issues probably niggled). That the independence campaign effectively split the left between Unionist and independents.
Usually, these two got along quite happily – because if independence wasn’t an issue – there was little difference between being for the working class, and being for the working class of Scotland.
But the independence campaign must have created divisions. People who formerly worked well together must have found themselves at each other’s throat. And those who normally did not work together (the independence group) found themselves getting on well together.
As such, the campaign may have made a lot on the left realise that what mattered to them most was not “working class politics” but “Scottish politics” and the massive increase in membership of the SNP may well have been a huge chunk of the left upping sticks and moving to the SNP.
As a result of the shift in membership, they may in turn have caused the SNP to shift to the left.
In contrast, the same didn’t happen on the right. The Tories have always been obstinately Unionist to the extent that people like me can’t vote for them even if I voted no at the referendum.
The right wing of the SNP (tartan tories) was always divided from the right of the Unionist (and conservative party).
Alternative (repeat of my comment to StewGreen) Continue reading
For several years I’ve been finding that there really is no political party I can support – note, not “I would like” but “none I can”. Several times I’ve desperately looked through a list of Scottish political parties trying to find one that even vaguely suitable to see whether I could join. But not one is suitable.
So, I wrote down a list of my “red lines” which I wouldn’t cross if I joined another party:-
Scottish Based
The party must be based in Scotland. After my experience in UKIP and seeing the way Scottish labour was destroyed by its “branch office” status and how the Tories are a complete failure because they are run by and for England, it would be a waste of time joining another “branch office” party.
Free Health & Education
I stood down from the Green party because they would not support local hospitals. I believe that healthcare and education, which primarily supports the young and old who cannot earn the money they need to purchase these service, must be largely free at the point of delivery. The absolute red line is that if you have an illness which means you cannot work, then healthcare must be free. But where possible people ought to be responsible for their own health – particularly working people, so I’m not in principle against charging for prescriptions.
Likewise, under 18 education should be free (but that doesn’t mean cheap and where possible controlled by parents and not politicians). However, I’m not in principle against adults who gain from education paying for that education. It’s only what works best for society.
Scottish Independence (against dogmatic views either way)
Where possible people should have self government. But that applies as much to EU membership as UK membership or even local councils being dictated to by Edinburgh.
So, I have a pragmatic view of Scottish Independence: any political group whether a council or nation has to work with other similar groups. The best form of co-operation may be a formal union. But it may not. There is no hard and fast rule or principle governing what is or is not the appropriate relationship between peoples and the appropriate working relationships are likely to change over time.
So I want to see a pragmatic view on Scottish independence – in other words it should be up to individuals to decide and I don’t want to be party of a party telling me how to vote. Indeed, in my view, the whole dogmatic focus of the SNP and Tory focussing so much on this one issue is why so many issues of such importance to Scotland get ignored.
Democratic
Democracy means giving power to ordinary people. OK, elections, aren’t a panacea (they can be bought or fixed by large interest groups) nor are they the only way to give ordinary people power; but any party I belong to must be democratic which means free and fair election of officials and for example yearly AGMs (unlike UKIP Scotland).
Pro-business, engineering and enterprise
The party must support business, it must be for cutting red tape.
Energy
Energy is key to a vibrant economy. We need secure and cheap supplies and decisions on energy should be taken by those with knowledge of the economic impacts of energy policy and based firmly on the evidence (i.e. not on speculation and failed theories from academics who are as clueless about the science behind climate as they are about the economy).
Equality & Political correctness
I’m fed up of political correctness. Equality does not mean treated everyone the same but instead giving equal respect for who we are and giving equal protection under the law. Just as we treat children differently from adults and adults differently from the elderly, so for example men and women have different needs and any party I join would respect that (and not pander to the politically correct bigots like the BBC).
That’s it
So, why’s it so difficult to find a party?
I’ve been searching the news sites trying to find even one article about the SNP landslide that makes sense and I’ve drawn a blank. So, I’m going to make some suggestions albeit very tentatively.
It has been suggested that Cameron’s “English votes for English laws” put off Scottish voters. Frankly I think that’s tripe. If anyone thought about it for one second, they know it makes sense. So, I don’t think it’s what he said but how and why it was said.
Another suggestion is anti-Scottish racism. But to me that smacks more of a symptom than a cause.
Instead, I think something changed after the referendum. The thing that struck me about the referendum campaign was that Scotland was very much left to get on with it. The English parties and politicians largely ignored us so long as it appeared we were going to vote no. It was only when the polls started suggesting that Scotland was going to leave the Union that suddenly Scotland was filled with politicians & journalists from England most of whom never seem to have been here before.
And then when the referendum was over – to use a metaphor – they just got out of bed – put on their clothes, put £5 on the table and said “thanks Scotland” and left. And using that scenario, what Cameron’s “English votes for English laws” looked like was finding a notch on the bed post – or overhearing them boasting of their conquest. As for the promises of “I’ll respect you” – like the “I’ll call in the morning” – the behaviour of the English just didn’t make them believable.
So, that’s why I think Scotland turned out in force to vote SNP.
And so the problem for this Union, is that having let Scotland make it’s own decision on independence, the Scots now have a new self-confidence that we should be treated as equals in this Union. So, we find it extremely insulting to find English news-media and politicians in effect saying “you’re just a kept woman who should be thankful that we keep paying your bills: And NO! There’s no way on earth we are letting you anywhere near running the place you slut”.
That kind of attitude from the English is no longer acceptable. Because not only did Scotland decide to be part of the Union, but we decided that the present Union was not treating us fairly: that England had to change otherwise there will be no Union. That message has not sunk home with the English.
But unlike before, when Scots threatened to leave the Union, the difference this time is that Scotland is not threatening. We are not saying we may leave. We are just offering England a final chance: stop treating us like a kept woman, stop thinking you can ignore us until you want something from us. Treat us like equals, give us our fair share of government and British institution jobs. Stop spending all the public sector money in London, stop focussing economic policy on what benefits the square mile of London – or pack your bags and get out of the Union.
I came across this video by the well known climate alarmist John Cheese:
My advice to John: if you’re going to use a fake Scottish accent, best use one appropriate to the constituency and not one located somewhere between Braveheart and Whisky Galore.
In no particular order here are the issues I think are dividing Scotland and England
Whilst I don’t support the SNP and certainly not labour, what this election has revealed is blatant English racism in that many in England – or at least many in the chatterarti class – could not tolerate the idea that a Scottish party might be part of a UK government.
This contrasts sharply with the lack of interest in the fact that the “UNIONIST” party of England-in-Scotland (known in England as Tories – but revealed in its true colours in Scotland as the Unionist and conservative party) has effectively run Scotland much of the last century.
So if it’s OK for little Englanders to run Scotland with almost no comment, but apparently it is beyond the pale for little Scotlanders to have even a part in a UK government. This clearly shows that MUCH OF THE ENGLISH ESTABLISHMENT ARE STILL ANTI-SCOTTISH RACISTS. It still seems the attitude in England is that of the English national Anthem says: to repress the rebellious Scots.
Practically, I can’t see the English establishment either caring or wanting to doing anything I think that needs doing to keep Scotland in the Union. That means we in Scotland really have no choice because public opinion will inevitably drift toward independence more by default than intention. So that when the next referendum takes place – and it may well be sooner than later – Scotland will be more or less forced to vote for independence largely because of the English racism this election has highlighted, rather than any benefit to us in Scotland.
I was disenfranchised in this election because there was no party I wanted to vote for. Here’s why:
But, since I don’t trust the English media particularly the Biased Broadcasting Company and haven’t discussed the election with people from England, I’ve no idea why England voted Tory.
But I can see why the Scots voted SNP. What the referendum revealed is a general consensus in Scotland that we have done badly out of the Union and that Scotland continues to be treated with contempt by the English media and English politicians. UKIP and much of the Tory sentiment are a prime examples of that. In particular the hatred revealed when it appeared that the SNP might by part of the supposed “UK” government. This shows it’s not a UK government but an “English only” government. That shows why people gathered around the Scottish party [see next article].
But the Tories have also created a party of “Unionist bigots” in Scotland. They are not a pro-business, self-reliance party that anyone on the right of centre wanting good fiscal government would want to vote for. Labour are reckless in the UK – but in Scotland their supposed hold over politics has made them corrupt and reckless – and anti-Scottish and/or they just use Scotland.
As for the LibDems. Let’s put it this way: Jo Swinson my MP ran a campaign of anti-male hatred (aka feminism). She then rejected the evidence of climate, couldn’t care less for the problem of cold and fuel bills in Scotland, couldn’t care less for the 1million extra winter deaths in the UK during this madness and in one interview with Andrew Neil both lambasted everyone else for not being more green and praised the frequent shuttle flights from London city to Glasgow. She was a fantastic marketeer but totally gormless on the issues that matter. But perhaps her biggest problem – was that the public sector, who are largely clueless on the real economy so vote Liberal Democrat – and which was expanded well beyond the ability of the UK to support by Total Blair – bore the brunt of the austerity measures which only went ahead because of Lid Dem support.
The Tories look set to get an extremely thin majority. That majority is so thin that realistically there will be always more rebels in the Tories on any important issue than their majority allows.
So, the Tory administration will not practically be able to run without support from those “in” minority parties. Because one key feature is that votes will be won, not so much by party majorities, but by individuals willing for whatever reason to vote with the government.
And more than likely that issue will get worse, because it would appear that the “protest vote” for most by-elections will go to UKIP.
The SNPs may well suffer a humiliating defeat at the Scottish elections. At the very least, compared to the UK election result, it will look like a humiliating defeat. It will certainly attract many former MPs who had a high profile. Also it may well see the first legitimate UKIP politician in Scotland (i.e. one selected by members in Scotland and not foisted on Scotland by England).
I had a search today to find out whether those involved in Ringberg had finally come to their senses. Reading Climate Etc and some other blogs I was reminded of this scenario:
Wile is running and suddenly finds himself to have run over a cliff. But in the cartoons he still keeps running as if the ground were still there. That’s where we are with climate sensitivity. The ground is the “2C” limit and they still present the same rubbish they always have as if that “2C” limit were written in stone, except the pause shows that all their knowledge encapsulated in those climate models is wrong. They know nothing – but still they keep pumping out the same rubbish … the legs keep going ….
But whether or not Wile believes it or not, sooner or later physical laws dictate what happens next.
Mother earth aka “God” is a climate sceptic. And mother nature dictates what happens next, not a bunch of useless academics with their failed theories at Ringberg.
This is what sorts out engineer-scientists from academic-scientists. We both use the same physical laws of the universe, the difference is that engineers know that they have to be right because if a bridge falls down, we get sued. In contrast academic-scientists like those at Ringberg are purely academic and if their predictions fail – what happens? They have another all expenses paid by the public purse conference like Ringberg to all get around and discuss why they aren’t complete failures and present such wonderful results as this:
The only actual evidence that one presenter gave after which he said “I’m very very very very very very very confident climate sensitivity is over 2C” (I added a few extra very’s for humour – but it was hilarious even without them).
