Letters - 2017 / 2016 / 2015 / 2014
To The Scotsman (29 Dec 2017) published 1 Jan 2018
It is surprising that, in writing about a wealth tax ('Has the time come for a modern-day businesslike Robin Hood?', 29 December), Jim Duffy made no international comparison. The UK does not operate in a vacuum.
Not all countries have such a tax: in fact Austria, Denmark, Germany, Sweden, Spain, Finland, Iceland and Luxembourg have abolished it in recent years. There is no wealth tax in the USA, just income and property taxes.
France imposes a 'solidarity tax' on any net asset over €800,000 (£709,584) if ones’ total net worth is €1,300,000 or more. Spain has a patrimonia tax which ranges from 0.2 to 3.75% of net assets above the threshold of €700,000 after €300,000 primary residence allowance. The Netherlands’ taxes interest income. Up to and including 2016, the rate was fixed at 1.2% (30% taxation over an assumed yield of 4%). From the fiscal year of 2017 onwards, the tax rate progresses with wealth.
Argentina, Norway, Switzerland and Italy impose similar taxes on wealth or assets and Wikipedia has a lot more on this subject.
Perhaps Jim Duffy has forgotten that the UK already taxes dividends (over £5000 pa now but reducing to £2000 shortly). In addition beneficiaries are taxed on wealth they inherit (IHT).
Many might argue that taxing wealth is unfair double taxation if the money came from income tax or was taxed in some other way as it was acquired. How would HMRC know whether or not wealth had already been taxed? Instead HMRC should go after those who are already evading/avoiding paying tax.
It is surprising that, in writing about a wealth tax ('Has the time come for a modern-day businesslike Robin Hood?', 29 December), Jim Duffy made no international comparison. The UK does not operate in a vacuum.
Not all countries have such a tax: in fact Austria, Denmark, Germany, Sweden, Spain, Finland, Iceland and Luxembourg have abolished it in recent years. There is no wealth tax in the USA, just income and property taxes.
France imposes a 'solidarity tax' on any net asset over €800,000 (£709,584) if ones’ total net worth is €1,300,000 or more. Spain has a patrimonia tax which ranges from 0.2 to 3.75% of net assets above the threshold of €700,000 after €300,000 primary residence allowance. The Netherlands’ taxes interest income. Up to and including 2016, the rate was fixed at 1.2% (30% taxation over an assumed yield of 4%). From the fiscal year of 2017 onwards, the tax rate progresses with wealth.
Argentina, Norway, Switzerland and Italy impose similar taxes on wealth or assets and Wikipedia has a lot more on this subject.
Perhaps Jim Duffy has forgotten that the UK already taxes dividends (over £5000 pa now but reducing to £2000 shortly). In addition beneficiaries are taxed on wealth they inherit (IHT).
Many might argue that taxing wealth is unfair double taxation if the money came from income tax or was taxed in some other way as it was acquired. How would HMRC know whether or not wealth had already been taxed? Instead HMRC should go after those who are already evading/avoiding paying tax.
To The Scotsman (27 Dec 2017) not published
You claim that one does not have to be religious to see the merit in the teaching of Jesus (leader 26 December). I have to say, as someone who is not religious, I see no merit whatsoever in them. Jesus' teaching was to Jews only and conditional on the imminent arrival of the Kingdom of God (the expected Messianic rule over the whole Earth). His words were not for posterity and certainly not for Gentiles. In fact they make no sense at all in modern society. We all know how to behave without Jesus' advice.
You claim that one does not have to be religious to see the merit in the teaching of Jesus (leader 26 December). I have to say, as someone who is not religious, I see no merit whatsoever in them. Jesus' teaching was to Jews only and conditional on the imminent arrival of the Kingdom of God (the expected Messianic rule over the whole Earth). His words were not for posterity and certainly not for Gentiles. In fact they make no sense at all in modern society. We all know how to behave without Jesus' advice.
To The Scotsman (23 Dec 2017) not published
The Kirk Moderator (Derek Browning) asks 'What if Jesus had never been born?' (Scottish Perspective 23 December).
In a parallel universe, he probably wasn't and/or Paul did not create a world religion out of his life. There the pagan religions that existed at the time would have persisted. In the Roman world that meant predominantly Mithraism, the religion of the legions.
At this time of the year we would be celebrating the birth of Mithras (25 December) and reading from the Mithraic books how, when Mithras was born, a star fell from the sky and was followed by Zoroastrian priests called 'Magi' on their way to worship him. We would remember how shepherds witnessed the 'birth' of Mithras, as he emerged fully-grown from a rocky cliff after a blinding beam of light from the sky had carved out his figure.
There is no reason to believe that, in that other Earth, life would be much different. Superstitions would persist, as they do here, and people will behave and well or as badly as they do everywhere. Christians completely misunderstand 'what Jesus is about' and mistakenly believe that his life was 'wonderful'. In fact it was a tragedy; a failed attempt to become the Jews' Messiah. Jesus would be astonished at what Christianity have made of him.
The Kirk Moderator (Derek Browning) asks 'What if Jesus had never been born?' (Scottish Perspective 23 December).
In a parallel universe, he probably wasn't and/or Paul did not create a world religion out of his life. There the pagan religions that existed at the time would have persisted. In the Roman world that meant predominantly Mithraism, the religion of the legions.
At this time of the year we would be celebrating the birth of Mithras (25 December) and reading from the Mithraic books how, when Mithras was born, a star fell from the sky and was followed by Zoroastrian priests called 'Magi' on their way to worship him. We would remember how shepherds witnessed the 'birth' of Mithras, as he emerged fully-grown from a rocky cliff after a blinding beam of light from the sky had carved out his figure.
There is no reason to believe that, in that other Earth, life would be much different. Superstitions would persist, as they do here, and people will behave and well or as badly as they do everywhere. Christians completely misunderstand 'what Jesus is about' and mistakenly believe that his life was 'wonderful'. In fact it was a tragedy; a failed attempt to become the Jews' Messiah. Jesus would be astonished at what Christianity have made of him.
To The Scotsman (22 Dec 2017) not published
No one should be persecuted just for their religious belief, but Gordon Macdonald's reliance on the gospel story as an example is flawed ('Aggressive secularism threatens Christians' freedom to mention belief out loud', 22 December).
The Birth Narratives of Matthew and Luke were invented (more likely borrowed from Mithraism) to give Jesus a provenance commensurate with his deification. None of it is historical; it was designed to persuade both Jewish and Gentile readers that Jesus was both the expected Jewish Messiah and the Saviour God of all the world.
In fact, Jesus birthplace and date are unknown, although it seems he came from Capernaum in Galilee (not Nazareth). It would not have been notable nor accompanied by the signs and wonders described in the New Testament. Jesus himself would be astonished at what Christianity has made of him.
For more on this see my book The Rise and Fall of Jesus.
No one should be persecuted just for their religious belief, but Gordon Macdonald's reliance on the gospel story as an example is flawed ('Aggressive secularism threatens Christians' freedom to mention belief out loud', 22 December).
The Birth Narratives of Matthew and Luke were invented (more likely borrowed from Mithraism) to give Jesus a provenance commensurate with his deification. None of it is historical; it was designed to persuade both Jewish and Gentile readers that Jesus was both the expected Jewish Messiah and the Saviour God of all the world.
In fact, Jesus birthplace and date are unknown, although it seems he came from Capernaum in Galilee (not Nazareth). It would not have been notable nor accompanied by the signs and wonders described in the New Testament. Jesus himself would be astonished at what Christianity has made of him.
For more on this see my book The Rise and Fall of Jesus.
To Scotland on Sunday (18 Dec 2017) published 24 Dec 2017
Few people realize that the ubiquitous Christmas story is actually based on the Roman religion of Mithraism, which was especially popular with Roman soldiers.
The story of the Wise Men has a clear model in the story of the three Magi (astrologers) who accompanied Tiridates of Parthia to Rome to worship the newly-born Nero as the Lord God Mithras.
The story of the Star of Bethlehem may have been borrowed from Mithraism. The Mithraic books tell how, when Mithras was born, a star fell from the sky and was followed by Zoroastrian priests called 'Magi' on their way to worship him.
The shepherds appear to have come from the Mithraic legend where they witnessed the 'birth' of Mithras. They told how Mithras emerged full-grown from a rocky cliff after a blinding beam of light from the sky (Cf. Luke 2:9) had carved out his figure. Some believe that the Mithraic New Year and the birthday of Mithras was on December 25 although it might have been subsumed in the festival of the Sun, Dies Natalis Solis Invicti (Birthday of the unconquered Sun), held on that day, when the return of the sun southwards was evident.
Christians are unwittingly celebrating a Roman Mithraic festival. The real birthday of Jesus is unknown, as is his birthplace.
Few people realize that the ubiquitous Christmas story is actually based on the Roman religion of Mithraism, which was especially popular with Roman soldiers.
The story of the Wise Men has a clear model in the story of the three Magi (astrologers) who accompanied Tiridates of Parthia to Rome to worship the newly-born Nero as the Lord God Mithras.
The story of the Star of Bethlehem may have been borrowed from Mithraism. The Mithraic books tell how, when Mithras was born, a star fell from the sky and was followed by Zoroastrian priests called 'Magi' on their way to worship him.
The shepherds appear to have come from the Mithraic legend where they witnessed the 'birth' of Mithras. They told how Mithras emerged full-grown from a rocky cliff after a blinding beam of light from the sky (Cf. Luke 2:9) had carved out his figure. Some believe that the Mithraic New Year and the birthday of Mithras was on December 25 although it might have been subsumed in the festival of the Sun, Dies Natalis Solis Invicti (Birthday of the unconquered Sun), held on that day, when the return of the sun southwards was evident.
Christians are unwittingly celebrating a Roman Mithraic festival. The real birthday of Jesus is unknown, as is his birthplace.
To The Scotsman (16 Dec 2017) not published
Les Reid is right that Christianity usurped older winter pagan festivals (Letters, 14 December). However he could have pointed out that a prominent Roman religion was that of Mithraism, especially popular with Roman soldiers.
The story of the Wise Men has a clear model in the story of the three Magi (astrologers) who accompanied Tiridates of Parthia to Rome to worship the newly-born Nero as the Lord God Mithras.
The story of the Star of Bethlehem may have been borrowed from Mithraism. The Mithraic books tell how, when Mithras was born, a star fell from the sky and was followed by Zoroastrian priests called 'Magi' on their way to worship him.
The shepherds appear to have come from the Mithraic legend where they witnessed the 'birth' of Mithras. They told how Mithras emerged full-grown from a rocky cliff after a blinding beam of light from the sky (Cf. Luke 2:9) had carved out his figure. Some believe that the Mithraic New Year and the birthday of Mithras was on December 25 although it might have been subsumed in the festival of the Sun, Dies Natalis Solis Invicti (Birthday of the unconquered Sun), held on that day, when the return of the sun southwards was evident.
Christians are unwittingly celebrating a Roman Mithraic festival. The real birthday of Jesus is unknown, as is his birthplace.
Les Reid is right that Christianity usurped older winter pagan festivals (Letters, 14 December). However he could have pointed out that a prominent Roman religion was that of Mithraism, especially popular with Roman soldiers.
The story of the Wise Men has a clear model in the story of the three Magi (astrologers) who accompanied Tiridates of Parthia to Rome to worship the newly-born Nero as the Lord God Mithras.
The story of the Star of Bethlehem may have been borrowed from Mithraism. The Mithraic books tell how, when Mithras was born, a star fell from the sky and was followed by Zoroastrian priests called 'Magi' on their way to worship him.
The shepherds appear to have come from the Mithraic legend where they witnessed the 'birth' of Mithras. They told how Mithras emerged full-grown from a rocky cliff after a blinding beam of light from the sky (Cf. Luke 2:9) had carved out his figure. Some believe that the Mithraic New Year and the birthday of Mithras was on December 25 although it might have been subsumed in the festival of the Sun, Dies Natalis Solis Invicti (Birthday of the unconquered Sun), held on that day, when the return of the sun southwards was evident.
Christians are unwittingly celebrating a Roman Mithraic festival. The real birthday of Jesus is unknown, as is his birthplace.
To The Scotsman (15 Dec 2017) not published
Les Reid is right that Christianity usurped older winter pagan festivals (Letters, 14 December). However he could have pointed out that a prominent Roman religion was that of Mithraism, especially popular with Roman soldiers.
The story of the Wise Men has a clear model in the story of the three Magi (astrologers) who accompanied Tiridates of Parthia to Rome to worship the newly-born Nero as the Lord God Mithras.
The story of the Star may have been borrowed from Mithraism, perhaps in an attempt to usurp that widespread religion. The Mithraic books tell how, when Mithras was born, a star fell from the sky and was followed by Zoroastrian priests called 'Magi' on their way to worship him.
The shepherds appear to have come from the Mithraic legend where they witnessed the 'birth' of Mithras. They told how Mithras emerged full-grown from a rocky cliff after a blinding beam of light from the sky (Cf. Luke 2:9) had carved out his figure. Some believe that the Mithraic New Year and the birthday of Mithras was on December 25 although it may be that might have been subsumed in the festival of of the Sun, Dies Natalis Solis Invicti (Birthday of the unconquered Sun), held on that day, when the return of the sun southwards was evident.
Christians are unwittingly celebrating a Roman Mithraic festival. The real birthday of Jesus is unknown, as is his birthplace.
Les Reid is right that Christianity usurped older winter pagan festivals (Letters, 14 December). However he could have pointed out that a prominent Roman religion was that of Mithraism, especially popular with Roman soldiers.
The story of the Wise Men has a clear model in the story of the three Magi (astrologers) who accompanied Tiridates of Parthia to Rome to worship the newly-born Nero as the Lord God Mithras.
The story of the Star may have been borrowed from Mithraism, perhaps in an attempt to usurp that widespread religion. The Mithraic books tell how, when Mithras was born, a star fell from the sky and was followed by Zoroastrian priests called 'Magi' on their way to worship him.
The shepherds appear to have come from the Mithraic legend where they witnessed the 'birth' of Mithras. They told how Mithras emerged full-grown from a rocky cliff after a blinding beam of light from the sky (Cf. Luke 2:9) had carved out his figure. Some believe that the Mithraic New Year and the birthday of Mithras was on December 25 although it may be that might have been subsumed in the festival of of the Sun, Dies Natalis Solis Invicti (Birthday of the unconquered Sun), held on that day, when the return of the sun southwards was evident.
Christians are unwittingly celebrating a Roman Mithraic festival. The real birthday of Jesus is unknown, as is his birthplace.
To Edinburgh Evening News (13 Dec 2017) published 15 Dec 2017
Do people who release illuminated lanterns (or helium balloons for that matter) wonder or care where they end up ('Heatfelt tributes to 'beautiful' Liam, 14', 13 December)?
The balloons end up as land and sea pollution, often mistaken by fauna as food. On at least one occasion a lighted lantern set fire to a scrapyard. 'Sending off' Liam is all very well, but 'sending off' aerial memorials is stupid and dangerous. It should not be allowed; it's aerial pollution.
Do people who release illuminated lanterns (or helium balloons for that matter) wonder or care where they end up ('Heatfelt tributes to 'beautiful' Liam, 14', 13 December)?
The balloons end up as land and sea pollution, often mistaken by fauna as food. On at least one occasion a lighted lantern set fire to a scrapyard. 'Sending off' Liam is all very well, but 'sending off' aerial memorials is stupid and dangerous. It should not be allowed; it's aerial pollution.
To The Scotsman (8 Dec 2017) not published
Dr James Eglinton claimed that the Bible 'was originally written in three languages--Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek' (Platform, 7 December).
This over-simplification requires correction. We cannot tell what languages were 'originally' used to write any part of the Bible; we only know the languages of the received texts, which of course could be the 'original' languages.
The received texts of the of what we call the 'Old Testament' are in Hebrew and only some 250 verses of that are in Aramaic, a Semitic language closely related to Hebrew.
The received texts of the New Testament are in Koine (common) Greek with the occasional Aramaic word. This text was later combined with a Greek translation of the Hebrew texts in the Septuagint.
Dr James Eglinton claimed that the Bible 'was originally written in three languages--Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek' (Platform, 7 December).
This over-simplification requires correction. We cannot tell what languages were 'originally' used to write any part of the Bible; we only know the languages of the received texts, which of course could be the 'original' languages.
The received texts of the of what we call the 'Old Testament' are in Hebrew and only some 250 verses of that are in Aramaic, a Semitic language closely related to Hebrew.
The received texts of the New Testament are in Koine (common) Greek with the occasional Aramaic word. This text was later combined with a Greek translation of the Hebrew texts in the Septuagint.
To The Scotsman (29 Nov 2017) not published
I have frequently rebuked you privately for misusing the word 'historic', but today (29 November) you go to far: emblazoning it on the front page and continuing on page 4 (not '32' as claimed on the front page) in relation to care abuse at Smyllum. It was also misused in the caption to a photograph on page 2 and, questionably, in relation to the story about Kings House Hotel on page 3.
There is nothing 'historic' about care or sexual abuse, or a car rally. Also, in what way is Kings House Hotel 'historic'?
'Historic' means 'famous or important in history, or potentially so'. The Battle of Culloden was 'historic'; Roslin Chapel is 'historic'. Using it as if it mean just 'old' devalues it's meaning. Nor is it a shortened form of 'historical'. Please set a better example.
I have frequently rebuked you privately for misusing the word 'historic', but today (29 November) you go to far: emblazoning it on the front page and continuing on page 4 (not '32' as claimed on the front page) in relation to care abuse at Smyllum. It was also misused in the caption to a photograph on page 2 and, questionably, in relation to the story about Kings House Hotel on page 3.
There is nothing 'historic' about care or sexual abuse, or a car rally. Also, in what way is Kings House Hotel 'historic'?
'Historic' means 'famous or important in history, or potentially so'. The Battle of Culloden was 'historic'; Roslin Chapel is 'historic'. Using it as if it mean just 'old' devalues it's meaning. Nor is it a shortened form of 'historical'. Please set a better example.
To The Sunday Times (27 Nov 2017) not published
There is a widely held view that the current housing crisis results from a failure to build enough new houses, causing a restricted supply and inflated prices. It is claimed that building more houses will Increase the supply of houses, making them more affordable. It is a view shared by Shelter, The Town and Country Planning Association, Policy Exchange, and Generation Rent. Even the Chancellor thinks that £4.4bn is needed to boost the supply of new homes. However, not everyone agrees.
You report that the Office of Budget Responsibility claims that Philip Hammond's largess will not boost the supply ('Hammond's £44bn boost for housing won't raise the roof', Business 26 November).
Also an article last year in The Land (issue 19), an occasional magazine covering issues relating to land rights, rural life, agriculture, sustainable development and land access, explained why building more houses is not the answer to tackling our housing crisis. The solutions offered include making better use of the housing stock, rent control (removed by the Thatcher government in the 1980s), alternative investment options, property and wealth taxes, deterring foreign investors, rebalancing regional economies, credit control and providing more affordable homes.
Who's right about this?
There is a widely held view that the current housing crisis results from a failure to build enough new houses, causing a restricted supply and inflated prices. It is claimed that building more houses will Increase the supply of houses, making them more affordable. It is a view shared by Shelter, The Town and Country Planning Association, Policy Exchange, and Generation Rent. Even the Chancellor thinks that £4.4bn is needed to boost the supply of new homes. However, not everyone agrees.
You report that the Office of Budget Responsibility claims that Philip Hammond's largess will not boost the supply ('Hammond's £44bn boost for housing won't raise the roof', Business 26 November).
Also an article last year in The Land (issue 19), an occasional magazine covering issues relating to land rights, rural life, agriculture, sustainable development and land access, explained why building more houses is not the answer to tackling our housing crisis. The solutions offered include making better use of the housing stock, rent control (removed by the Thatcher government in the 1980s), alternative investment options, property and wealth taxes, deterring foreign investors, rebalancing regional economies, credit control and providing more affordable homes.
Who's right about this?
To Scotland on Sunday (27 Nov 2017) not published
I don't know what translation of the Bible Sandra Busell has been reading (Letters, 26 November) but, according to the original Hebrew text in Genesis, God gave mankind 'dominion' ('radah', rule) over all life on Earth. No mention of 'protecting them from harm' and no support for vegetarianism. Furthermore, after Noah's Flood, God stated that 'every moving thing...shall be meat for you' (Gen 9:3).
Nor did Jesus preach vegetarianism. On the contrary, he ate fish (Lk 24:42-43) and fed the crowds fish and bread (Mt 14:17-21). In a vision to the apostle Peter, Jesus declared all foods to be clean, including animals (Acts 10:10-15).
Vegetarianism is a personal choice, but not a lifestyle that has biblical support.
I don't know what translation of the Bible Sandra Busell has been reading (Letters, 26 November) but, according to the original Hebrew text in Genesis, God gave mankind 'dominion' ('radah', rule) over all life on Earth. No mention of 'protecting them from harm' and no support for vegetarianism. Furthermore, after Noah's Flood, God stated that 'every moving thing...shall be meat for you' (Gen 9:3).
Nor did Jesus preach vegetarianism. On the contrary, he ate fish (Lk 24:42-43) and fed the crowds fish and bread (Mt 14:17-21). In a vision to the apostle Peter, Jesus declared all foods to be clean, including animals (Acts 10:10-15).
Vegetarianism is a personal choice, but not a lifestyle that has biblical support.
To The Scotsman (23 Nov 2017) published 24 Nov 2017
There is a widely held view that the current housing crisis results from a failure to build enough new houses, causing a restricted supply and inflated prices. Increase the supply of houses, so the theory goes, and housing will inevitably become more affordable, so build, build, build. It is a view shared by organizations as diverse as Shelter, The Town and Country Planning Association, Policy Exchange, and Generation Rent. However, not everyone shares that view.
In an article last year in The Land (issue 19), an occasional magazine covering issues relating to land rights, rural life, agriculture, sustainable development and land access, Tom Chance, Anne Chapman and Maya de Souza explained why building more houses is not the answer to tackling our housing crisis.
I cannot explain all their reasoning here but their solution includes making better use of housing stock, rent control (removed by the Thatcher government in the 1980s), alternative investment options, property and wealth taxes, deterring foreign investors, rebalancing regional economies, credit control and providing more affordable homes.
Are they right?
There is a widely held view that the current housing crisis results from a failure to build enough new houses, causing a restricted supply and inflated prices. Increase the supply of houses, so the theory goes, and housing will inevitably become more affordable, so build, build, build. It is a view shared by organizations as diverse as Shelter, The Town and Country Planning Association, Policy Exchange, and Generation Rent. However, not everyone shares that view.
In an article last year in The Land (issue 19), an occasional magazine covering issues relating to land rights, rural life, agriculture, sustainable development and land access, Tom Chance, Anne Chapman and Maya de Souza explained why building more houses is not the answer to tackling our housing crisis.
I cannot explain all their reasoning here but their solution includes making better use of housing stock, rent control (removed by the Thatcher government in the 1980s), alternative investment options, property and wealth taxes, deterring foreign investors, rebalancing regional economies, credit control and providing more affordable homes.
Are they right?
To Scotland on Sunday (13 Nov 2017) published 19 Nov 2017
You claimed that Armistice Day marked 'the 99th anniversary of the end of the First World War' ('Millions observe silence in honour of our fallen heroes', 12 November).
In fact the War did not end until the signing of the Treaty of Versailles in June 1919. Armistice, as the word indicates, was the point at which it was agreed to cease fighting (noon, Western European Time on 11 November 1918, but 11am in the UK).
You also refer to 'services' held on Armistice Day. Not all the remembrance ceremonies were religious events, some were secular, as at the Slateford/Longstone war memorial in Edinburgh. Now that most people are not religious it is inappropriate for Christian clerics to be allowed to conduct these ceremonies and make everyone pray as if they were in a church.
You claimed that Armistice Day marked 'the 99th anniversary of the end of the First World War' ('Millions observe silence in honour of our fallen heroes', 12 November).
In fact the War did not end until the signing of the Treaty of Versailles in June 1919. Armistice, as the word indicates, was the point at which it was agreed to cease fighting (noon, Western European Time on 11 November 1918, but 11am in the UK).
You also refer to 'services' held on Armistice Day. Not all the remembrance ceremonies were religious events, some were secular, as at the Slateford/Longstone war memorial in Edinburgh. Now that most people are not religious it is inappropriate for Christian clerics to be allowed to conduct these ceremonies and make everyone pray as if they were in a church.
To The Scotsman (9 Nov 2017) published 10 Nov 17
Another example of the stupidity of having three verdicts in Scotland (yes, no and maybe) ('Mother cleared of murdering her toddler', 9 November).
No jury can be sure that an accused is either guilty or innocent of the charge although such verdicts give that impression. For that reason alone, let alone the fact that they were imported from England, we should return to the old Scottish system of proven/not proven. Then 'not proven' would be seen its true light; not a 'bastard' (probably guilty but we can't be sure) verdict.
Another example of the stupidity of having three verdicts in Scotland (yes, no and maybe) ('Mother cleared of murdering her toddler', 9 November).
No jury can be sure that an accused is either guilty or innocent of the charge although such verdicts give that impression. For that reason alone, let alone the fact that they were imported from England, we should return to the old Scottish system of proven/not proven. Then 'not proven' would be seen its true light; not a 'bastard' (probably guilty but we can't be sure) verdict.
To The Scotsman (1 Nov 2017) not published
Surely MD Taylor (Letters, 31 October) is not claiming that we can be absolutely certain of everything that happened in the past. Are we sure that global warming is real? Did Martin Luther nail his theses to the door of All Saints' Church, Wittenberg 500 years ago?
Claiming that we know some things certainly and other things not so certainly raises the question of how one decides between them (not easy). Epistemologically, we can know nothing for certain; all is probability. We believe many things with a high degree of probability, nearing certainty (for example that there was a second world war), but absolute certainty invites no scepticism or criticism and is a mistake.
This applies to the gospel story as to any other historical record (it can't be a special case). If MD Taylor wants the answers to the questions he or she raises, then my book contains them. Superstitions are easily spread.
Surely MD Taylor (Letters, 31 October) is not claiming that we can be absolutely certain of everything that happened in the past. Are we sure that global warming is real? Did Martin Luther nail his theses to the door of All Saints' Church, Wittenberg 500 years ago?
Claiming that we know some things certainly and other things not so certainly raises the question of how one decides between them (not easy). Epistemologically, we can know nothing for certain; all is probability. We believe many things with a high degree of probability, nearing certainty (for example that there was a second world war), but absolute certainty invites no scepticism or criticism and is a mistake.
This applies to the gospel story as to any other historical record (it can't be a special case). If MD Taylor wants the answers to the questions he or she raises, then my book contains them. Superstitions are easily spread.
To The Scotsman (30 Oct 2017) not published
Iain Gill recommends that I read Tom Wright's book The Resurrection of the Son of God (Letters, 30 October). A book on this subject by a CoE Bishop and published by the SPCK is hardly likely to convince me that it is an objective analysis. Furthermore anyone who thinks that Jesus was the 'Son of God' has misunderstood the gospel record (Jesus never called himself this--it implies divinity--whereas the the term 'Son of Man', which Jesus obliquely applied to himself, represented the expected Messiah, a totally human person. But see Robert M Price's critical review on Amazon. Mr Gill should read my book: The Rise and Fall of Jesus.
Iain Gill recommends that I read Tom Wright's book The Resurrection of the Son of God (Letters, 30 October). A book on this subject by a CoE Bishop and published by the SPCK is hardly likely to convince me that it is an objective analysis. Furthermore anyone who thinks that Jesus was the 'Son of God' has misunderstood the gospel record (Jesus never called himself this--it implies divinity--whereas the the term 'Son of Man', which Jesus obliquely applied to himself, represented the expected Messiah, a totally human person. But see Robert M Price's critical review on Amazon. Mr Gill should read my book: The Rise and Fall of Jesus.
To The Scotsman (25 Oct 2017) published 27 Oct 2017
David Whitlie (Letters, 25 October) should note that there cannot be any 'established and indisputable facts', a point I made in my letter of 20 October. This applies to history as much as anywhere; we cannot know for certain what happened in the past. In the case of the origin of Christianity, we can only speculate on the basis of the scant evidence presented by the New Testament and a few contemporary historians.
However, I do not doubt that Jesus existed, even though some would quarrel with Josephus' 'Testimonies'. The 'Jesus Myth Theory' poses more problems than it solves and I have always opposed it.
Nevertheless, that does not mean that Jesus' was resurrected; the evidence for that is extremely doubtful. The fact that his tomb was empty has a mundane explanation, as does the absence of any body. The posthumous last chapter of John's Gospel shows that the disciples were not even sure that the figure they encountered was their master. In fact he appeared to be an elderly shepherd, anxious to retire.
I agree that 'looking into' Jesus' life can be 'life changing'. It changed me from a Christian to an atheist and since then the author of a book (The Rise and Fall of Jesus).
David Whitlie (Letters, 25 October) should note that there cannot be any 'established and indisputable facts', a point I made in my letter of 20 October. This applies to history as much as anywhere; we cannot know for certain what happened in the past. In the case of the origin of Christianity, we can only speculate on the basis of the scant evidence presented by the New Testament and a few contemporary historians.
However, I do not doubt that Jesus existed, even though some would quarrel with Josephus' 'Testimonies'. The 'Jesus Myth Theory' poses more problems than it solves and I have always opposed it.
Nevertheless, that does not mean that Jesus' was resurrected; the evidence for that is extremely doubtful. The fact that his tomb was empty has a mundane explanation, as does the absence of any body. The posthumous last chapter of John's Gospel shows that the disciples were not even sure that the figure they encountered was their master. In fact he appeared to be an elderly shepherd, anxious to retire.
I agree that 'looking into' Jesus' life can be 'life changing'. It changed me from a Christian to an atheist and since then the author of a book (The Rise and Fall of Jesus).
To The Scotsman (21 Oct 2017) published 23 Oct 2017
In my letter ["If the faith fits"] (20 October) I did not mention any particular faith, but Robert Anderson wants to defend Christianity (Letters, 21 October).
Using scientific terms to justify Christian belief is a desperate ploy. It obscures that fact that the only knowledge we have about Christianity's origin is suspect accounts written between 50 and 100 years after the events described, although the received texts, except for fragments, were not compiled until centuries later. There is not a 'multiplicity of corroboration'; there is only the Synoptic Gospels, which borrow from and often contradict each other, and John, which in many respects contradicts the Synoptics. 'Qualitative analysis' is a term used in chemistry and inappropriate here; in any case, 'analysis' is not evidence.
Of course Christians can belief what they want, but they need to recognise that their faith is based on an interpretation, perhaps even a misunderstanding of the received Gospels. It cannot be based on established and indisputable facts.
In my letter ["If the faith fits"] (20 October) I did not mention any particular faith, but Robert Anderson wants to defend Christianity (Letters, 21 October).
Using scientific terms to justify Christian belief is a desperate ploy. It obscures that fact that the only knowledge we have about Christianity's origin is suspect accounts written between 50 and 100 years after the events described, although the received texts, except for fragments, were not compiled until centuries later. There is not a 'multiplicity of corroboration'; there is only the Synoptic Gospels, which borrow from and often contradict each other, and John, which in many respects contradicts the Synoptics. 'Qualitative analysis' is a term used in chemistry and inappropriate here; in any case, 'analysis' is not evidence.
Of course Christians can belief what they want, but they need to recognise that their faith is based on an interpretation, perhaps even a misunderstanding of the received Gospels. It cannot be based on established and indisputable facts.
To The Scotsman (19 Oct 2017) published 20 Oct 2017
I would be surprised if Prof Brian Cox referred to 'facts' (Point of View from James Watson, [Letters,]19 October) as all scientists usually beware of using the word. They understand that we cannot know the 'truth' about anything. All we can do is draw conclusions from 'evidence', which itself might be unreliable, and express them as a 'probability'. Scientific beliefs are a set of high probabilities, contingent on evidence; these beliefs can change with new evidence.
'Faith' is belief without evidence.
I would be surprised if Prof Brian Cox referred to 'facts' (Point of View from James Watson, [Letters,]19 October) as all scientists usually beware of using the word. They understand that we cannot know the 'truth' about anything. All we can do is draw conclusions from 'evidence', which itself might be unreliable, and express them as a 'probability'. Scientific beliefs are a set of high probabilities, contingent on evidence; these beliefs can change with new evidence.
'Faith' is belief without evidence.
To The Scotsman (14 Oct 2017) not published
Clark Cross rightly questioned the cost and source of the electricity for Nicola Sturgeon's 'state-owned energy firm' (Letter, 13 October). In fact, neither the electricity nor the gas required would know where it came from. One may pretend that the fuel comes from a renewable source, but there is no guarantee of that or any method of ensuring it. Both electricity and gas fed into the relevant grids from various sources is not labelled with that source when it arrives at the consumer. So the First Minister's claim on this matter is nonsense.
Clark Cross rightly questioned the cost and source of the electricity for Nicola Sturgeon's 'state-owned energy firm' (Letter, 13 October). In fact, neither the electricity nor the gas required would know where it came from. One may pretend that the fuel comes from a renewable source, but there is no guarantee of that or any method of ensuring it. Both electricity and gas fed into the relevant grids from various sources is not labelled with that source when it arrives at the consumer. So the First Minister's claim on this matter is nonsense.
To Scotland on Sunday (10 Oct 2017) not published
Alexa Morrison of RSPB Scotland claimed that the Scottish Government (SG) respected the 'precautionary principle' (PP) in its decision to ban fracking (8 October). In fact, the Scottish Government has not mentioned this 'principle' in their recent statement.
The 'precautionary principle' is defined as 'a strategy to cope with possible risks where scientific understanding is yet incomplete, such as the risks of nano technology, genetically modified organisms and systemic insecticides'. However, in this case, all the scientific studies showed complete understanding of the technology, one that has been in use around the world for a long time. That may be why the SG did not mention it.
Miss Morrison was implying, wrongly, that we know too little about fracking to allow it to proceed, even as a test. In her interpretation, we would not have allowed the development of the steam engine or the use of electricity.
Alexa Morrison of RSPB Scotland claimed that the Scottish Government (SG) respected the 'precautionary principle' (PP) in its decision to ban fracking (8 October). In fact, the Scottish Government has not mentioned this 'principle' in their recent statement.
The 'precautionary principle' is defined as 'a strategy to cope with possible risks where scientific understanding is yet incomplete, such as the risks of nano technology, genetically modified organisms and systemic insecticides'. However, in this case, all the scientific studies showed complete understanding of the technology, one that has been in use around the world for a long time. That may be why the SG did not mention it.
Miss Morrison was implying, wrongly, that we know too little about fracking to allow it to proceed, even as a test. In her interpretation, we would not have allowed the development of the steam engine or the use of electricity.
To The Scotsman (4 Oct 2017, resent 6 OCT) published 7 Oct 2017
Since the scientific evidence received by the Scottish Government was reassuring, it appears to have been more influenced in its decision by the result of the public consultation (99 per cent anti). But, as you have [The Scotsman's leader comment] noted, 'a co-ordinated anti-fracking campaign could organise this level of agitation'. It looks likely that this happened. Those content with fracking to proceed probably did not bother to participate.
Griesbach & Associates' analysis of the consultation warns against taking the result as representative of the wider population because 'individuals (and organisations) who have a keen interest in a topic and the capacity to respond are more likely to participate in a consultation than those who do not'. They point out that 'the main purpose was not to identify how many people held particular views'. Yet the government seems to have ignored that and been impressed by the numbers. So who knows what the result would be if there had been a referendum on the matter and if the public had been well informed on the pros and cons.
The argument by the government that fracking should not be allowed because of greenhouse gas emissions lacks conviction for several reasons: 1) fracking itself is not an emitter of greenhouse gases (that only happens if that gas is burned and a lot of gas is used in the chemical stock industry); 2) fracked gas is imported to Grangemouth by Ineos (why is the government not banning that import?); 3) the government allows North Sea gas to be burned for electricity generation at Boddam power station and at Grangemouth; 4) most homes and businesses throughout Scotland burn gas for heating and cooking (fracking would allow much of this gas, presently sourced from abroad to be replaced, resulting in no net increase in emissions); 5) Scotland's contribution to global greenhouse emissions is trivial--banning fracking will have negligible effect.
Clearly the decision to ban fracking is political and not based on any real evidence. It is all about votes and is the result of the general scientific ignorance of not just the population in general but our elected representatives.
Since the scientific evidence received by the Scottish Government was reassuring, it appears to have been more influenced in its decision by the result of the public consultation (99 per cent anti). But, as you have [The Scotsman's leader comment] noted, 'a co-ordinated anti-fracking campaign could organise this level of agitation'. It looks likely that this happened. Those content with fracking to proceed probably did not bother to participate.
Griesbach & Associates' analysis of the consultation warns against taking the result as representative of the wider population because 'individuals (and organisations) who have a keen interest in a topic and the capacity to respond are more likely to participate in a consultation than those who do not'. They point out that 'the main purpose was not to identify how many people held particular views'. Yet the government seems to have ignored that and been impressed by the numbers. So who knows what the result would be if there had been a referendum on the matter and if the public had been well informed on the pros and cons.
The argument by the government that fracking should not be allowed because of greenhouse gas emissions lacks conviction for several reasons: 1) fracking itself is not an emitter of greenhouse gases (that only happens if that gas is burned and a lot of gas is used in the chemical stock industry); 2) fracked gas is imported to Grangemouth by Ineos (why is the government not banning that import?); 3) the government allows North Sea gas to be burned for electricity generation at Boddam power station and at Grangemouth; 4) most homes and businesses throughout Scotland burn gas for heating and cooking (fracking would allow much of this gas, presently sourced from abroad to be replaced, resulting in no net increase in emissions); 5) Scotland's contribution to global greenhouse emissions is trivial--banning fracking will have negligible effect.
Clearly the decision to ban fracking is political and not based on any real evidence. It is all about votes and is the result of the general scientific ignorance of not just the population in general but our elected representatives.
To The Sunday Times (2 Oct 2017) published 8 Oct 2017
Gillian Bowditch, in her article ('Losing religion, but not our ideals', 1 October) relied on data from the 2016 Scottish Household Survey, which showed that, in that year, 51[%] per cent of Scots had no religion, with 48.5[%] per cent identifying with an organised religion. However things are changing fast. A[a] Survation survey for the Humanist Society of Scotland between 8-12 [in] September showed that over [more than] 70[%] per cent of Scots say they are not religious. Only 24 per cent say they are.
Since younger people are less religious than older people, it can be expected that[,] this gap will widen, leading to a situation where the state will need to recognise that compulsory religion is inappropriate and should be removed from public institutions such as schools.
Steuart Campbell, Secretary/Edinburgh Secular Society
Gillian Bowditch, in her article ('Losing religion, but not our ideals', 1 October) relied on data from the 2016 Scottish Household Survey, which showed that, in that year, 51[%] per cent of Scots had no religion, with 48.5[%] per cent identifying with an organised religion. However things are changing fast. A[a] Survation survey for the Humanist Society of Scotland between 8-12 [in] September showed that over [more than] 70[%] per cent of Scots say they are not religious. Only 24 per cent say they are.
Since younger people are less religious than older people, it can be expected that[,] this gap will widen, leading to a situation where the state will need to recognise that compulsory religion is inappropriate and should be removed from public institutions such as schools.
Steuart Campbell, Secretary/Edinburgh Secular Society
|
To Scotland on Sunday (26 Sep 2017) published 1 Oct 2017
Juries should not have to decide between three options (Yes, no and maybe); they should be faced with an either/or option ('Study to evaluate 15-member jury and 'not proven', 24 September). But the way to do that is not to abandon the 'not proven' verdict but to revert to the old Scottish practice of 'proven' or 'not proven'. Abandon the 'guilty' or 'not guilty' options; the latter was imported from English law by a rogue jury in 1728, causing confusion ever since. Charges have to proved (i.e. tested), either beyond reasonable doubt or on the balance of probabilities. Scots law was precise and logical. No one knows whether or not an accused is in fact guilty or not-guilty. All a verdict finds is whether or not the prosecution has proved its case to the satisfaction of the jury; that should be made clear in the names used for those verdicts. The public should learn to understand these verdicts and their meaning. We should enhance Scots law and rationalise it, distinguishing it from English law. Does Scotland not want to show its independence from the English legal system? To The Scotsman (21 Sep 2017) published 22 Sep 2017
You reported the heroic decision of Stanislav Petrov to ignore what Russian computers wrongly told him on 26 September 1983: that the USA had launched ballistic missiles (Obituary 20 September). He almost certainly saved the world from disaster. But he was not the only Russian officer to do that. On 27 October 1962, during the Cuban Missile Crisis, Vasili Arkhipov was executive officer of a nuclear-armed Soviet submarine near Cuba being depth-charged by the US navy to force it to surface. Thinking that war had broken out but with no contact with Moscow, two of the officers wanted to launch a nuclear torpedo. But that required the agreement of Arkhipov and he refused, instead persuading the captain to surface and contact their base. In 2002 Thomas Blanton, who was then director of the US National Security Archive, said that "Vasili Arkhipov saved the world". Both these Russian officers deserve our undying gratitude for preventing a Third World War and global catastrophe. Let us hope that no such incidents ever occur again and war does not break out over a mistake or miscalculation. To The Scotsman (15 Sep 2017) published 16 Sep 2017
Evidently the device described in your item about prostate surgery ('Musician 'drums up' support for robotic surgery', 15 September) is not a robot. The latter are autonomous or semi-autonomous. What's described is a remotely-controlled device, albeit a finely-tuned one. The surgeon still has control. Many misuse the word 'robot' to mean any intricate device. You should be careful not to follow them. To Scotland on Sunday (11 Sep 2017) published 17 Sep 2017
Anthropogenic global warming (AGW) is a serious matter outlined by Dani Garavelli in her article 'Trump still in denial as stares into eye of the storm' (10 September). The series of Atlantic hurricanes cannot be attributed directly to AGM but it is most likely that they are the result of it. Sea temperatures are rising, giving such storms added strength. Furthermore, sea level is rising, meaning that flooding from such storms is likely to get worse. Low-lying land, including coastal cities, may have to be abandoned. This may include London! How long is mankind going to ignore this dire prospect? AGW has the potential to destroy our civilisation. Green measures so far advanced are too late and too little to make much difference, although they should continue. The amount of warming induced so far will continue to heat the planet for hundreds of years even if we stopped burning all fossil fuels today. Only one thing can halt AGW and that is a form of geoengineering that cools the planet. Various options are available but they will be expensive and need international agreement. Not doing this will be even more expensive and catastrophic. The UN should be advocating urgent action before it is too late. |
|
To The Times (7 Sep 2017) published 8 Sep 2017
Your report [(Sep 2)] of [a] UFO seen by the crew of an Airbus 230 [passenger aircraft] when approaching Glasgow A[a]irport early on the morning of [May] 26 May this year ('Air crew spot unidentified flying object over Glasgow' 2 September) has a simple explanation. What he or she [the crew] saw was almost certainly the planet Jupiter [which was] then lying low in the WSW [west southwest]. That the object was reported to have flown towards the aircraft and passed it is [would be] due to imagination[,] as the pilot tries[d] to make sense of it. Pilots are not astronomers and frequently misidentify astronomical objects.
Your report [(Sep 2)] of [a] UFO seen by the crew of an Airbus 230 [passenger aircraft] when approaching Glasgow A[a]irport early on the morning of [May] 26 May this year ('Air crew spot unidentified flying object over Glasgow' 2 September) has a simple explanation. What he or she [the crew] saw was almost certainly the planet Jupiter [which was] then lying low in the WSW [west southwest]. That the object was reported to have flown towards the aircraft and passed it is [would be] due to imagination[,] as the pilot tries[d] to make sense of it. Pilots are not astronomers and frequently misidentify astronomical objects.
To The Scotsman (7 Sep 2017) not published
Christians are as entitled as anyone else to serve on public bodies (Geoff Miller's letter 7 September) provided they are not in a privileged position because of their religion and don't attempt to have religion influence decisions. Salt can be a contaminant.
Christianity was not founded by Jesus but by Paul. Jesus' own plan had nothing to do with the present worldwide Church.
Christians are as entitled as anyone else to serve on public bodies (Geoff Miller's letter 7 September) provided they are not in a privileged position because of their religion and don't attempt to have religion influence decisions. Salt can be a contaminant.
Christianity was not founded by Jesus but by Paul. Jesus' own plan had nothing to do with the present worldwide Church.
To The Scotsman (6 Sep 2017) not published
Phil Tate claimed that 'the Tory government [is] squandering vast sums on new nuclear plants' (Letter 5 September).
In fact the UK government is paying nothing towards the construction of such stations, the costs being met entirely by private companies or, in the case of Hinkley Point, EDF a company mainly owned by the French government.
Phil Tate claimed that 'the Tory government [is] squandering vast sums on new nuclear plants' (Letter 5 September).
In fact the UK government is paying nothing towards the construction of such stations, the costs being met entirely by private companies or, in the case of Hinkley Point, EDF a company mainly owned by the French government.
To The Scotsman (4 Sep 2017) published 5 Sep 17
You claim that it is good that Scotland's 'washout summer' has 'killed off millions of wasps' (New Digest 4 September). However, as BBC1's 'Countryfile' programme on Sunday showed, wasps can be beneficial.
In early summer wasps, like bees, pollinate plants and flowers as they feed on nectar and while they can also kill some beneficial insects, they can be very helpful in eating crop-destroying bugs, such as grubs, caterpillars, and weevils. They are so useful in this respect that farmers will sometimes ship wasps in as a natural pest control for their crops, a natural pesticide.
You claim that it is good that Scotland's 'washout summer' has 'killed off millions of wasps' (New Digest 4 September). However, as BBC1's 'Countryfile' programme on Sunday showed, wasps can be beneficial.
In early summer wasps, like bees, pollinate plants and flowers as they feed on nectar and while they can also kill some beneficial insects, they can be very helpful in eating crop-destroying bugs, such as grubs, caterpillars, and weevils. They are so useful in this respect that farmers will sometimes ship wasps in as a natural pest control for their crops, a natural pesticide.
To The Scotsman (16 Aug 2017) not published
John Coutts appears to justify his claim that Christians are not stupid (Letters, 16 August) by quoting from 1 Cor 2:9, where Paul quotes from Isaiah 64:4 . One could argue that it is stupid to believe that an ancient Jewish prophet knows what God has prepared for his followers. Isaiah offers to evidence as to how he knows this and non-Christians are entitled to claim that it is all make believe.
John Coutts appears to justify his claim that Christians are not stupid (Letters, 16 August) by quoting from 1 Cor 2:9, where Paul quotes from Isaiah 64:4 . One could argue that it is stupid to believe that an ancient Jewish prophet knows what God has prepared for his followers. Isaiah offers to evidence as to how he knows this and non-Christians are entitled to claim that it is all make believe.
To Edinburgh Evening News (7 Aug 2017) published 16 Aug 2017
Scotland has nothing to lose but its (Christian) chains (Letter from Gus Logan, 7 August). The Christian superstition has hindered progress, causing people to look to an 'afterlife' rather than this one and making them fearful of divine punishment. The gospel has absolutely no relevance to modern life.
Fortunately more and more of us have rejected religion and found that we can live better and more useful lives without it. Consequently it is only right that local education committees should not have unelected religious representatives imposed on them, having undue influence on the school curriculum.
Scotland has nothing to lose but its (Christian) chains (Letter from Gus Logan, 7 August). The Christian superstition has hindered progress, causing people to look to an 'afterlife' rather than this one and making them fearful of divine punishment. The gospel has absolutely no relevance to modern life.
Fortunately more and more of us have rejected religion and found that we can live better and more useful lives without it. Consequently it is only right that local education committees should not have unelected religious representatives imposed on them, having undue influence on the school curriculum.
To The Scotsman (17 Jul 2017) not published
One cannot 'junk our proud and remarkable Christian history' (Letter from Gus Logan 17 July); it stands as the foundation of modern Western civilisation. However, we are now building a modern secular Britain on that foundation. Nearly 60 per cent of Scots have now rejected religion (74% of the 18-34 yr olds) and only about 18 per cent now belong to the Church of Scotland. Clearly Christianity is dying out.
Not before time, the Government is considering removing undemocratic Christian influence on local education committees. But there is more that could be done to remove the privileged position religion holds in education and wider society. Religion should be a private matter; it should not be imposed on everyone.
Mr Logan may not like these developments any more than he likes modern architecture. He can live in the past if he wants, but leave us to build a future without superstition.
One cannot 'junk our proud and remarkable Christian history' (Letter from Gus Logan 17 July); it stands as the foundation of modern Western civilisation. However, we are now building a modern secular Britain on that foundation. Nearly 60 per cent of Scots have now rejected religion (74% of the 18-34 yr olds) and only about 18 per cent now belong to the Church of Scotland. Clearly Christianity is dying out.
Not before time, the Government is considering removing undemocratic Christian influence on local education committees. But there is more that could be done to remove the privileged position religion holds in education and wider society. Religion should be a private matter; it should not be imposed on everyone.
Mr Logan may not like these developments any more than he likes modern architecture. He can live in the past if he wants, but leave us to build a future without superstition.
To Edinburgh Evening News (11 Jul 2017) published 15 Jul 2017
No UFO reports are 'unexplained', even if some people don't believe the explanations ('The trust is out there...right here', 10 July).
I have explained all the reports I have examined in my book The UFO Mystery Solved (1994). They include Robert Taylor's report, which I investigated.
Nowhere in Scotland is more or less likely to generate UFO reports; it depends on the local press publicity and people's ignorance of what can be seen in the sky.
Aliens are no more likely to be visiting Earth than we are of visiting them. In fact it is unlikely that any other intelligent beings exist in our Galaxy and perhaps nowhere else in the whole universe. See my article 'Are we alone' at https://asedinburghjournal.wordpress.com/2017/06/07/are-we-alone/.
No UFO reports are 'unexplained', even if some people don't believe the explanations ('The trust is out there...right here', 10 July).
I have explained all the reports I have examined in my book The UFO Mystery Solved (1994). They include Robert Taylor's report, which I investigated.
Nowhere in Scotland is more or less likely to generate UFO reports; it depends on the local press publicity and people's ignorance of what can be seen in the sky.
Aliens are no more likely to be visiting Earth than we are of visiting them. In fact it is unlikely that any other intelligent beings exist in our Galaxy and perhaps nowhere else in the whole universe. See my article 'Are we alone' at https://asedinburghjournal.wordpress.com/2017/06/07/are-we-alone/.
To The Scotsman (7 Jul 2017) published 8 Jul 2017
It is surprising that [Lesley McLeod,] a representative of the Association of Project Safety (Lesley McLeod in her article 'Blaze tragedy at Grenfell Tower should ring alarm bells for all of us', 7 July) should make the mistake of claiming that carbon monoxide (CO) is 'heavier than air'.
In fact CO is slightly lighter than air and mixes well. If it is escaping from a heating appliance it is likely to be warm and so rise through air, which is why CO detectors are recommended to be placed at a high level.
It is surprising that [Lesley McLeod,] a representative of the Association of Project Safety (Lesley McLeod in her article 'Blaze tragedy at Grenfell Tower should ring alarm bells for all of us', 7 July) should make the mistake of claiming that carbon monoxide (CO) is 'heavier than air'.
In fact CO is slightly lighter than air and mixes well. If it is escaping from a heating appliance it is likely to be warm and so rise through air, which is why CO detectors are recommended to be placed at a high level.
To The Scotsman (4 Jul 2017) published 5 Jul 2017
In your report of MSP Mark Ruskell's Bill proposing reducing the urban speed limit from 30 mph to 20, you failed to point out that the Bill would
allow local authorities to increase the limit back up to 30mph in areas 'where they and the local community consider it appropriate'.
20 mph is a suitable speed for local side roads (in most cases it is not possible to drive any faster making one wonder why a lower limit is necessary) but it is a ridiculously low speed on major through routes (only appropriate in city centres).
In Edinburgh, in my area, major through routes will remain at 30 or 40, but the City Council has seen fit to impose a 20 limit on a section of Slateford Road (an A road and a major artery and bus route). Sensibly most traffic ignores that limit; even the buses ignore it.
So if this lower limit makes no difference to driving habits, why bother with it? All that expense to no effect!
One may also ask what evidence there is that driving at 20 reduces vehicle emissions (one of the purposes of Mr Ruskell's Bill). Logic suggest that emissions will increase because of the lower gears involved and/or lower efficiency at low speeds.
In your report of MSP Mark Ruskell's Bill proposing reducing the urban speed limit from 30 mph to 20, you failed to point out that the Bill would
allow local authorities to increase the limit back up to 30mph in areas 'where they and the local community consider it appropriate'.
20 mph is a suitable speed for local side roads (in most cases it is not possible to drive any faster making one wonder why a lower limit is necessary) but it is a ridiculously low speed on major through routes (only appropriate in city centres).
In Edinburgh, in my area, major through routes will remain at 30 or 40, but the City Council has seen fit to impose a 20 limit on a section of Slateford Road (an A road and a major artery and bus route). Sensibly most traffic ignores that limit; even the buses ignore it.
So if this lower limit makes no difference to driving habits, why bother with it? All that expense to no effect!
One may also ask what evidence there is that driving at 20 reduces vehicle emissions (one of the purposes of Mr Ruskell's Bill). Logic suggest that emissions will increase because of the lower gears involved and/or lower efficiency at low speeds.
To The Scotsman (23 Jun 2017) not published
Generating electricity from tidal power is all very well (your report of the West Islay Tidal Park, 23 June) but it is not reliable. At times of the slack water between tides (four times a day, at variable times) there will be no generation at all. This will be a headache for grid controllers who must arrange for an alternative source of supply at such times. Those alternatives may well be burning gas, so contributing to greenhouse gas emissions. Is that as green as it sound?
Generating electricity from tidal power is all very well (your report of the West Islay Tidal Park, 23 June) but it is not reliable. At times of the slack water between tides (four times a day, at variable times) there will be no generation at all. This will be a headache for grid controllers who must arrange for an alternative source of supply at such times. Those alternatives may well be burning gas, so contributing to greenhouse gas emissions. Is that as green as it sound?
To Edinburgh News (23 Jun 2017) not published
John Eoin Douglas evidently can't move with the times and accept the metric system of measurement (Letter 22 June). It is now taught in all our schools and used by all of science and technology worldwide. It is also far more logical and efficient than our old confused Imperial system of weights and measures.
Even if the UK leaves the EU (not certain yet!), it would be foolish to abandon metric measures, if only on the basis of the cost involved. We trade with a metric world, so if we want to be a successful trading nation we need to use (SI) metric.
John Eoin Douglas evidently can't move with the times and accept the metric system of measurement (Letter 22 June). It is now taught in all our schools and used by all of science and technology worldwide. It is also far more logical and efficient than our old confused Imperial system of weights and measures.
Even if the UK leaves the EU (not certain yet!), it would be foolish to abandon metric measures, if only on the basis of the cost involved. We trade with a metric world, so if we want to be a successful trading nation we need to use (SI) metric.
To Edinburgh News (20 Jun 2017) not published
If Christianity is so necessary (Letter from J Longstaff, 19 June), why are so many rejecting it (only about one third of Scots are now Christians and even fewer regularly attend services)?
It's because they find its teachings irrelevant to their lives. We are all capable of behaving ourselves and telling right from wrong without dipping into the Bible. In fact close adherence to scriptural authority can be a distraction, claiming that superstitious beliefs are more important than reality and that a better life awaits.
Most of us do not believe that one can survive death and that this life is the only one we will ever have. That is why we try to make the best of it for ourselves and others. Philanthropy does not require religion.
If Christianity is so necessary (Letter from J Longstaff, 19 June), why are so many rejecting it (only about one third of Scots are now Christians and even fewer regularly attend services)?
It's because they find its teachings irrelevant to their lives. We are all capable of behaving ourselves and telling right from wrong without dipping into the Bible. In fact close adherence to scriptural authority can be a distraction, claiming that superstitious beliefs are more important than reality and that a better life awaits.
Most of us do not believe that one can survive death and that this life is the only one we will ever have. That is why we try to make the best of it for ourselves and others. Philanthropy does not require religion.
To The Scotsman (10 Jun 2017) not published but sent to Scotland on Sunday (15 Jun 2017) published in SoS 18 Jun 2017
Many call for the SNP to abandon its obsession with independence and, instead, to concentrate on the Scottish need for good education, health and an prosperous economy, all seen as neglected by the SNP.
But that neglect could be deliberate. The more the SNP can blame Westminster (Scotland is still dependent on the Barnet Formula funding), the more they can claim that all these problems can be fixed by making Scotland independent of the UK.
Conversely, if the SNP government fixed the problems and made Scotland a successful devolved administration, the less independence could be seen as desirable.
So the SNP are in a dilemma. They need to show how independence would solve all problems but if they allow problems to fester, they get seen as incompetent and unsuitable to run an independent Scotland, let alone a devolved one.
Many call for the SNP to abandon its obsession with independence and, instead, to concentrate on the Scottish need for good education, health and an prosperous economy, all seen as neglected by the SNP.
But that neglect could be deliberate. The more the SNP can blame Westminster (Scotland is still dependent on the Barnet Formula funding), the more they can claim that all these problems can be fixed by making Scotland independent of the UK.
Conversely, if the SNP government fixed the problems and made Scotland a successful devolved administration, the less independence could be seen as desirable.
So the SNP are in a dilemma. They need to show how independence would solve all problems but if they allow problems to fester, they get seen as incompetent and unsuitable to run an independent Scotland, let alone a devolved one.
To The Scotsman (30 May 2017) not published
Dr Gordon Macdonald is entitled to his beliefs but not to ignore the facts and biblical criticism ('Our rulers often forget that they will be accountable to Jesus for their actions', 30 May) .
The gospel story of Jesus' ascension (Acts 1:9) is clearly imaginary and probably based on the belief at the time that admired Roman emperors ascended to heaven after their death, perhaps in the smoke of their funeral pyre. If Jesus was superior to the Emperors, then he must at least have a similar ascension, even though Jesus himself did not believe in any human going to heaven.
The Book of Daniel is now known to be pseudepigraphic, written about 165 BC but pretending to come from the 6th century BC. It should not be regarded as a prophetic. As for Revelation, this was not written by the disciple of that name but by some fanatic living in Patmos, whose style differs from that of the apostle.
Dr Macdonald's naive belief in Christian myths is both inappropriate and a distraction. Politicians do well not to 'do God' and to make their decisions based the information available to them without considering judgement after death. Modern secularism is not 'intolerant'; instead it tolerates all religious views so long as they do not claim special privileges and influence in society that is denied to other groups. Unfortunately Christianity still benefits from anachronistic privileges which should long ago have been denied to it.
Life after death and judgement by Jesus are not a 'historical certainty'; they are primitive beliefs based on a misreading of the Bible and a gross misunderstanding of Jesus' life and mission.
Dr Gordon Macdonald is entitled to his beliefs but not to ignore the facts and biblical criticism ('Our rulers often forget that they will be accountable to Jesus for their actions', 30 May) .
The gospel story of Jesus' ascension (Acts 1:9) is clearly imaginary and probably based on the belief at the time that admired Roman emperors ascended to heaven after their death, perhaps in the smoke of their funeral pyre. If Jesus was superior to the Emperors, then he must at least have a similar ascension, even though Jesus himself did not believe in any human going to heaven.
The Book of Daniel is now known to be pseudepigraphic, written about 165 BC but pretending to come from the 6th century BC. It should not be regarded as a prophetic. As for Revelation, this was not written by the disciple of that name but by some fanatic living in Patmos, whose style differs from that of the apostle.
Dr Macdonald's naive belief in Christian myths is both inappropriate and a distraction. Politicians do well not to 'do God' and to make their decisions based the information available to them without considering judgement after death. Modern secularism is not 'intolerant'; instead it tolerates all religious views so long as they do not claim special privileges and influence in society that is denied to other groups. Unfortunately Christianity still benefits from anachronistic privileges which should long ago have been denied to it.
Life after death and judgement by Jesus are not a 'historical certainty'; they are primitive beliefs based on a misreading of the Bible and a gross misunderstanding of Jesus' life and mission.
To The Scotsman (29 may 2017) published 01 Jun 2017
You report that the Rev Stephen Reid suggested to the Kirk assembly that, on the matter of gay marriage, they should 'listen to the one who is King and head of our church' (General Assembly report, 26 May). He means Jesus.
However, the Gospels contain no record of any statement by Jesus on that matter, although several on marriage in general and an insistance that the resurrected would be sexless. As he thought the Kingdom of Heaven imminent, one could argue that he regarded marriage at that time as irrelevant and that may explain why he did not marry.
He might have agreed with the law (Leviticus 18:22), although considering that he overruled or ignored several Jewish laws, he might well have ignored this one. Indeed, his behaviour towards his disciple John (he allowed him to rest his head of his breast at meals) suggests an ambiguous sexual attitude.
That is what the Kirk should listen to.
To The Edinburgh Evening News (26 May 2017) published 29 may 2017
You report that the Rev Stephen Reid suggested to the Kirk assembly that, on the matter of gay marriage, they should 'listen to the one who is King and head of our church' (General Assembly report, 26 May). He means Jesus.
However, the Gospels contain no record of any statement by Jesus on that matter, although several on marriage in general and an insistance that the resurrected would be sexless. As he thought the Kingdom of Heaven imminent, one could argue that he regarded marriage at that time as irrelevant and that may explain why he did not marry.
He might have agreed with the law (Leviticus 18:22), although considering that he overruled or ignored several Jewish laws, he might well have ignored this one. Indeed, his behaviour towards his disciple John (he allowed him to rest his head of his breast at meals) suggests an ambiguous sexual attitude.
That is what the Kirk should listen to.
You report that the Rev Stephen Reid suggested to the Kirk assembly that, on the matter of gay marriage, they should 'listen to the one who is King and head of our church' (General Assembly report, 26 May). He means Jesus.
However, the Gospels contain no record of any statement by Jesus on that matter, although several on marriage in general and an insistance that the resurrected would be sexless. As he thought the Kingdom of Heaven imminent, one could argue that he regarded marriage at that time as irrelevant and that may explain why he did not marry.
He might have agreed with the law (Leviticus 18:22), although considering that he overruled or ignored several Jewish laws, he might well have ignored this one. Indeed, his behaviour towards his disciple John (he allowed him to rest his head of his breast at meals) suggests an ambiguous sexual attitude.
That is what the Kirk should listen to.
To The Edinburgh Evening News (26 May 2017) published 29 may 2017
You report that the Rev Stephen Reid suggested to the Kirk assembly that, on the matter of gay marriage, they should 'listen to the one who is King and head of our church' (General Assembly report, 26 May). He means Jesus.
However, the Gospels contain no record of any statement by Jesus on that matter, although several on marriage in general and an insistance that the resurrected would be sexless. As he thought the Kingdom of Heaven imminent, one could argue that he regarded marriage at that time as irrelevant and that may explain why he did not marry.
He might have agreed with the law (Leviticus 18:22), although considering that he overruled or ignored several Jewish laws, he might well have ignored this one. Indeed, his behaviour towards his disciple John (he allowed him to rest his head of his breast at meals) suggests an ambiguous sexual attitude.
That is what the Kirk should listen to.
To Edinburgh Evening News (21 May 2017) published 26 May 2017
Driving at 20 mph on a main road like the A70 (through Gorgie and Dalry) is inordinately slow. One soon collects a stream of cars behind who evidently want to go faster. Indeed, when the buses exceed the limit why shouldn't car drivers?
I now change my routes to avoid 20 mph main roads as far as possible. 20 is fine for side roads and the City Centre, but on the main arterial routes it's nonsense.
Driving at 20 mph on a main road like the A70 (through Gorgie and Dalry) is inordinately slow. One soon collects a stream of cars behind who evidently want to go faster. Indeed, when the buses exceed the limit why shouldn't car drivers?
I now change my routes to avoid 20 mph main roads as far as possible. 20 is fine for side roads and the City Centre, but on the main arterial routes it's nonsense.
To Scotland on Sunday (17 May 2017) published 21 May 2017
Belief in the reports by the children of seeing the Virgin Mary ("Pope canonises two child visionaries at farm town", 14 May) were taken seriously when a 'Miracle of the Sun' was observed by huge crowds on 13 Oct 1917. You don't mention it.
The Sun appeared to change colour and approach the Earth, causing fear and panic. This was taken as proof of the children's stories.
However, I have shown that [T]this was a natural phenomenon caused by a dust cloud passing over Portugal. It was sheer coincidence that it occurred on that day at that time.
It is quite possible that the "visions" also have a natural explanation.
Belief in the reports by the children of seeing the Virgin Mary ("Pope canonises two child visionaries at farm town", 14 May) were taken seriously when a 'Miracle of the Sun' was observed by huge crowds on 13 Oct 1917. You don't mention it.
The Sun appeared to change colour and approach the Earth, causing fear and panic. This was taken as proof of the children's stories.
However, I have shown that [T]this was a natural phenomenon caused by a dust cloud passing over Portugal. It was sheer coincidence that it occurred on that day at that time.
It is quite possible that the "visions" also have a natural explanation.
To The Scotsman (26 Apr 2017) published 27 Apr 2017
It is surprising that a retired professor of chemistry is unsure as to whether or not climate change is a myth ('Emissions cut is win-win, global warming or not', 25 April).
David Cole-Hamilton ought to know that it is certainly not a myth. He should also know that his proposed fix ('reduce emissions and develop alternative renewable energy sources') is utterly inadequate. Even if all emissions ceased today, warming is locked in and will continue for a long time unless we find a way of cooling the planet (there are geoengineering options for that). In fact, achieved and planned reductions are making little difference because of inaction by the major emission countries.
Renewable energy is a false prophet, promising much but achieving little and costing much. So is increasing efficiency in energy use; it encourages greater use, defeating its purpose.
It is surprising that a retired professor of chemistry is unsure as to whether or not climate change is a myth ('Emissions cut is win-win, global warming or not', 25 April).
David Cole-Hamilton ought to know that it is certainly not a myth. He should also know that his proposed fix ('reduce emissions and develop alternative renewable energy sources') is utterly inadequate. Even if all emissions ceased today, warming is locked in and will continue for a long time unless we find a way of cooling the planet (there are geoengineering options for that). In fact, achieved and planned reductions are making little difference because of inaction by the major emission countries.
Renewable energy is a false prophet, promising much but achieving little and costing much. So is increasing efficiency in energy use; it encourages greater use, defeating its purpose.
To The Times (23 Apr 2017)
Roderick Strange mentions all the superstitious reports of the risen Jesus ('Christ wins over present-day doubting Thomases too', (Credo 22 April) but strangely makes no mention of the one reliable report in John chapter 21. Here we find the disciples fishing in Galilee, where Jesus had told them to go. But then they see a figure by the shore whom they take to be Jesus, but some were not sure and none dared ask for identify. That Peter had to ask who had betrayed him shows that they had not seen him 'risen' in Jerusalem.
But this was not Jesus; it was an old shepherd (he spoke several times about his sheep), who wanted to retire. Nevertheless this seems to have been the incident that convinced Peter especially that Jesus had been resurrected.
Mr Strange should know that Thomas could not have called Jesus 'my God' as no Jew believed that the Messiah was divine. This report is an invention of the Early Church, which did so believe.
Roderick Strange mentions all the superstitious reports of the risen Jesus ('Christ wins over present-day doubting Thomases too', (Credo 22 April) but strangely makes no mention of the one reliable report in John chapter 21. Here we find the disciples fishing in Galilee, where Jesus had told them to go. But then they see a figure by the shore whom they take to be Jesus, but some were not sure and none dared ask for identify. That Peter had to ask who had betrayed him shows that they had not seen him 'risen' in Jerusalem.
But this was not Jesus; it was an old shepherd (he spoke several times about his sheep), who wanted to retire. Nevertheless this seems to have been the incident that convinced Peter especially that Jesus had been resurrected.
Mr Strange should know that Thomas could not have called Jesus 'my God' as no Jew believed that the Messiah was divine. This report is an invention of the Early Church, which did so believe.
To The Scotsman (22 Apr 2017) published 24 Apr 2017
Replacing coal by wood pellets, as at Drax power station ('King Coal dethroned-UK's first day without coal-fired electricity', 22 April) is not necessarily an improvement. Although burning coal produces some pollutants, its worst effect and one that cannot be eliminated except by sequestration (not yet practical) is the emission of a greenhouse gas (CO2). So it would seem to be better to burn wood instead.
Unfortunately, studies have shown that burning wood from unsustainable sources without reforestation (usually the case) releases more CO2 that burning coal (0.39 kg CO2/kWh, compared with 0.34 kg). So let's not burn anything in electricity generation.
Replacing coal by wood pellets, as at Drax power station ('King Coal dethroned-UK's first day without coal-fired electricity', 22 April) is not necessarily an improvement. Although burning coal produces some pollutants, its worst effect and one that cannot be eliminated except by sequestration (not yet practical) is the emission of a greenhouse gas (CO2). So it would seem to be better to burn wood instead.
Unfortunately, studies have shown that burning wood from unsustainable sources without reforestation (usually the case) releases more CO2 that burning coal (0.39 kg CO2/kWh, compared with 0.34 kg). So let's not burn anything in electricity generation.
To Scotland on Sunday (18 Apr 2017) published 23 Apr 2017
How little Rev Colin Sinclair understands Jesus' fate ('Comment, 16 April). In no way was his death 'for us', although he may have thought that he had to suffer on behalf of his people--the Jews. Nor was he trying to show anyone 'what God was like'; he was trying to show his people what the Messiah was like.
In fact, he had not even expected to die; he expected to survive and emerge victorious as the conquering Messiah ben David, who would throw the Romans into the sea. That he died was an unexpected coup-de-grace by the execution squad.
Mr Sinclair claims that no one expected his resurrection. But Jesus did, even telling his disciples that they would see him again.
The Christian Church completely misunderstands Jesus' plan and his fate and has made a god out of Jewish rabbi.
How this came about is explained in my book The Rise and Fall of Jesus.
How little Rev Colin Sinclair understands Jesus' fate ('Comment, 16 April). In no way was his death 'for us', although he may have thought that he had to suffer on behalf of his people--the Jews. Nor was he trying to show anyone 'what God was like'; he was trying to show his people what the Messiah was like.
In fact, he had not even expected to die; he expected to survive and emerge victorious as the conquering Messiah ben David, who would throw the Romans into the sea. That he died was an unexpected coup-de-grace by the execution squad.
Mr Sinclair claims that no one expected his resurrection. But Jesus did, even telling his disciples that they would see him again.
The Christian Church completely misunderstands Jesus' plan and his fate and has made a god out of Jewish rabbi.
How this came about is explained in my book The Rise and Fall of Jesus.
To The Scotsman (17 Apr 2017) published 18 Apr 2017
On page 5 yesterday (17 April) you carried a report about declining church attendance and, at the same time, a report of the royal family attending a service at St George's Chapel.
The Royals seem to be as dedicated to attendance as ever, while the population increasingly avoids it. Gradually, they become more and more out of touch with the beliefs of the people as a whole. Where are the non-believers in the royal family? There must be some.
On page 5 yesterday (17 April) you carried a report about declining church attendance and, at the same time, a report of the royal family attending a service at St George's Chapel.
The Royals seem to be as dedicated to attendance as ever, while the population increasingly avoids it. Gradually, they become more and more out of touch with the beliefs of the people as a whole. Where are the non-believers in the royal family? There must be some.
To The Sunday Times (12 Apr 2017) not published
Very many have tried to explain Jesus' life--none convincingly. Overlooked is the possibility that he wanted to be crucified. This would explain his apparent willingness to be betrayed and arrested; he even encouraged and arranged it, refusing to defend himself. But why?
Believing that he was the first of two Messiahs, one who had to suffer for his people, he planned to survive the ordeal and emerge ('resurrected') from the tomb as the second expected Messiah, who would rule Israel and overthrow the Roman occupiers.
How he planned all this and why he failed is explained in my book The Rise and Fall of Jesus (WPS 2009).--
Very many have tried to explain Jesus' life--none convincingly. Overlooked is the possibility that he wanted to be crucified. This would explain his apparent willingness to be betrayed and arrested; he even encouraged and arranged it, refusing to defend himself. But why?
Believing that he was the first of two Messiahs, one who had to suffer for his people, he planned to survive the ordeal and emerge ('resurrected') from the tomb as the second expected Messiah, who would rule Israel and overthrow the Roman occupiers.
How he planned all this and why he failed is explained in my book The Rise and Fall of Jesus (WPS 2009).--
To The Scotsman (25 Mar 2017) published 27 Mar 2017
You report (25 March) that an offshore worker is concerned about being exposed to alpha radiation on the Thistle platform and that he has called for action (unspecified).
Alpha particles are just the nuclei of helium atoms and the weakest of all the particles emitted by radioactive elements. They can travel a few centimetres in air but can be stopped by a sheet of paper, by clothing or by the top layer of the skin. No one should be alarmed by exposure to alpha particles.
You report (25 March) that an offshore worker is concerned about being exposed to alpha radiation on the Thistle platform and that he has called for action (unspecified).
Alpha particles are just the nuclei of helium atoms and the weakest of all the particles emitted by radioactive elements. They can travel a few centimetres in air but can be stopped by a sheet of paper, by clothing or by the top layer of the skin. No one should be alarmed by exposure to alpha particles.
To Edinburgh Evening News (21 Mar 2017) published 4 Apr 2017
For a floating voter, Helen Martin seems already to have made up her mind to support the SNP ('May's ignorance of Scotland a gift to the SNP', 20 March). But she also seems to be ignorant of Scotland's constitutional position.
Constitutionally the UK is not 'a union of four countries'; it is a union of only two, Great Britain (GB, itself a union formed in 1707) and Northern Ireland, a province and what remains of of the country that was united with GB in 1801.
Consequently, Scotland is part of GB. In 1707 the separate kingdoms of England and Scotland ceased to exist and a new kingdom (GB) was formed ('for ever' in the Treaty of Union!). It is this union that the SNP aim to undo. If that happened there would still be a 'UK: 'The United Kingdom of England and Northern Ireland' (Wales is subsumed in England).
For a floating voter, Helen Martin seems already to have made up her mind to support the SNP ('May's ignorance of Scotland a gift to the SNP', 20 March). But she also seems to be ignorant of Scotland's constitutional position.
Constitutionally the UK is not 'a union of four countries'; it is a union of only two, Great Britain (GB, itself a union formed in 1707) and Northern Ireland, a province and what remains of of the country that was united with GB in 1801.
Consequently, Scotland is part of GB. In 1707 the separate kingdoms of England and Scotland ceased to exist and a new kingdom (GB) was formed ('for ever' in the Treaty of Union!). It is this union that the SNP aim to undo. If that happened there would still be a 'UK: 'The United Kingdom of England and Northern Ireland' (Wales is subsumed in England).
To Scotland on Sunday (21 Mar 2017) published 26 Mar 2017
Everyone talks about breaking up the 'United Kingdom'. Merely losing Northern Ireland (NI) would do that, leaving us here with 'Great Britain', a nation formed in 1707. The 'United' in 'UK' refers to the union with Ireland in 1801. Unionist should take note.
What the SNP hope to do is break up Great Britain. In that event, assuming NI remained British, the British state would become 'The United Kingdom of England and Northern Ireland'. Wales tags along with England.
Consequently, any referendum should be about whether or not Scots want to remain part of 'Great Britain'.
The Prime Minister claims that the UK is 'four nations' (the word 'nation' has various interpretations). Northern Ireland is technically a 'province' and Wales was a principality but now seems to be just a region of the UK (it shares its legal system with England). Scotland and England were independent kingdoms until 1707 when they were united into 'The Kingdom of Great Britain' (one nation). Today there is only one British nation: that of the 'United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland', the latter the rump of what was the whole of Ireland.
Is the Prime Minister sure she understands the constitutional situation in the country she governs?
Everyone talks about breaking up the 'United Kingdom'. Merely losing Northern Ireland (NI) would do that, leaving us here with 'Great Britain', a nation formed in 1707. The 'United' in 'UK' refers to the union with Ireland in 1801. Unionist should take note.
What the SNP hope to do is break up Great Britain. In that event, assuming NI remained British, the British state would become 'The United Kingdom of England and Northern Ireland'. Wales tags along with England.
Consequently, any referendum should be about whether or not Scots want to remain part of 'Great Britain'.
The Prime Minister claims that the UK is 'four nations' (the word 'nation' has various interpretations). Northern Ireland is technically a 'province' and Wales was a principality but now seems to be just a region of the UK (it shares its legal system with England). Scotland and England were independent kingdoms until 1707 when they were united into 'The Kingdom of Great Britain' (one nation). Today there is only one British nation: that of the 'United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland', the latter the rump of what was the whole of Ireland.
Is the Prime Minister sure she understands the constitutional situation in the country she governs?
To The Scotsman (18 Mar 2017) not published
Everyone talks about breaking up the 'United Kingdom' (e.g. Andrew Hamilton is his letter, 18 March, suggests that a referendum questions should be 'Should Scotland remain a member of the United Kingdom').
Merely losing Northern Ireland would fracture the UK, leaving us here with 'Great Britain', a country formed in 1707. The 'United' in 'UK' refers to the union with Ireland in 1801. Unionist should take note.
What the SNP hope to do is break up Great Britain. In that event, assuming NI remained British, the British state would become 'The United Kingdom of England and Northern Ireland'. Wales tags along with England.
Consequently, voters should be asked if Scotland should remain part of 'Great Britain'.
Everyone talks about breaking up the 'United Kingdom' (e.g. Andrew Hamilton is his letter, 18 March, suggests that a referendum questions should be 'Should Scotland remain a member of the United Kingdom').
Merely losing Northern Ireland would fracture the UK, leaving us here with 'Great Britain', a country formed in 1707. The 'United' in 'UK' refers to the union with Ireland in 1801. Unionist should take note.
What the SNP hope to do is break up Great Britain. In that event, assuming NI remained British, the British state would become 'The United Kingdom of England and Northern Ireland'. Wales tags along with England.
Consequently, voters should be asked if Scotland should remain part of 'Great Britain'.
To The Sunday Times (20 Feb 2017) not published
Michael Sims trots out the usual ignorant objections to nuclear power (Business, 19 February). But in fact it is one of the safest, cheapest and most reliable forms of electricity generation and the industry knows full well how to dispose of its waste. Japan's widespread shutdown was an unnecessary overreaction to the Fukushima Daiichi accident, as is Germany's.
Bernard George also thought it expensive. Constructing nuclear power plants is expensive but the fuel they use is cheap, making the electricity they produce competitive. Nuclear power is ideal as the provider of base load without damaging the climate. Gas is a fossil fuel, the burning of which emits greenhouse gases.
Michael Sims trots out the usual ignorant objections to nuclear power (Business, 19 February). But in fact it is one of the safest, cheapest and most reliable forms of electricity generation and the industry knows full well how to dispose of its waste. Japan's widespread shutdown was an unnecessary overreaction to the Fukushima Daiichi accident, as is Germany's.
Bernard George also thought it expensive. Constructing nuclear power plants is expensive but the fuel they use is cheap, making the electricity they produce competitive. Nuclear power is ideal as the provider of base load without damaging the climate. Gas is a fossil fuel, the burning of which emits greenhouse gases.
To Edinburgh News (19 Feb 2017) not published
While Royal Mail congratulates itself on exceeding its 1st class mail target in the EH postcode area (your report 18 February) it should be ashamed of the state of its drop boxes and some postboxes. Most are covered with graffiti, which it seems reluctant to remove.
While Royal Mail congratulates itself on exceeding its 1st class mail target in the EH postcode area (your report 18 February) it should be ashamed of the state of its drop boxes and some postboxes. Most are covered with graffiti, which it seems reluctant to remove.
To The Scotsman (15 Feb 2017) published 16 Feb 2017
It would be good, as Benedict Bate suggests (Letters, 15 February), if money collected from a tourist tax were used to remove graffiti around Edinburgh. However, the refusal/reluctance of the City Council to remove graffiti even from Princes Street and elsewhere has not yet been blamed on shortage of funds.
In the Longstone Community Council area we know of 28 different cases of graffiti that we are attempting to get removed. Sometimes the ownership of the property involved is not clear, but 17 cases are on Council property. One is a case of offensive graffiti, not yet removed after nearly a week! All have been reported both to CEC and the police.
Leaving graffiti encourages more and also leads to other low-level crime. We wish that the Council and the police would take graffiti more seriously.
It would be good, as Benedict Bate suggests (Letters, 15 February), if money collected from a tourist tax were used to remove graffiti around Edinburgh. However, the refusal/reluctance of the City Council to remove graffiti even from Princes Street and elsewhere has not yet been blamed on shortage of funds.
In the Longstone Community Council area we know of 28 different cases of graffiti that we are attempting to get removed. Sometimes the ownership of the property involved is not clear, but 17 cases are on Council property. One is a case of offensive graffiti, not yet removed after nearly a week! All have been reported both to CEC and the police.
Leaving graffiti encourages more and also leads to other low-level crime. We wish that the Council and the police would take graffiti more seriously.
To The Scotsman (11 Feb 2017) not published
Alastair Martin denigrates thermal power stations as 'not so smart' because they have to throw away more energy than they produce in the form of electricity ('Energy matters enough to force smart solutions', 10 February).
However, such stations have been the backbone of reliable electricity generation from before the existence of the national electricity network in 1933. They cannot help 'throwing away' energy because of the Carnot cycle which limits efficiency in converting heat in electricity. Without such stations, we would not have had universal access to a reliable electricity supply for the last 80-odd years. They would be 'smarter' if the waste heat was put to some use, as in some cases it has, but it has always been the 'smartest' way to provide electricity to all and to 'keep the lights on'.
If Dr Martin is calling for better use to be made of this 'waste heat', then well and good. Even the heat dumped from nuclear stations could be put to a good use for the benefit of society; such ideas are being explored in various countries. More could be done to encourage such developments in the UK.
Alastair Martin denigrates thermal power stations as 'not so smart' because they have to throw away more energy than they produce in the form of electricity ('Energy matters enough to force smart solutions', 10 February).
However, such stations have been the backbone of reliable electricity generation from before the existence of the national electricity network in 1933. They cannot help 'throwing away' energy because of the Carnot cycle which limits efficiency in converting heat in electricity. Without such stations, we would not have had universal access to a reliable electricity supply for the last 80-odd years. They would be 'smarter' if the waste heat was put to some use, as in some cases it has, but it has always been the 'smartest' way to provide electricity to all and to 'keep the lights on'.
If Dr Martin is calling for better use to be made of this 'waste heat', then well and good. Even the heat dumped from nuclear stations could be put to a good use for the benefit of society; such ideas are being explored in various countries. More could be done to encourage such developments in the UK.
To The Scotsman (8 Feb 2017) not published
Your correspondents (6/7 February) are right to express concern that an important constitutional issue should not be decided by a simple majority (they suggest 60% or two-thirds minimum).
In the 2014 Scottish referendum, 'No' won by 2,001,026 votes to 'Yes's 1,617,989 (55.3% to 44.7%). That was out of a total electorate of 4,283,392. Consequently, those who voted 'No' represented only 46.7 per cent of the electorate and those who voted 'Yes' only 37.8 per cent respectively. Neither represented more than half the electorate and 664,377 (15.5%) did not vote.
So besides aiming for (say) 60 percent to win, it would also be better if the winning side represented at least half the electorate.
Of course this may mean that neither side wins, and quite right too on an important constitutional issue. If insufficient people support change, then the status quo should prevail.
Your correspondents (6/7 February) are right to express concern that an important constitutional issue should not be decided by a simple majority (they suggest 60% or two-thirds minimum).
In the 2014 Scottish referendum, 'No' won by 2,001,026 votes to 'Yes's 1,617,989 (55.3% to 44.7%). That was out of a total electorate of 4,283,392. Consequently, those who voted 'No' represented only 46.7 per cent of the electorate and those who voted 'Yes' only 37.8 per cent respectively. Neither represented more than half the electorate and 664,377 (15.5%) did not vote.
So besides aiming for (say) 60 percent to win, it would also be better if the winning side represented at least half the electorate.
Of course this may mean that neither side wins, and quite right too on an important constitutional issue. If insufficient people support change, then the status quo should prevail.
To The Sunday Times (6 Feb 2017) published 12 Feb 2017
While Stephen McGinty made an attempt to describe events correctly[, he was not entirely accurate] ('Highlands still haunted by ghosts of Glencoe', 5 February), he was not entirely accurate. Grossly inaccurate was your caption to the accompanying illustration, claiming that 'the Campbells slew members of the MacDonald clan'.
Although, for a hundred years or so clan had massacred clan, this was not a clan on clan action; it was a government action, in which troops were ordered to carry out a despicable act. The commanding officer was indeed a Campbell, but he had his orders. The troop itself had only a minority of Campbell soldiers, some of whom tried to warn the MacDonalds and some even refused the order (breaking their swords).
So please stop portraying this as a clan feud. It was unjustified government vengeance.
While Stephen McGinty made an attempt to describe events correctly[, he was not entirely accurate] ('Highlands still haunted by ghosts of Glencoe', 5 February), he was not entirely accurate. Grossly inaccurate was your caption to the accompanying illustration, claiming that 'the Campbells slew members of the MacDonald clan'.
Although, for a hundred years or so clan had massacred clan, this was not a clan on clan action; it was a government action, in which troops were ordered to carry out a despicable act. The commanding officer was indeed a Campbell, but he had his orders. The troop itself had only a minority of Campbell soldiers, some of whom tried to warn the MacDonalds and some even refused the order (breaking their swords).
So please stop portraying this as a clan feud. It was unjustified government vengeance.
To The Scotsman (4 Feb 2017) published 6 Feb 2017
Clark Cross reported electricity imported to Scotland over the weekend of 28 January (Letters, 3 February) but gets his units wrong. '1.2GW' is a power unit, but perhaps he meant '1.2 GWh' (gigawatthours), which is an electricity industry energy unit. It was energy that was imported, not power (power times time = energy).
Clark Cross reported electricity imported to Scotland over the weekend of 28 January (Letters, 3 February) but gets his units wrong. '1.2GW' is a power unit, but perhaps he meant '1.2 GWh' (gigawatthours), which is an electricity industry energy unit. It was energy that was imported, not power (power times time = energy).
To Radio Times (30 Jan 2017)
I enjoy the young Morse's exploits in Endeavour, but the unbelievable plots make that difficult. The last in Series 4 ('Harvest') involved a nuclear power station located inland when all the UK's stations are on the coast (to use sea water for cooling), a threat to build as reservoir (for what purpose) and even a chimney! Nor would a fast reactor ('Goldenrod') be planned within an existing thermal reactor site. The release of cooling water, which would not be radioactive is just unimagineable and how did that cause Dr Laxman's body to become highly radioactive? It was laughable, which I don't think was Russell Lewis's intention. ITV should find a better writer for the next series.
I enjoy the young Morse's exploits in Endeavour, but the unbelievable plots make that difficult. The last in Series 4 ('Harvest') involved a nuclear power station located inland when all the UK's stations are on the coast (to use sea water for cooling), a threat to build as reservoir (for what purpose) and even a chimney! Nor would a fast reactor ('Goldenrod') be planned within an existing thermal reactor site. The release of cooling water, which would not be radioactive is just unimagineable and how did that cause Dr Laxman's body to become highly radioactive? It was laughable, which I don't think was Russell Lewis's intention. ITV should find a better writer for the next series.
To Edinburgh News (28 Jan 2017) published 31 Jan 2017
The jaywalking to which Moira Forrest refers (Platform, 26 January) would be less of a problem if the pedestrian control lights included countdown times in seconds to the green man and countup times to the red one. This is common practice in other countries (I have seen it in Spain).
Those waiting to cross then no longer have to wonder how long they will be kept waiting and are less tempted to risk their lives crossing against the lights.
What is preventing Edinburgh from adopting this system?
The jaywalking to which Moira Forrest refers (Platform, 26 January) would be less of a problem if the pedestrian control lights included countdown times in seconds to the green man and countup times to the red one. This is common practice in other countries (I have seen it in Spain).
Those waiting to cross then no longer have to wonder how long they will be kept waiting and are less tempted to risk their lives crossing against the lights.
What is preventing Edinburgh from adopting this system?
To The Scotsman (23 Jan 17) published 25 Jan 2017
'There's none so deaf as those who will not hear' and Geoff Moore (Letter, 21 January) is clearly 'deaf'. The scientific evidence is overwhelming that global temperatures are rising and that mainly this is due to man-made emissions of greenhouse gases (mainly CO2 from burning fossil fuels).
As Moore points out, there are many factors that influence Earth's climate in the long term but lately these have been swamped by mankind's industrial activity. In fact we appear to have stopped Earth heading into another glaciation (increase in the ice caps). But that is no comfort when the 'correction' we have inadvertently made will perhaps bring about the collapse of civilization. The inevitable rise in sea level will drown most coastal cities and tropical areas will be uninhabitable.
There are ways to mitigate this disaster, but no one seems to have the power to implement them.
'There's none so deaf as those who will not hear' and Geoff Moore (Letter, 21 January) is clearly 'deaf'. The scientific evidence is overwhelming that global temperatures are rising and that mainly this is due to man-made emissions of greenhouse gases (mainly CO2 from burning fossil fuels).
As Moore points out, there are many factors that influence Earth's climate in the long term but lately these have been swamped by mankind's industrial activity. In fact we appear to have stopped Earth heading into another glaciation (increase in the ice caps). But that is no comfort when the 'correction' we have inadvertently made will perhaps bring about the collapse of civilization. The inevitable rise in sea level will drown most coastal cities and tropical areas will be uninhabitable.
There are ways to mitigate this disaster, but no one seems to have the power to implement them.
To The Scotsman (21 Jan 2017) published 23 Jan 2017
Peter Kearney claims that 115 billion deaths are attributable to atheism or systems of government which have rejected or outlawed religion ('Blaming religion for most wars and violence simply doesn't add up', 19 January). He cites the deaths under Hitler's Nazi regime and those under the communist regimes of Stalin and Mao Zedong.
Ironically, Hitler was born a Catholic and remained a Christian, Stalin was born into the Russian Orthodox Church and trained as a priest and Mao was raised as a Buddhist.
But Kearney is merely revisiting the old theist argument that because Hitler, Stalin, and Mao were atheists (if they were), they all were responsible for terrible mass murder; therefore, atheism is responsible for terrible mass murder. This is an example of the logical fallacy 'Post hoc ergo propter hoc' (after this, therefore, because of this).
There is no evidence that the the deaths for which these men were responsible were due to a belief or espousal of atheism; Hitler's anti-Semitism was not religious; it was racial. Jews were targeted not because of their religion — indeed many German Jews were completely secular in their way of life — but because of their racial identity. This was an ethnic and not a religious designation. Hitler's anti-Semitism was secular.
Stalin certainly made a vast effort to rid Russia of religion, but that had nothing to do with atheism per se; he merely used it as a tool to seize power.
Mao was an utter fanatic devoted to grasping, then consolidating total power and imposing his ideology upon all, driven not by non-belief, but by a belief in himself and his personality cult.
Religion is guilty of some truly hideous crimes and a direct root cause within a delusional belief can be established (9/11 is an example), but the attempt to put a lack of belief in the dock on the basis that some fanatical psychopaths committed truly hideous crimes on an industrial scale is fallacious; the root cause was their psychopathy.
Atheism doesn’t kill people, fanaticism kills people, be that religious or political.
Peter Kearney claims that 115 billion deaths are attributable to atheism or systems of government which have rejected or outlawed religion ('Blaming religion for most wars and violence simply doesn't add up', 19 January). He cites the deaths under Hitler's Nazi regime and those under the communist regimes of Stalin and Mao Zedong.
Ironically, Hitler was born a Catholic and remained a Christian, Stalin was born into the Russian Orthodox Church and trained as a priest and Mao was raised as a Buddhist.
But Kearney is merely revisiting the old theist argument that because Hitler, Stalin, and Mao were atheists (if they were), they all were responsible for terrible mass murder; therefore, atheism is responsible for terrible mass murder. This is an example of the logical fallacy 'Post hoc ergo propter hoc' (after this, therefore, because of this).
There is no evidence that the the deaths for which these men were responsible were due to a belief or espousal of atheism; Hitler's anti-Semitism was not religious; it was racial. Jews were targeted not because of their religion — indeed many German Jews were completely secular in their way of life — but because of their racial identity. This was an ethnic and not a religious designation. Hitler's anti-Semitism was secular.
Stalin certainly made a vast effort to rid Russia of religion, but that had nothing to do with atheism per se; he merely used it as a tool to seize power.
Mao was an utter fanatic devoted to grasping, then consolidating total power and imposing his ideology upon all, driven not by non-belief, but by a belief in himself and his personality cult.
Religion is guilty of some truly hideous crimes and a direct root cause within a delusional belief can be established (9/11 is an example), but the attempt to put a lack of belief in the dock on the basis that some fanatical psychopaths committed truly hideous crimes on an industrial scale is fallacious; the root cause was their psychopathy.
Atheism doesn’t kill people, fanaticism kills people, be that religious or political.
To Scotland on Sunday (16 Jan 2017) published 22 Jan 2017
Euan McColn claims that there are two choices when it comes to improving the NHS ('Why voters should take no pride in the health service', 15 January).
One choice would be to abandon the Beveridge Model on which it is based and switch to the Bismarck Model used in France and Germany (the WHO places France top in per capita expenditure). This uses an insurance system — the insurers are called 'sickness funds'— usually financed jointly by employers and employees through payroll deduction.
Unlike the US insurance industry, Bismarck-type health insurance plans have to cover everybody and they do not make a profit. Doctors and hospitals tend to be private in Bismarck countries; Japan, which uses this Model, has more private hospitals than the US. Although this is a multi-payer model — Germany has about 240 different funds — tight regulation gives government much of the cost-control clout that the single-payer Beveridge Model provides.
Euan McColn claims that there are two choices when it comes to improving the NHS ('Why voters should take no pride in the health service', 15 January).
One choice would be to abandon the Beveridge Model on which it is based and switch to the Bismarck Model used in France and Germany (the WHO places France top in per capita expenditure). This uses an insurance system — the insurers are called 'sickness funds'— usually financed jointly by employers and employees through payroll deduction.
Unlike the US insurance industry, Bismarck-type health insurance plans have to cover everybody and they do not make a profit. Doctors and hospitals tend to be private in Bismarck countries; Japan, which uses this Model, has more private hospitals than the US. Although this is a multi-payer model — Germany has about 240 different funds — tight regulation gives government much of the cost-control clout that the single-payer Beveridge Model provides.
To Edinburgh Evening News (15 Jan 2017) published 18 Jan 2017 as Sec of ESS
I hope that the City of Edinburgh Council will take the opportunity another two months of repairs offers (Your report 14 January) to remove the crosses that loom over both chapels (they need to be covered with a curtain for non-religious funerals).
The Crematorium is a secular building and should not appear to be supporting one particular religious faith--Christianity. Only a minority are now Christians and most Scots have no religion. That should be reflected in the appearance of the chapels.
I hope that the City of Edinburgh Council will take the opportunity another two months of repairs offers (Your report 14 January) to remove the crosses that loom over both chapels (they need to be covered with a curtain for non-religious funerals).
The Crematorium is a secular building and should not appear to be supporting one particular religious faith--Christianity. Only a minority are now Christians and most Scots have no religion. That should be reflected in the appearance of the chapels.
To The Scotsman (13 Jan 2017) published 14 Jan 2017
Andrew P Gray claimed that there is only one answer to funding the NHS: means testing (Letter, 12 January).
There are four basic models of health care: the Beveridge Model used by the UK, Spain, most of Scandinavia, New Zealand, Hong Kong and Cuba; the Bismarck Model used by Germany, France, Belgium, the Netherlands, Japan, Switzerland, and in some parts of Latin America; the National Health Insurance Model used in Canada, Taiwan and South Korea, which combines elements of the two previous Models, and the Out-of-Pocket Model where only a payment will get any health care. The USA offers a combination of all the Models for different societal groups.
The World Health Organisation ranks the UK as 18th in per capita expenditure and performance, while France comes first. France also scores highly on GP numbers and on spending as a percentage of GDP. We should look around the world and take the best to overhaul or replace the NHS. Means testing would be a costly administrative nightmare and perhaps the UK should consider one of the other Models, or a combination of them.
Can Scotland go its own way in this matter?
Andrew P Gray claimed that there is only one answer to funding the NHS: means testing (Letter, 12 January).
There are four basic models of health care: the Beveridge Model used by the UK, Spain, most of Scandinavia, New Zealand, Hong Kong and Cuba; the Bismarck Model used by Germany, France, Belgium, the Netherlands, Japan, Switzerland, and in some parts of Latin America; the National Health Insurance Model used in Canada, Taiwan and South Korea, which combines elements of the two previous Models, and the Out-of-Pocket Model where only a payment will get any health care. The USA offers a combination of all the Models for different societal groups.
The World Health Organisation ranks the UK as 18th in per capita expenditure and performance, while France comes first. France also scores highly on GP numbers and on spending as a percentage of GDP. We should look around the world and take the best to overhaul or replace the NHS. Means testing would be a costly administrative nightmare and perhaps the UK should consider one of the other Models, or a combination of them.
Can Scotland go its own way in this matter?
To The Scotsman (11 Jan 2017) published 12 Jan 2017
I am surprised that the taxpayer will have to pay up to £24 billion for the decommissioning of North Sea oil rigs ('Oil revenues 'wiped out' by costs to scrap rigs', 10 January).
The nuclear power industry puts money aside from its earnings (in fact it's required to do this) to cover future decommissioning costs. So why was the North Sea oil industry not required to do likewise?
The hydro power industry also makes no such provision. What about the renewable power industry?
I am surprised that the taxpayer will have to pay up to £24 billion for the decommissioning of North Sea oil rigs ('Oil revenues 'wiped out' by costs to scrap rigs', 10 January).
The nuclear power industry puts money aside from its earnings (in fact it's required to do this) to cover future decommissioning costs. So why was the North Sea oil industry not required to do likewise?
The hydro power industry also makes no such provision. What about the renewable power industry?
To The Scotsman (9 Jan 2017) published 10 Jan 2017
Despite delivering a leaflet about the community council election in September to every household our area we gained no new community council members; we even struggled to register the minimum number of members.
This was a great disappointment, but perhaps typical of the apathy shown by the public to community councils. The work they do is largely unappreciated. In our area we have been instrumental in affecting the outcome of several major planning applications to the benefit of the community.
So how about an inducement? Why not change the law to allow local authorities to give community council members a discount on their council tax? Why should community councillors not be rewarded for the voluntary work they do?
Despite delivering a leaflet about the community council election in September to every household our area we gained no new community council members; we even struggled to register the minimum number of members.
This was a great disappointment, but perhaps typical of the apathy shown by the public to community councils. The work they do is largely unappreciated. In our area we have been instrumental in affecting the outcome of several major planning applications to the benefit of the community.
So how about an inducement? Why not change the law to allow local authorities to give community council members a discount on their council tax? Why should community councillors not be rewarded for the voluntary work they do?
To The Scotsman (6 Jan 2017) not published
In my area we gained no new community council members despite delivering a leaflet about the election in September to every household, and we even struggled to register the minimum number of members.
This was a great disappointment, but perhaps typical of the apathy shown by the public to community councils. The work they do is largely unappreciated. In my area we have been instrumental in affecting the outcome of several major planning applications to the benefit of the community.
So how about an inducement? Why not change the law to allow local authorities to give community council members a discount on their council tax? Why should community councillors not be rewarded for the voluntary work they do?
In my area we gained no new community council members despite delivering a leaflet about the election in September to every household, and we even struggled to register the minimum number of members.
This was a great disappointment, but perhaps typical of the apathy shown by the public to community councils. The work they do is largely unappreciated. In my area we have been instrumental in affecting the outcome of several major planning applications to the benefit of the community.
So how about an inducement? Why not change the law to allow local authorities to give community council members a discount on their council tax? Why should community councillors not be rewarded for the voluntary work they do?
To The Scotsman (4 Jan 2017) published 5 Jan 2017
Alan Black thinks that we should not worry about damage to health from fireworks when damage from over-drinking is more serious (Letters, 4 January).
However, drinkers only harm their own health, not other people's. Fireworks damage everyone's health, without their consent.
Alan Black thinks that we should not worry about damage to health from fireworks when damage from over-drinking is more serious (Letters, 4 January).
However, drinkers only harm their own health, not other people's. Fireworks damage everyone's health, without their consent.
To Edinburgh Evening News (2 Jan 2017) published 5 Jan 2017
It is astonishing that organisers of the Hogmanay fireworks should boast that 'not a single silent firework' was fired during four different displays ('75,000 join in as Hogmanay fun lifts spirts', 2 January).
No doubt that was a response to the call by one Edinburgh councillor for silent fireworks because of the frightening effect the noise has on household pets, wildlife and persons of as nervous disposition. Three miles away indoors we could clearly hear the explosions, which made it seem that we were in a war zone. Such loud explosions can also vibrate buildings and cause instability.
But what about the pollution letting off 2.6 tonnes of fireworks causes? These include the toxic metal particles that give them their colours and other noxious pollutants such as nitrogen dioxide, sulphur dioxide, carbon monoxide and microscopic soot particles, the worst of which are PM2.5. The latter penetrate deep into the lungs and cause serious health problems. Fireworks displays can lead to a two to fourfold upsurge in these tiny particles. Due to the smog they cause, many Chinese cities have banned fireworks from urban areas.
What is Edinburgh's environmental department's attitude to this pollution (noise and air quality) and when will the Scottish Environmental Protection Agency take the matter seriously? It would be ironic if we celebrate New Year by damaging people's health.
It is astonishing that organisers of the Hogmanay fireworks should boast that 'not a single silent firework' was fired during four different displays ('75,000 join in as Hogmanay fun lifts spirts', 2 January).
No doubt that was a response to the call by one Edinburgh councillor for silent fireworks because of the frightening effect the noise has on household pets, wildlife and persons of as nervous disposition. Three miles away indoors we could clearly hear the explosions, which made it seem that we were in a war zone. Such loud explosions can also vibrate buildings and cause instability.
But what about the pollution letting off 2.6 tonnes of fireworks causes? These include the toxic metal particles that give them their colours and other noxious pollutants such as nitrogen dioxide, sulphur dioxide, carbon monoxide and microscopic soot particles, the worst of which are PM2.5. The latter penetrate deep into the lungs and cause serious health problems. Fireworks displays can lead to a two to fourfold upsurge in these tiny particles. Due to the smog they cause, many Chinese cities have banned fireworks from urban areas.
What is Edinburgh's environmental department's attitude to this pollution (noise and air quality) and when will the Scottish Environmental Protection Agency take the matter seriously? It would be ironic if we celebrate New Year by damaging people's health.
To The Scotsman (2 Jan 2017) published 3 Jan 2017
It is astonishing that Titanium Fireworks should boast that 'not a single silent firework' was fired during the [Edinburgh] Hogmanay display ('Revellers from 80 countries enjoy sold-out party', 2 January).
No doubt that was a response to the call by one Edinburgh councillor for silent fireworks because of the frightening effect the noise has on household pets, wildlife and persons of as nervous disposition. Three miles away indoors we could clearly hear the explosions, which made it seem that we were in a war zone. Such loud explosions can also vibrate buildings and cause instability.
But what about the pollution letting off 2.6 tonnes of fireworks causes? These include the toxic metal particles that give them their colours and other noxious pollutants such as nitrogen dioxide, sulphur dioxide, carbon monoxide and microscopic soot particles, the worst of which are PM2.5. The latter penetrate deep into the lungs and cause serious health problems. Fireworks displays can lead to a two to fourfold upsurge in these tiny particles. Due to the smog they cause, many Chinese cities have banned fireworks from urban areas.
What is Edinburgh's environmental department's attitude to this pollution (noise and air quality) and when will the Scottish Environmental Protection Agency take the matter seriously?
It would be ironic if we celebrate New Year by damaging people's health.
It is astonishing that Titanium Fireworks should boast that 'not a single silent firework' was fired during the [Edinburgh] Hogmanay display ('Revellers from 80 countries enjoy sold-out party', 2 January).
No doubt that was a response to the call by one Edinburgh councillor for silent fireworks because of the frightening effect the noise has on household pets, wildlife and persons of as nervous disposition. Three miles away indoors we could clearly hear the explosions, which made it seem that we were in a war zone. Such loud explosions can also vibrate buildings and cause instability.
But what about the pollution letting off 2.6 tonnes of fireworks causes? These include the toxic metal particles that give them their colours and other noxious pollutants such as nitrogen dioxide, sulphur dioxide, carbon monoxide and microscopic soot particles, the worst of which are PM2.5. The latter penetrate deep into the lungs and cause serious health problems. Fireworks displays can lead to a two to fourfold upsurge in these tiny particles. Due to the smog they cause, many Chinese cities have banned fireworks from urban areas.
What is Edinburgh's environmental department's attitude to this pollution (noise and air quality) and when will the Scottish Environmental Protection Agency take the matter seriously?
It would be ironic if we celebrate New Year by damaging people's health.
End of letters written in 2016
To The Scotsman (31 Dec 2016) not published
Harry D Watson (Point of View, 31 December) points out your misuse of 'underestimated'. an error I have noticed before, among many others I have reported to the editor. The standards of journalism do not seem to improve.
Today (31 Dec) I note the ungrammatical use of 'them' and 'their' (twice) in your report 'Teachers paid £600,000 for injury at work in 2016', when referring to only one teacher. The fact that Shakespeare used this form does not make it correct.
Harry D Watson (Point of View, 31 December) points out your misuse of 'underestimated'. an error I have noticed before, among many others I have reported to the editor. The standards of journalism do not seem to improve.
Today (31 Dec) I note the ungrammatical use of 'them' and 'their' (twice) in your report 'Teachers paid £600,000 for injury at work in 2016', when referring to only one teacher. The fact that Shakespeare used this form does not make it correct.
To The Scotsman (30 Dec 2016) published 31 Dec 2016
Alastair Dalton rightly draws attention to the number of people killed on Scottish roads ('Inside Transport', 30 December). He especially mentions the deaths of children 'most frequently hit in the hour after the end of school, between 3 and 4pm' and exemplifies one killed just 15 minutes after the end of school.
Strange then that he does not point out, as others have, that keeping British Summer Time in winter would probably have reduced these deaths considerably. BST (GMT+1) pushes that critical hour after school into daylight and saves lives.
To The Scotsman (21 Dec 2016) not published
Rev Dr John Cameron claims that 'secure knowledge of one's place in the universe' is 'informed' by the Christian faith (Letters, 21 December).
Hardly. Jesus, like his fellow Jews, believed in a flat Earth and a sky like a tent with stars as lamps hanging from it. They knew nothing of the real universe and its origin. Nor does Christianity; the Bible contains only myths about the universe.
Only modern science has revealed our true place a universe that is probably infinite. For this purpose, religion is useless, even a hindrance.
Alastair Dalton rightly draws attention to the number of people killed on Scottish roads ('Inside Transport', 30 December). He especially mentions the deaths of children 'most frequently hit in the hour after the end of school, between 3 and 4pm' and exemplifies one killed just 15 minutes after the end of school.
Strange then that he does not point out, as others have, that keeping British Summer Time in winter would probably have reduced these deaths considerably. BST (GMT+1) pushes that critical hour after school into daylight and saves lives.
To The Scotsman (21 Dec 2016) not published
Rev Dr John Cameron claims that 'secure knowledge of one's place in the universe' is 'informed' by the Christian faith (Letters, 21 December).
Hardly. Jesus, like his fellow Jews, believed in a flat Earth and a sky like a tent with stars as lamps hanging from it. They knew nothing of the real universe and its origin. Nor does Christianity; the Bible contains only myths about the universe.
Only modern science has revealed our true place a universe that is probably infinite. For this purpose, religion is useless, even a hindrance.
To The Scotsman (17 Dec 2016) not published
Alastair Dutton and Gordon Macdonald both refer to Christmas as celebrating the birth of Jesus as 'God Incarnate' (Friends of the Scotsman, 16 December).
But this is a mistake. They ought to know that the whole 'Birth Narrative' of Matthew and Luke (it was not known to either Mark or John) was invented to give Jesus a background and origin commensurate with his deification (he would never have dreamed of claiming divinity). It is merely the Christian Church's celebration of what it thinks was the birth of Jesus (god or man). In fact most of the Advent story is based on those about the ancient sun god Mithras, worshipped widely throughout the Roman Empire at the time. The story of the Wise Men has a clear model in the story of the three Magi (astrologers) who accompanied Tiridates of Parthia to Rome to worship the newly-born Nero as the 'Lord God Mithras', whose birthday was celebrated on 25 December. The Church merely replaced Mithras with Jesus.
Dr Macdonald makes the further mistake of claiming that Herod the Great, who died in 4 BC, ruled on Rome's behalf in Judea. At the time, Judea was under direct Roman rule. The story of the Massacre of the Innocents, unknown to the Jewish historian Josephus, is an invention in an attempt to show fulfilment of prophecy.
Alastair Dutton and Gordon Macdonald both refer to Christmas as celebrating the birth of Jesus as 'God Incarnate' (Friends of the Scotsman, 16 December).
But this is a mistake. They ought to know that the whole 'Birth Narrative' of Matthew and Luke (it was not known to either Mark or John) was invented to give Jesus a background and origin commensurate with his deification (he would never have dreamed of claiming divinity). It is merely the Christian Church's celebration of what it thinks was the birth of Jesus (god or man). In fact most of the Advent story is based on those about the ancient sun god Mithras, worshipped widely throughout the Roman Empire at the time. The story of the Wise Men has a clear model in the story of the three Magi (astrologers) who accompanied Tiridates of Parthia to Rome to worship the newly-born Nero as the 'Lord God Mithras', whose birthday was celebrated on 25 December. The Church merely replaced Mithras with Jesus.
Dr Macdonald makes the further mistake of claiming that Herod the Great, who died in 4 BC, ruled on Rome's behalf in Judea. At the time, Judea was under direct Roman rule. The story of the Massacre of the Innocents, unknown to the Jewish historian Josephus, is an invention in an attempt to show fulfilment of prophecy.
To The Scotsman (16 Dec 2016) not published
It is disappointing to see both the Scottish Council on Human Bioethics and the Church of Scotland expressing concern about mitochondrial replacement therapy ('"Three-parent" babies given the go-ahead by regulator', 16 December).
One would expect them both to welcome the opportunity MRT gives to wipe out devastating inherited diseases.
The Kirk's policy officer thinks the risks outweigh the benefits. Since no risks have been identified and the benefit is enormous this comment makes no sense unless one believes that mankind should not interfere in God's creation. Is that the Kirk's view?
It is disappointing to see both the Scottish Council on Human Bioethics and the Church of Scotland expressing concern about mitochondrial replacement therapy ('"Three-parent" babies given the go-ahead by regulator', 16 December).
One would expect them both to welcome the opportunity MRT gives to wipe out devastating inherited diseases.
The Kirk's policy officer thinks the risks outweigh the benefits. Since no risks have been identified and the benefit is enormous this comment makes no sense unless one believes that mankind should not interfere in God's creation. Is that the Kirk's view?
To Scotland on Sunday (13 Dec 2016) not published
Whoever wrote the strapline to Dani Garavelli's article about MP Alison Thewliss (11 December) mistakenly thought that Westminster is 'The Mother of Parliaments'.
The phrase was coined by MP John Bright in 1865 when he described England [sic] as 'the mother of parliaments' because it gives birth to successive parliaments. In no sense is Westminster the mother of other parliaments, but it is the child of the state, being born again at each general election. It is the UK that is the 'mother', not Westminster.
Whoever wrote the strapline to Dani Garavelli's article about MP Alison Thewliss (11 December) mistakenly thought that Westminster is 'The Mother of Parliaments'.
The phrase was coined by MP John Bright in 1865 when he described England [sic] as 'the mother of parliaments' because it gives birth to successive parliaments. In no sense is Westminster the mother of other parliaments, but it is the child of the state, being born again at each general election. It is the UK that is the 'mother', not Westminster.
To The Scotsman (13 Dec 2016) not published
I hope that it is not true that, as Kausar Uddin is reported to have claimed, 'Muslims believe that whatever comes is from God. Everything happens for a reason' ('Scots father returns home after Saudi jail "nightmare"', 13 December).
Fatalism means that no one questions anything or protests; the end of participatory democracy. Muslims and all religious people need to understand that their destiny is in their own hands, no matter what deity they worship. Certainly, 'everything happens for a reason', a consequence of complex mundane interactions that are not always easy to find. Divine intervention is the least likely explanation.
I hope that it is not true that, as Kausar Uddin is reported to have claimed, 'Muslims believe that whatever comes is from God. Everything happens for a reason' ('Scots father returns home after Saudi jail "nightmare"', 13 December).
Fatalism means that no one questions anything or protests; the end of participatory democracy. Muslims and all religious people need to understand that their destiny is in their own hands, no matter what deity they worship. Certainly, 'everything happens for a reason', a consequence of complex mundane interactions that are not always easy to find. Divine intervention is the least likely explanation.
To Edinburgh Evening News (10 Dec 2016) published 2 Feb 2017!
On behalf of Longstone Community Council, I attended the meeting of the Development Management Subcommittee that determined the application by architect Kenneth Reid to redevelop two sites in Slateford as student flats (Lanark Road Living was not the applicant); your report 'Plans for "Student Village" rejected', 10 December.
What astonished me was that only 11 of the 15 members of the Subcommittee bothered to turn up and that the Deputy Convenor (Cllr Alex Lunn) introduced a wrecking amendment that disregarded the expert opinion of the planning officers that the application was 'unacceptable in principle as it constitutes a non-conforming use within the Green Belt'. The planners also pointed out that the site is not suitable for student housing development and is of inappropriate design, scale, height, massing and footprint and that it would represent an incongruous feature within the streetscape.
Some councillors were intent on approving any application on the sites just because The Blue Goose Country Pub is closed and that Westside Motors looks unsightly. However, this was the wrong application for these sites and, fortunately, the common sense of other councillors prevailed--just.
On behalf of Longstone Community Council, I attended the meeting of the Development Management Subcommittee that determined the application by architect Kenneth Reid to redevelop two sites in Slateford as student flats (Lanark Road Living was not the applicant); your report 'Plans for "Student Village" rejected', 10 December.
What astonished me was that only 11 of the 15 members of the Subcommittee bothered to turn up and that the Deputy Convenor (Cllr Alex Lunn) introduced a wrecking amendment that disregarded the expert opinion of the planning officers that the application was 'unacceptable in principle as it constitutes a non-conforming use within the Green Belt'. The planners also pointed out that the site is not suitable for student housing development and is of inappropriate design, scale, height, massing and footprint and that it would represent an incongruous feature within the streetscape.
Some councillors were intent on approving any application on the sites just because The Blue Goose Country Pub is closed and that Westside Motors looks unsightly. However, this was the wrong application for these sites and, fortunately, the common sense of other councillors prevailed--just.
To The Scotsman (8 Dec 2016) not published
Dr John Cameron should be aware that 'energy' cannot be generated (Letter, 7 December): there's a fixed amount of energy in the universe and that cannot change.
But energy can be changed from one form to another, as in the generation of electricity, which is surely what Dr Cameron meant.
Everyone should be careful to distinguish between energy and the forms in which it is available.
Dr John Cameron should be aware that 'energy' cannot be generated (Letter, 7 December): there's a fixed amount of energy in the universe and that cannot change.
But energy can be changed from one form to another, as in the generation of electricity, which is surely what Dr Cameron meant.
Everyone should be careful to distinguish between energy and the forms in which it is available.
To The Scotsman (6 Dec 2016) not published
Christmas has no intrinsic meaning ('Advent films "reflect true meaning of Christmas"', 6 December), so it cannot have a 'true' meaning. It only has whatever meaning people wish to lay on it. It is merely the Christian Church's celebration of what it thinks was the birth of Jesus (god or man). In fact most of the Advent story is based on those about the ancient sun god Mithras, worshipped widely throughout the Roman Empire at the time. The story of the Wise Men has a clear model in the story of the three Magi (astrologers) who accompanied Tiridates of Parthia to Rome to worship the newly-born Nero as the Lord God Mithras, whose birthday was celebrated on 25 December.
The Church merely supplanted Mithras with Jesus.
Christmas has no intrinsic meaning ('Advent films "reflect true meaning of Christmas"', 6 December), so it cannot have a 'true' meaning. It only has whatever meaning people wish to lay on it. It is merely the Christian Church's celebration of what it thinks was the birth of Jesus (god or man). In fact most of the Advent story is based on those about the ancient sun god Mithras, worshipped widely throughout the Roman Empire at the time. The story of the Wise Men has a clear model in the story of the three Magi (astrologers) who accompanied Tiridates of Parthia to Rome to worship the newly-born Nero as the Lord God Mithras, whose birthday was celebrated on 25 December.
The Church merely supplanted Mithras with Jesus.
To Edinburgh News (4 Dec 2016) published 6 Dec 2016
The City Centre is a designated 20 mph zone, but that hasn't stopped buses and taxis speeding along Princes Street well over that speed. Nor does it slow down traffic elsewhere in the Centre. Trying to keep to the limit frustrates following traffic. Why is no one policing this limit?
The City Centre is a designated 20 mph zone, but that hasn't stopped buses and taxis speeding along Princes Street well over that speed. Nor does it slow down traffic elsewhere in the Centre. Trying to keep to the limit frustrates following traffic. Why is no one policing this limit?
To The Scotsman (3 Dec 2016) published 5 Dec 2016
Setting the nativity story in today's UK society (your report and picture on p. 4, 2 December) makes no sense. The circumstances cannot be transferred over two thousand years. It is just another way for the churches to attract the attention they are missing in today's largely secular society.
It makes even less sense when one knows that the story was an invention of Matthew and Luke to give Jesus an origin commensurate with his deification. To do so they borrowed from contemporary legends about other saviour gods. Historians know nothing of Jesus' origin except that he came from Galilee. Theologians and biblical critics are aware that the whole Birth Narrative is fiction, but keep quiet so as not to offend believers and, perhaps, to keep their jobs.
Setting the nativity story in today's UK society (your report and picture on p. 4, 2 December) makes no sense. The circumstances cannot be transferred over two thousand years. It is just another way for the churches to attract the attention they are missing in today's largely secular society.
It makes even less sense when one knows that the story was an invention of Matthew and Luke to give Jesus an origin commensurate with his deification. To do so they borrowed from contemporary legends about other saviour gods. Historians know nothing of Jesus' origin except that he came from Galilee. Theologians and biblical critics are aware that the whole Birth Narrative is fiction, but keep quiet so as not to offend believers and, perhaps, to keep their jobs.
To The Scotsman (29 Nov 2016) published 30 Nov 2016
How touching that Protestant Rev Dr Robert Anderson (Letters, 29 November) should call for Christian renewal in the name of Catholic St Andrew, Scotland's patron saint[,] because what were alleged to to be bits of his bones were brought to St Andrews. The story is of course medieval nonsense and superstition, supposedly eschewed by the Church of Scotland.
However, there's little evidence to support his claim that politicians have rejected Christianity (I wish they would). It has been rejected by the population in general as they see it of no relevance to their lives. Only about 25 per cent are now Christian and a majority have no religion at all. The last thing Scotland needs is the backward step of Christian renewal; what it needs is the adoption of a secular constitution that gives no privilege to any one religion. Religion and the state should keep their distance from each other and we should abandon state Christian rituals and even patron saints. Let's have a national day instead.
How touching that Protestant Rev Dr Robert Anderson (Letters, 29 November) should call for Christian renewal in the name of Catholic St Andrew, Scotland's patron saint[,] because what were alleged to to be bits of his bones were brought to St Andrews. The story is of course medieval nonsense and superstition, supposedly eschewed by the Church of Scotland.
However, there's little evidence to support his claim that politicians have rejected Christianity (I wish they would). It has been rejected by the population in general as they see it of no relevance to their lives. Only about 25 per cent are now Christian and a majority have no religion at all. The last thing Scotland needs is the backward step of Christian renewal; what it needs is the adoption of a secular constitution that gives no privilege to any one religion. Religion and the state should keep their distance from each other and we should abandon state Christian rituals and even patron saints. Let's have a national day instead.
To The Times (28 Nov 2016) published?
Neil deGrasse Tyson, Director of the Hayden Planetarium, who thinks that there could be billions of planets with intelligent life in our Galaxy ('Billions of planets 'can support intelligent life', 26 November) should read Prof. David Waltham's book Lucky Planet (2014). There he will find how lucky we are to exist in a universe that doesn't make it easy for intelligent life to emerge and prosper. We are the result of many lucky accidents, something of course that is bound to occur in an almost infinite universe, but rarely. Waltham concludes that we are probably effectively alone in a universe.
Neil deGrasse Tyson, Director of the Hayden Planetarium, who thinks that there could be billions of planets with intelligent life in our Galaxy ('Billions of planets 'can support intelligent life', 26 November) should read Prof. David Waltham's book Lucky Planet (2014). There he will find how lucky we are to exist in a universe that doesn't make it easy for intelligent life to emerge and prosper. We are the result of many lucky accidents, something of course that is bound to occur in an almost infinite universe, but rarely. Waltham concludes that we are probably effectively alone in a universe.
To The Scotsman (28 Nov 2016) not published
You report that Roger Bolton, the presenter of BBC Radio's Feedback programme, has accused the BBC of failing to 'take religion seriously' (Your report, 28 November).
Bolton, a Christian, claims that Christianity has played a role in the formation of the UK's political structures and culture. Hardly; our political parties owe nothing to religion and we now live in a post-Christian culture (only half the population have any religion and a shrinking minority are Christians). Immigrants, many of whom, will not be Christians, need to learn about the UK's largely secular culture and to see that religion is a remnant of history, more honoured in the breach than in observance.
You report that Roger Bolton, the presenter of BBC Radio's Feedback programme, has accused the BBC of failing to 'take religion seriously' (Your report, 28 November).
Bolton, a Christian, claims that Christianity has played a role in the formation of the UK's political structures and culture. Hardly; our political parties owe nothing to religion and we now live in a post-Christian culture (only half the population have any religion and a shrinking minority are Christians). Immigrants, many of whom, will not be Christians, need to learn about the UK's largely secular culture and to see that religion is a remnant of history, more honoured in the breach than in observance.
To The Scotsman (22 Nov 2016) not published
John Milne (Letters, 21 November) seems to want 'militant atheists' to be prevented from 'pouring too much scorn on Christianity' (how much 'scorn' would be allow)? How would that be accomplished? By censoring criticism of religion? Restricting freedom of speech? Fortunately we have freedom in this country to express our opinions without being fined, arrested, jailed or even killed (all those things are happening in some foreign countries). Let's keep it that way.
John Milne (Letters, 21 November) seems to want 'militant atheists' to be prevented from 'pouring too much scorn on Christianity' (how much 'scorn' would be allow)? How would that be accomplished? By censoring criticism of religion? Restricting freedom of speech? Fortunately we have freedom in this country to express our opinions without being fined, arrested, jailed or even killed (all those things are happening in some foreign countries). Let's keep it that way.
To Scotland on Sunday (21 Nov 2016) published 27 Nov 2016
It is true, as you report ('Stevenson's relatively critical about Einstein', 20 November), that Albert Einstein's paper on the Special Theory of Relativity' contained no references, but it did contain nine footnotes. Because Einstein was breaking new ground, there was almost nothing of relevance to which he could refer.
It was published in Annalen der Physik ('Annals of Physics'), which was not a refereed journal; contributions were accepted or rejected by the editor alone. It is hard to say whether or not such an 'innovation' would be accepted in today's peer-reviewed journals, but one hopes it would.
Einstein was not a student and did not have a 'tutor'; he was employed as a technical assistant in the Swiss federal patent office in Bern, working alone on his paper.
It is true, as you report ('Stevenson's relatively critical about Einstein', 20 November), that Albert Einstein's paper on the Special Theory of Relativity' contained no references, but it did contain nine footnotes. Because Einstein was breaking new ground, there was almost nothing of relevance to which he could refer.
It was published in Annalen der Physik ('Annals of Physics'), which was not a refereed journal; contributions were accepted or rejected by the editor alone. It is hard to say whether or not such an 'innovation' would be accepted in today's peer-reviewed journals, but one hopes it would.
Einstein was not a student and did not have a 'tutor'; he was employed as a technical assistant in the Swiss federal patent office in Bern, working alone on his paper.
To The Scotsman (17 Nov 2016) not published
I challenge all my critics (Letters, 17 November) to find any contempt in my letter of 16 November. Criticism, yes, and a contrary view, but that's not scorn. Most of the non-religious in Scotland (now the majority) don't even bother with religion, never mind challenge it. But they hold the same ethical standards as the religious.
Andrew Vass claims that science cannot explain why the universe is 'so finely tuned for life'. He should keep up with modern cosmology, which believes that our universe is just one of very many universes (perhaps an infinite number), all, by chance, with different 'tuning' of the basic physical constants. Consequently, there is bound to be at least one universe that has the 'lucky' tuning ours exhibits and so it is no surprise that we exist.
I challenge all my critics (Letters, 17 November) to find any contempt in my letter of 16 November. Criticism, yes, and a contrary view, but that's not scorn. Most of the non-religious in Scotland (now the majority) don't even bother with religion, never mind challenge it. But they hold the same ethical standards as the religious.
Andrew Vass claims that science cannot explain why the universe is 'so finely tuned for life'. He should keep up with modern cosmology, which believes that our universe is just one of very many universes (perhaps an infinite number), all, by chance, with different 'tuning' of the basic physical constants. Consequently, there is bound to be at least one universe that has the 'lucky' tuning ours exhibits and so it is no surprise that we exist.
To The Sunday Times (15t Nov 2016) not published
Emily Stevens claimed that leaving the EU means leaving the single market (Letter, 13 November). No it doesn't: the referendum question did not mention the market. To determine that we would need another referendum.
Emily Stevens claimed that leaving the EU means leaving the single market (Letter, 13 November). No it doesn't: the referendum question did not mention the market. To determine that we would need another referendum.
To The Scotsman (15 Nov 2016) published 16 Nov 2016
John Milne contrasts the minority who practise religion with 'militant atheists [who] pour scorn on that minority' (Letter, 15 November).
However, that's not the situation I see. The majority in Scotland who have no religious belief do not scorn the religious minority; not even atheists like me do so, even though there is plenty to criticise. We merely believe that religion is a superstitious distraction which we would all be better off without. If Christianity is not based on hope of 'entry to heaven' then it is, as Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians, 'vain' (literally 'empty').
I also attended a remembrance ceremony, one I organised, trying to ignore the outdated religious elements in it. Those who have no religion are as capable of hope for justice, healing, peace and mercy as the religious. In fact more so, because we live in the real world, not an imaginary one.
John Milne contrasts the minority who practise religion with 'militant atheists [who] pour scorn on that minority' (Letter, 15 November).
However, that's not the situation I see. The majority in Scotland who have no religious belief do not scorn the religious minority; not even atheists like me do so, even though there is plenty to criticise. We merely believe that religion is a superstitious distraction which we would all be better off without. If Christianity is not based on hope of 'entry to heaven' then it is, as Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians, 'vain' (literally 'empty').
I also attended a remembrance ceremony, one I organised, trying to ignore the outdated religious elements in it. Those who have no religion are as capable of hope for justice, healing, peace and mercy as the religious. In fact more so, because we live in the real world, not an imaginary one.
To The Scotsman (5 Nov 2016); similar letter to Edinburgh Evening News (6 Nov) published in EEN on 9 Nov 2016.
David Frost is right about Princes Street ('Former whisky boss blasts 'filthy' Edinburgh', 5 November), although not necessarily for the reasons he gives.
I am sure that most residents value using buses there, but then perhaps Mr Frost doesn't use buses. As for street furniture, does he mean litter bins, without which the street would be covered in more litter than it is?
What he doesn't mention is the graffiti on these bins and other street furniture. It is understandable that the City cannot remove graffiti through out the City, although it will deal with it if asked (it does in my area). But at least it could try to keep it off Princes Street. Are other Scottish cities as bad?
David Frost is right about Princes Street ('Former whisky boss blasts 'filthy' Edinburgh', 5 November), although not necessarily for the reasons he gives.
I am sure that most residents value using buses there, but then perhaps Mr Frost doesn't use buses. As for street furniture, does he mean litter bins, without which the street would be covered in more litter than it is?
What he doesn't mention is the graffiti on these bins and other street furniture. It is understandable that the City cannot remove graffiti through out the City, although it will deal with it if asked (it does in my area). But at least it could try to keep it off Princes Street. Are other Scottish cities as bad?
To The Sunday Times (31 Oct 2016) published 6 Nov 2016
It is true that we are making a mess of this planet (Neil Oliver's 'Australia reminds us why we don't deserve to conquer Mars', [Comment, last week]), even to the extent of ruining the climate. But abandoning any idea of colonising Mars would leave us at the mercy of a variety of extinction events. Inhabiting two planets gives us a better chance of surviving[.] catastrophes beyond our control. We do want to survive, don't we?
It is true that we are making a mess of this planet (Neil Oliver's 'Australia reminds us why we don't deserve to conquer Mars', [Comment, last week]), even to the extent of ruining the climate. But abandoning any idea of colonising Mars would leave us at the mercy of a variety of extinction events. Inhabiting two planets gives us a better chance of surviving[.] catastrophes beyond our control. We do want to survive, don't we?
To The Scotsman (30 Oct 2016) not published
Timothy Egan would ask his sister, an evangelical Christian who inclines to vote for Donald Trump, whether he has tried to live by The Ten Commandments ('A final plea to Trump's America', 29 October).
This is a mistake many people make, even Christians. The Commandments (laws) were given to the Israelites (Jews); Christians did not exist at the time.
Jesus, a Jew himself who was brought up with these Commandments, was once asked which was the greatest of the them. He answered by ignoring all ten and instead instituting two new ones: love God and ones neighbour as oneself (Matt. 22:36-40). But is Trump even a Christian?
Timothy Egan would ask his sister, an evangelical Christian who inclines to vote for Donald Trump, whether he has tried to live by The Ten Commandments ('A final plea to Trump's America', 29 October).
This is a mistake many people make, even Christians. The Commandments (laws) were given to the Israelites (Jews); Christians did not exist at the time.
Jesus, a Jew himself who was brought up with these Commandments, was once asked which was the greatest of the them. He answered by ignoring all ten and instead instituting two new ones: love God and ones neighbour as oneself (Matt. 22:36-40). But is Trump even a Christian?
To Edinburgh Evening News (26 Oct 2016) not published
I don't need to 'wish away Jesus's life, death and...message', as Gus Logan puts it (Letter, 26 October), because it's already going away: only about half the population are now religious and Christians constitute only about a third, and declining.
Most see the Gospel story as irrelevant, even if they never understood it. Others understand only too well that it is a superstition, even a hallucination. Jesus was mistaken about the coming kingdom and about resurrection (impossible anyway).
A N Wilson's book about Jesus showed no insight, while the beliefs of scientists are not necessarily more insightful than anyone else, Richard Dawkins excepted. People should apply common sense to stories of the miraculous.
I don't need to 'wish away Jesus's life, death and...message', as Gus Logan puts it (Letter, 26 October), because it's already going away: only about half the population are now religious and Christians constitute only about a third, and declining.
Most see the Gospel story as irrelevant, even if they never understood it. Others understand only too well that it is a superstition, even a hallucination. Jesus was mistaken about the coming kingdom and about resurrection (impossible anyway).
A N Wilson's book about Jesus showed no insight, while the beliefs of scientists are not necessarily more insightful than anyone else, Richard Dawkins excepted. People should apply common sense to stories of the miraculous.
To Edinburgh Evening News (19 Oct 2016) published 22 Oct 2016
Gerry Farrell suggests 'laying out' the Nativity crib 'just in case that old tale...turns out to be true' ('Tree service leaves me pining for traditional Christmas', 19 October).
Well I can assure Gerry that the tale is not true; all biblical scholars, even theologians, conclude that the whole Birth Narrative found in Matthew and Luke's Gospels is a myth invented to give Jesus a background and origin commensurate with his deification. It is time that people stopped pandering to such superstitions. Dump the crib.
Gerry Farrell suggests 'laying out' the Nativity crib 'just in case that old tale...turns out to be true' ('Tree service leaves me pining for traditional Christmas', 19 October).
Well I can assure Gerry that the tale is not true; all biblical scholars, even theologians, conclude that the whole Birth Narrative found in Matthew and Luke's Gospels is a myth invented to give Jesus a background and origin commensurate with his deification. It is time that people stopped pandering to such superstitions. Dump the crib.
To The Scotsman (13 Oct 2016) published 14 Oct 2016 but with points rearranged in the following order: 4, 3, 1, 2 and renumbered.
C Badenoch asks what action we letters writers suggest be taken to solve energy problems (Letters, 13 October).
1) Stop subsidising renewable energy schemes, which are uneconomic and won't solve the crisis;
2) Authorise the construction of new nuclear power stations to provide clean base load electricity;
3) Authorise both coal gasification and fracking to provide gas for fuel and the chemical industry, so reducing reliance on imports; also providing much needed employment for redundant oil industry workers;
4) Support the creation of a hydrogen economy to replace methane in heating buildings and fossil fuels in transport.
C Badenoch asks what action we letters writers suggest be taken to solve energy problems (Letters, 13 October).
1) Stop subsidising renewable energy schemes, which are uneconomic and won't solve the crisis;
2) Authorise the construction of new nuclear power stations to provide clean base load electricity;
3) Authorise both coal gasification and fracking to provide gas for fuel and the chemical industry, so reducing reliance on imports; also providing much needed employment for redundant oil industry workers;
4) Support the creation of a hydrogen economy to replace methane in heating buildings and fossil fuels in transport.
To The Sunday Times (11 Oct 2016) not published
More likely than Prof Brian Cox's theory (that advanced technological civilisations self-destruct) ('Cox's theory on riddle of aliens', 9 October) is that the development of intelligent life is very rare and that we are probably alone in this Galaxy. The more one learns of the happy coincidences that led to our emergence, the more one concludes that we are the exception that proves the rule. We do not hear from aliens because there are none within hailing distance.
More likely than Prof Brian Cox's theory (that advanced technological civilisations self-destruct) ('Cox's theory on riddle of aliens', 9 October) is that the development of intelligent life is very rare and that we are probably alone in this Galaxy. The more one learns of the happy coincidences that led to our emergence, the more one concludes that we are the exception that proves the rule. We do not hear from aliens because there are none within hailing distance.
To The Scotsman (10 Oct 2016) not published
Heating 40 per cent of Scotland's homes (from electricity?) and using electricity to power 33 per cent of cars and 50 per cent of all buses with electricity would put an enormous strain on the electricity supply system and the grid. It is doubtful that the grid could cope, especially if the generation is from intermittent renewable sources ('Half of energy needs to come from renewables', 10 October). This idea was trailed last week in Jerry Stewart's article 'Drive to boost electric vehicles' (3 October).
The obvious alternative is to use hydrogen, either burned in engines or used in fuel cells. This is probably the only way to meet the Scottish Government's intention to ban fossil-fuelled vehicles from Scottish roads by 2050.
In any case, to replace the methane presently heating our buildings, we would need to develop a hydrogen economy.
Burning hydrogen produces only water.
Heating 40 per cent of Scotland's homes (from electricity?) and using electricity to power 33 per cent of cars and 50 per cent of all buses with electricity would put an enormous strain on the electricity supply system and the grid. It is doubtful that the grid could cope, especially if the generation is from intermittent renewable sources ('Half of energy needs to come from renewables', 10 October). This idea was trailed last week in Jerry Stewart's article 'Drive to boost electric vehicles' (3 October).
The obvious alternative is to use hydrogen, either burned in engines or used in fuel cells. This is probably the only way to meet the Scottish Government's intention to ban fossil-fuelled vehicles from Scottish roads by 2050.
In any case, to replace the methane presently heating our buildings, we would need to develop a hydrogen economy.
Burning hydrogen produces only water.
To The Scotsman (8 Oct 2016) not published
I find it odd that the Scottish Government has relied on only one expert (Prof Gemmel) for advice on underground coal gasification (UCG) while relying on nine others for advice on fracking (the Independent Expert Scientific Panel). The latter reported in 2014 (Report on Unconventional Oil And Gas) but this has not satisfied SG, which has asked for a further report. UCG is as 'unconventional' as fracking, so why was the Expert Scientific Panel not asked to give advice on UGC?
I find it odd that the Scottish Government has relied on only one expert (Prof Gemmel) for advice on underground coal gasification (UCG) while relying on nine others for advice on fracking (the Independent Expert Scientific Panel). The latter reported in 2014 (Report on Unconventional Oil And Gas) but this has not satisfied SG, which has asked for a further report. UCG is as 'unconventional' as fracking, so why was the Expert Scientific Panel not asked to give advice on UGC?
To The Scotsman (7 Oct 2016) published 8 Oct 2016
You report that Ruth Davidson believes in 'God' ('Tom Peterkin', 6 October). I wondered which god that is; there are a lot to choose from.
To The Scotsman (4 Oct 2016) not published
Banning fossil-fuelled vehicles from Scottish roads by 2050 is certainly ambitious but also probably impossible (Jerry Stewart's article 'Drive to boost electric vehicles', 3 October).
However, switching entirely to electrically-powered vehicles is not the only option. In fact it is doubtful that the generation system, let alone the grid, could cope with that extra load.
The obvious alternative is to use hydrogen, either burned in engines or used in fuel cells. In any case, to replace the methane presently heating our buildings, we would need to develop a hydrogen economy.
Burning hydrogen produces only water.
You report that Ruth Davidson believes in 'God' ('Tom Peterkin', 6 October). I wondered which god that is; there are a lot to choose from.
To The Scotsman (4 Oct 2016) not published
Banning fossil-fuelled vehicles from Scottish roads by 2050 is certainly ambitious but also probably impossible (Jerry Stewart's article 'Drive to boost electric vehicles', 3 October).
However, switching entirely to electrically-powered vehicles is not the only option. In fact it is doubtful that the generation system, let alone the grid, could cope with that extra load.
The obvious alternative is to use hydrogen, either burned in engines or used in fuel cells. In any case, to replace the methane presently heating our buildings, we would need to develop a hydrogen economy.
Burning hydrogen produces only water.
To The Sunday Times (3 Oct 2016) not published
Kay Bagon, in criticising the proposed Hinkley Point power plant (Letters, 2 October) throws in some myths, such as the idea that there will be 'huge amounts of nuclear waste' and that burying it underground will 'pose a huge threat to future generations'. Modern nuclear plants produce far less waste per MW generated than older ones and the point of putting just the 'high-level waste' (not all the waste) underground is specifically to protect people and the environment. Does Ms Bagon not think that future generations will have their own nuclear plants and so their own waste to dispose of? Renewable energy will not obviate the need for reliable base load generation, which nuclear power provides without damaging the climate.
Kay Bagon, in criticising the proposed Hinkley Point power plant (Letters, 2 October) throws in some myths, such as the idea that there will be 'huge amounts of nuclear waste' and that burying it underground will 'pose a huge threat to future generations'. Modern nuclear plants produce far less waste per MW generated than older ones and the point of putting just the 'high-level waste' (not all the waste) underground is specifically to protect people and the environment. Does Ms Bagon not think that future generations will have their own nuclear plants and so their own waste to dispose of? Renewable energy will not obviate the need for reliable base load generation, which nuclear power provides without damaging the climate.
To The Scotsman (01 Oct 2016) published 3 Oct 2016
For years anti-nuclear activists have insisted that clusters of childhood cancers around nuclear installations were caused by radiation from those plants, even though the level of radiation is so small as to be barely above background levels.
Such accusations have long been countered by the suggestion that the clusters were caused by infections caused by the sudden mixing of population when the plants attracted new personnel and their families.
Now, as you report (1 October), the Committee on Medical Aspects of Radiation in the Environment (COMARE) has concluded that the latter explanation is probably correct, although they think that another explanation might also be involved. The evidence for that it that the 'spikes' of cases previously reported around Dounreay and Sellafield have disappeared. This is what one would expect as population movement slows down.
Residents around nuclear plants can be confident that the minimal radiation escaping from such plants is unlikely to be harmful. Indeed, there is evidence from elsewhere that small amounts or ionising radiation are beneficial.
For years anti-nuclear activists have insisted that clusters of childhood cancers around nuclear installations were caused by radiation from those plants, even though the level of radiation is so small as to be barely above background levels.
Such accusations have long been countered by the suggestion that the clusters were caused by infections caused by the sudden mixing of population when the plants attracted new personnel and their families.
Now, as you report (1 October), the Committee on Medical Aspects of Radiation in the Environment (COMARE) has concluded that the latter explanation is probably correct, although they think that another explanation might also be involved. The evidence for that it that the 'spikes' of cases previously reported around Dounreay and Sellafield have disappeared. This is what one would expect as population movement slows down.
Residents around nuclear plants can be confident that the minimal radiation escaping from such plants is unlikely to be harmful. Indeed, there is evidence from elsewhere that small amounts or ionising radiation are beneficial.
To The Scotsman (28 Sep 2016) not published
Scott Macnab makes an excellent summary of the problem ('Time to look at the facts on fracking', Scottish Perspective, 28 September).
But of course facts are not welcome to politicians if they perceive that the voters are prejudiced against some policy. Votes might be lost. Hence only the Tories in Holyrood support fracking. The other opposition parties sense public opposition, even if it is ignorant, and oppose fracking. The SNP evidently sees that the science is in favour but fears to go with it.
The same is evident in the case of nuclear power, opposed by the SNP, the Greens and the LibDems because they sense public opposition (in this case they're wrong--the public is not prejudiced against it).
Politicians should take scientific advice and acted on it in the public interest, educating the public as they go.
Scott Macnab makes an excellent summary of the problem ('Time to look at the facts on fracking', Scottish Perspective, 28 September).
But of course facts are not welcome to politicians if they perceive that the voters are prejudiced against some policy. Votes might be lost. Hence only the Tories in Holyrood support fracking. The other opposition parties sense public opposition, even if it is ignorant, and oppose fracking. The SNP evidently sees that the science is in favour but fears to go with it.
The same is evident in the case of nuclear power, opposed by the SNP, the Greens and the LibDems because they sense public opposition (in this case they're wrong--the public is not prejudiced against it).
Politicians should take scientific advice and acted on it in the public interest, educating the public as they go.
To The Scotsman (27 Sep 2016) not published
The operative word in David Robertson's quote from Tim Keller's book ('Here's hoping you have something to live for', 27 September) is 'If' (If Jesus Christ was really raised from the dead-)!
Unfortunately the evidence for this is flimsy: just stories of impressionable people and superstition. The disappearance of Jesus' body in mysterious circumstances (a day earlier than he predicted) is hardly evidence of a resurrection. If he did rise from the dead, why did his disciples flee to Galilee in despair? In any case, Jesus' idea of resurrection was not some ethereal being, but a flesh and blood new body in the new order to be established here on Earth.
Common sense tells us that in death all bodily functions, including the brain circuits, shut down and cannot be revived. Nor can the brain function without a blood supply. The idea of living again after dying is hopeless wishful thinking. We have only one life and need to make the most of it, not be distracted by hope of another.
The operative word in David Robertson's quote from Tim Keller's book ('Here's hoping you have something to live for', 27 September) is 'If' (If Jesus Christ was really raised from the dead-)!
Unfortunately the evidence for this is flimsy: just stories of impressionable people and superstition. The disappearance of Jesus' body in mysterious circumstances (a day earlier than he predicted) is hardly evidence of a resurrection. If he did rise from the dead, why did his disciples flee to Galilee in despair? In any case, Jesus' idea of resurrection was not some ethereal being, but a flesh and blood new body in the new order to be established here on Earth.
Common sense tells us that in death all bodily functions, including the brain circuits, shut down and cannot be revived. Nor can the brain function without a blood supply. The idea of living again after dying is hopeless wishful thinking. We have only one life and need to make the most of it, not be distracted by hope of another.
To The Sunday Times (19 Sep 2016) published 25 Sep 2016
Neil Oliver bemoans the fact that only one religion (Christianity) is deemed deserving of 'ceaseless public ridicule' ("Only Christianity is made to bear the cross of public ridicule", 18 September) [Comment, last week].
He seems to overlook the fact t [T]his is a post-Christian country and that the population is largely unfamiliar with other religions. One can reject belief in a god but to criticise a religion one needs to be familiar with it. In any case, the religious have usually fallen into their beliefs by accident and do not deserve ridicule; they need sympathy and help.
Neil Oliver bemoans the fact that only one religion (Christianity) is deemed deserving of 'ceaseless public ridicule' ("Only Christianity is made to bear the cross of public ridicule", 18 September) [Comment, last week].
He seems to overlook the fact t [T]his is a post-Christian country and that the population is largely unfamiliar with other religions. One can reject belief in a god but to criticise a religion one needs to be familiar with it. In any case, the religious have usually fallen into their beliefs by accident and do not deserve ridicule; they need sympathy and help.
To The Scotsman (17 Sep 2016) not published
Mary Thomas refers to the guaranteed price for electricity from the proposed Hinkley Point C (£92.50/MWh) to the current price of £37 (Letters, 17 September).
It should be made clear the guaranteed price is the 'strike price' in a 'contract for difference'. This means that the Government will pay EDF the difference between the strike price and the current price if the latter is below the strike price. So in the case mentioned, EDF would get £55.5/MWh. If the current price rises above the strike price, EDF has to pay the Government the difference. The wholesale price of electricity varies day-to-day and reached over £60/MWh in March this year.
The strike price would reduce to £89.50 if another plant were built at Sizewell. In any case, the price compares broadly with the costs of other clean energy such as offshore wind with the additional costs of intermittency or gas with carbon capture and storage.
The European Pressurised Reactor design (two planned at Hinkley) looks over-designed due to excessive security measures and is already taking too long to built elsewhere and costs too much. Personally I would rather that support were given to the alternative nuclear designs being proposed by Hitachi, NuGen and Horizon Nuclear Power on various sites across the UK.
Either way we desperately need replacement base load provision and nuclear is the only way to get it without damaging the climate.
Mary Thomas refers to the guaranteed price for electricity from the proposed Hinkley Point C (£92.50/MWh) to the current price of £37 (Letters, 17 September).
It should be made clear the guaranteed price is the 'strike price' in a 'contract for difference'. This means that the Government will pay EDF the difference between the strike price and the current price if the latter is below the strike price. So in the case mentioned, EDF would get £55.5/MWh. If the current price rises above the strike price, EDF has to pay the Government the difference. The wholesale price of electricity varies day-to-day and reached over £60/MWh in March this year.
The strike price would reduce to £89.50 if another plant were built at Sizewell. In any case, the price compares broadly with the costs of other clean energy such as offshore wind with the additional costs of intermittency or gas with carbon capture and storage.
The European Pressurised Reactor design (two planned at Hinkley) looks over-designed due to excessive security measures and is already taking too long to built elsewhere and costs too much. Personally I would rather that support were given to the alternative nuclear designs being proposed by Hitachi, NuGen and Horizon Nuclear Power on various sites across the UK.
Either way we desperately need replacement base load provision and nuclear is the only way to get it without damaging the climate.
To The Scotsman (15 Sep 2016) not published
It makes no sense to try to apply the strictures of a first century Jewish rabbi to modern society (Otto Inglis's Letter 15 September).
Jesus was asked a trick question in an attempt to get him to either endorse or renounce paying taxes to the Roman state. He avoided it by making the coin the determinant. In effect he was endorsing payment--in Roman coinage, although most people seem to think that he was not doing that. The coin could have been a Jewish one, which could not be used to pay Roman taxes and he might have give the same enigmatic answer. They were hardly 'wise words'; just devious ones.
As for punishment, his answer to those who wanted to stone a woman to death actually encouraged them to obey the law and kill her, provided they were sinless. Jesus declared that he wanted to fulfil the (Jewish) Law, not to undermine it. But the Mosaic law was harsh and unforgiving, not a model for modern society.
The cruel treatment that Christians have meted out to their enemies (often Christians of a different sect) rather undermines the idea that Christianity is 'humane and pacific'. It is a superstition that the world could well do without and which many people do now reject.
It makes no sense to try to apply the strictures of a first century Jewish rabbi to modern society (Otto Inglis's Letter 15 September).
Jesus was asked a trick question in an attempt to get him to either endorse or renounce paying taxes to the Roman state. He avoided it by making the coin the determinant. In effect he was endorsing payment--in Roman coinage, although most people seem to think that he was not doing that. The coin could have been a Jewish one, which could not be used to pay Roman taxes and he might have give the same enigmatic answer. They were hardly 'wise words'; just devious ones.
As for punishment, his answer to those who wanted to stone a woman to death actually encouraged them to obey the law and kill her, provided they were sinless. Jesus declared that he wanted to fulfil the (Jewish) Law, not to undermine it. But the Mosaic law was harsh and unforgiving, not a model for modern society.
The cruel treatment that Christians have meted out to their enemies (often Christians of a different sect) rather undermines the idea that Christianity is 'humane and pacific'. It is a superstition that the world could well do without and which many people do now reject.
To Scotland on Sunday (12 Sep 2016) published but edited 18 Sep 2016
I note your trail of Donny Mackay's talk about the Star of Bethlehem at Dunfermline's Carnegie Hall ('What's ahead this week'[News], 11 September). In fact it has now taken place (on 14 September).
This will be another attempt by an astronomer to explain a story that has nothing to do with astronomy. The 'Star' was an invention of the author of Matthew's Gospel, but only on the basis that the heavens should reflect important events on Earth. It also has its basis in some verses in the Jewish apocryphal books.
Because of its inconsistencies, no astronomer should take the report seriously. It was not a real celestial phenomenon; it was a imaginary one.
Anyone interested in the real explanation can see my article 'Why the Star of Bethlehem did not exist' at http://tinyurl.com/jptstx9.
I note your trail of Donny Mackay's talk about the Star of Bethlehem at Dunfermline's Carnegie Hall ('What's ahead this week'[News], 11 September). In fact it has now taken place (on 14 September).
This will be another attempt by an astronomer to explain a story that has nothing to do with astronomy. The 'Star' was an invention of the author of Matthew's Gospel, but only on the basis that the heavens should reflect important events on Earth. It also has its basis in some verses in the Jewish apocryphal books.
Because of its inconsistencies, no astronomer should take the report seriously. It was not a real celestial phenomenon; it was a imaginary one.
Anyone interested in the real explanation can see my article 'Why the Star of Bethlehem did not exist' at http://tinyurl.com/jptstx9.
To The Scotsman (8 Sep 2016) not published
Les Reid thinks that we can solve the electricity shortage that could arise when Scotland's nuclear power stations close by building more large hydro-electric stations (Letters, 8 September).
Unfortunately, as Prof Ponton pointed out, there are few suitable sites left in Scotland. Apart from that, one could argue that drowning more glens is not environmentally-friendly; some regret that we ever built the huge dams that already exist. They never produce more than 10 per cent of Scotland's electricity and then only when water levels and flow are suitable. They are not an entirely reliable energy source.
The solution to the problem Les Reid outlines is the construction of new nuclear power stations (Hunterston C and Torness B), for which land is already available. A third such station elsewhere in Scotland would see us meeting all Scottish electricity demand without having to import electricity from England, the inevitable result of present policies.
Les Reid thinks that we can solve the electricity shortage that could arise when Scotland's nuclear power stations close by building more large hydro-electric stations (Letters, 8 September).
Unfortunately, as Prof Ponton pointed out, there are few suitable sites left in Scotland. Apart from that, one could argue that drowning more glens is not environmentally-friendly; some regret that we ever built the huge dams that already exist. They never produce more than 10 per cent of Scotland's electricity and then only when water levels and flow are suitable. They are not an entirely reliable energy source.
The solution to the problem Les Reid outlines is the construction of new nuclear power stations (Hunterston C and Torness B), for which land is already available. A third such station elsewhere in Scotland would see us meeting all Scottish electricity demand without having to import electricity from England, the inevitable result of present policies.
To The Scotsman (6 Sep 2016) not published
Prof Jack Ponton claims that the best way for future energy policy to focus on security of supply, cost and CO2 emissions is to reduce energy consumption ('Brexit is a chance to revisit energy policy', 6 September).
However, energy is essential to our civilisation, especially in the form of electricity, without which it would collapse, and it seems unrealistic to expect consumption to fall when we expect growth in the economy. If energy consumption has fallen slightly over recent years, it is not clear that it has been due to increased efficiency. Some argue that increasing efficiency, due to feedback effects, actually brings an increase in energy use.
Security of electricity supply while reducing CO2 emissions would best be achieved by increasing nuclear power generation, something Prof Ponton fails to mention. The cost of nuclear power is often misunderstood and over-estimated. It would be lower if we did not have to pander to unnecessary safety measures and scaremongering.
A growing economy will demand more energy not less and nuclear power can 'keep the lights on' when unreliable alternative generation methods fail. Energy policy has been needing a 'revisit' for decades and Brexit makes no difference.
Prof Jack Ponton claims that the best way for future energy policy to focus on security of supply, cost and CO2 emissions is to reduce energy consumption ('Brexit is a chance to revisit energy policy', 6 September).
However, energy is essential to our civilisation, especially in the form of electricity, without which it would collapse, and it seems unrealistic to expect consumption to fall when we expect growth in the economy. If energy consumption has fallen slightly over recent years, it is not clear that it has been due to increased efficiency. Some argue that increasing efficiency, due to feedback effects, actually brings an increase in energy use.
Security of electricity supply while reducing CO2 emissions would best be achieved by increasing nuclear power generation, something Prof Ponton fails to mention. The cost of nuclear power is often misunderstood and over-estimated. It would be lower if we did not have to pander to unnecessary safety measures and scaremongering.
A growing economy will demand more energy not less and nuclear power can 'keep the lights on' when unreliable alternative generation methods fail. Energy policy has been needing a 'revisit' for decades and Brexit makes no difference.
To The Scotsman (30 Aug 2016) not published
It may be a 'stunning photograph' (Leap of faith: Wing suit jumpers share a meteor shower in the Canary Islands', 29 August) but apart from the lights of the wing suiters, no meteor trails are visible; just star trails due to the time exposure. Meteor trails will be straight, not curved. So most of your caption was irrelevant.
It may be a 'stunning photograph' (Leap of faith: Wing suit jumpers share a meteor shower in the Canary Islands', 29 August) but apart from the lights of the wing suiters, no meteor trails are visible; just star trails due to the time exposure. Meteor trails will be straight, not curved. So most of your caption was irrelevant.
To The Scotsman (29 Aug 2016) published 30 Aug 2016
It is true, as Richard Lucas claims, that 'a remarkable array of unlikely conditions must be met to make a planet potentially life bearing' (Letters, 29 August).
It seems that those conditions were met here, which is why there is life on Earth. But then, in an infinite universe, such rare conditions were bound to occur somewhere.
As to how life started in the first place, we are not short of theories. Contrary to Mr Lucas's claim, there is reason to believe that primitive life (bacteria) and then more complex forms did emerge when the conditions were right.
It is true, as Richard Lucas claims, that 'a remarkable array of unlikely conditions must be met to make a planet potentially life bearing' (Letters, 29 August).
It seems that those conditions were met here, which is why there is life on Earth. But then, in an infinite universe, such rare conditions were bound to occur somewhere.
As to how life started in the first place, we are not short of theories. Contrary to Mr Lucas's claim, there is reason to believe that primitive life (bacteria) and then more complex forms did emerge when the conditions were right.
To The Scotsman (22 Aug 2016) published 23 Aug 2016
I do wish people and journalists in particular would stop misusing the term 'Mother of Parliaments' (Lesley Riddoch misused it in her article 'More MSPs might be what we need', 22 August).
The phrase was coined by MP John Bright in 1865 when he described England [sic] as 'the mother of parliaments' because it gives birth to successive parliaments. In no sense is Westminster the mother of other parliaments, but it is the child of the state, being born again at each general election. It is the UK that is the 'mother', not Westminster.
I do wish people and journalists in particular would stop misusing the term 'Mother of Parliaments' (Lesley Riddoch misused it in her article 'More MSPs might be what we need', 22 August).
The phrase was coined by MP John Bright in 1865 when he described England [sic] as 'the mother of parliaments' because it gives birth to successive parliaments. In no sense is Westminster the mother of other parliaments, but it is the child of the state, being born again at each general election. It is the UK that is the 'mother', not Westminster.
To The Scotsman (20 Aug 2016) published 22 Aug 2016
Dr Roger I Cartright claims that the UK voted against the free movement of EU citizens (Letters, 20 August). However, that was not the question put in the referendum.
We were merely asked if we wanted to remain in the EU or leave it (nothing about free movement, even though that was on many voters' minds). Consequently, the UK Government has no remit to institute a ban on free movement; it only has a remit to leave the European Union and an arrangement like Norway's would fulfil that obligation. That would enable us to keep the 'soft' border in Ireland.
Note that Norway still institutes sporadic customs checks along its border with Sweden.
Dr Roger I Cartright claims that the UK voted against the free movement of EU citizens (Letters, 20 August). However, that was not the question put in the referendum.
We were merely asked if we wanted to remain in the EU or leave it (nothing about free movement, even though that was on many voters' minds). Consequently, the UK Government has no remit to institute a ban on free movement; it only has a remit to leave the European Union and an arrangement like Norway's would fulfil that obligation. That would enable us to keep the 'soft' border in Ireland.
Note that Norway still institutes sporadic customs checks along its border with Sweden.
To Edinburgh Evening News (5 Aug 2016) not published
The caption to Jim Nisbet's photo in Picture Gallery (5 August) claims that the Prestoungrange Gothenburg pub is 'Grade II listed'. Such numerical listing is only used in England; in Scotland the listing grades are alphabetical and the equivalent would be 'Grade B'.
The caption to Jim Nisbet's photo in Picture Gallery (5 August) claims that the Prestoungrange Gothenburg pub is 'Grade II listed'. Such numerical listing is only used in England; in Scotland the listing grades are alphabetical and the equivalent would be 'Grade B'.
To The Scotsman (5 Aug 2016) not published
David Robertson's article ('Christians recognise that we need both reason and revelation to reach the truth', Friends, 4 August) was OK until he reached the end, where he started to preach about truth, as if it were an absolute, being found in 'Jesus Christ, the incarnate God'.
The historical Jesus never claimed to be an incarnation of Jehovah (is he Mr Robertson's god?) and, as a Jew, could not have done. Mr Robertson's attempt to push evangelical Christianity where it has no business going is rather pathetic and wearisome.
Not only that, but he evidently does not understand the real meaning of 'agnosticism'. It does not mean 'sitting on the fence'; it means that nothing can be known about the existence of nature of God, and that is the truth!
David Robertson's article ('Christians recognise that we need both reason and revelation to reach the truth', Friends, 4 August) was OK until he reached the end, where he started to preach about truth, as if it were an absolute, being found in 'Jesus Christ, the incarnate God'.
The historical Jesus never claimed to be an incarnation of Jehovah (is he Mr Robertson's god?) and, as a Jew, could not have done. Mr Robertson's attempt to push evangelical Christianity where it has no business going is rather pathetic and wearisome.
Not only that, but he evidently does not understand the real meaning of 'agnosticism'. It does not mean 'sitting on the fence'; it means that nothing can be known about the existence of nature of God, and that is the truth!
To The Scotsman (3 Aug 2016) published 4 Aug 2016
I regret that I have to add to the phatic expression mentioned by D J Hollingdale (3 August) and others noted by other correspondents. 'You know' is bad enough, but it often comes with 'I mean', as in 'I mean, you know', which, irritatingly, conveys no meaningful information. I have to add to this list the misuse of 'finally'. In a TV programme last night, I heard it repeatedly, causing me to scream at the TV. Where do people get these bad habits?
I regret that I have to add to the phatic expression mentioned by D J Hollingdale (3 August) and others noted by other correspondents. 'You know' is bad enough, but it often comes with 'I mean', as in 'I mean, you know', which, irritatingly, conveys no meaningful information. I have to add to this list the misuse of 'finally'. In a TV programme last night, I heard it repeatedly, causing me to scream at the TV. Where do people get these bad habits?
To The Scotsman (29 Jul 2016) not published
As one who suffers from what is called 'colour blindness', but which is mostly just a problem distinguishing between red and green, I am pleased that the BBC Trust has called for the BBC to review its guidance on this matter (Your report, 29 July).
I frequently find it impossible to understand coloured graphics, not just on a TV screen, but in printed publications, including The Scotsman. How about you also reviewing your policy on this matter?
As one who suffers from what is called 'colour blindness', but which is mostly just a problem distinguishing between red and green, I am pleased that the BBC Trust has called for the BBC to review its guidance on this matter (Your report, 29 July).
I frequently find it impossible to understand coloured graphics, not just on a TV screen, but in printed publications, including The Scotsman. How about you also reviewing your policy on this matter?
To The Scotsman (26 Jul 2016) not published
No, carbon capture is not 'our best hope of combating climate change' (Inside Environment, 26 July).
The best hope is to stop emitting greenhouse gases altogether and the sooner the better (in fact many think that it is too late to halt the change that's already 'locked in' to the atmosphere and that our only hope is drastic geoengineering).
Carbon capture is costly, making fossil fuel plants, particularly the older less efficient ones, even less efficient and the electricity they produce more expensive. Storage of the captured CO2 is less difficult but there are doubts about the safety of sticking it under the sea and the legality of doing so in the North Sea.
No coal-fired power station remains in Scotland and only Peterhead still burns gas for electricity generation. Better to cease burning hydrocarbon gases and to rely more on renewables (not windfarms please) and nuclear power.
No, carbon capture is not 'our best hope of combating climate change' (Inside Environment, 26 July).
The best hope is to stop emitting greenhouse gases altogether and the sooner the better (in fact many think that it is too late to halt the change that's already 'locked in' to the atmosphere and that our only hope is drastic geoengineering).
Carbon capture is costly, making fossil fuel plants, particularly the older less efficient ones, even less efficient and the electricity they produce more expensive. Storage of the captured CO2 is less difficult but there are doubts about the safety of sticking it under the sea and the legality of doing so in the North Sea.
No coal-fired power station remains in Scotland and only Peterhead still burns gas for electricity generation. Better to cease burning hydrocarbon gases and to rely more on renewables (not windfarms please) and nuclear power.
To The Scotsman (20 Jul 2016) not published
You claim that a atomic bomb test occurred in Nevada 'around 1940 - five years before Hiroshima and Nagaski' ('This is how debate ends - not with a bang but a whimper', 20 July).
In fact the first ever nuclear detonation occurred on 16 July 1945 as part of the Manhattan Project, the month before the weapons were used in Japan. Furthermore, the site of the test was in New Mexico and the picture you show is not of that test.
You claim that a atomic bomb test occurred in Nevada 'around 1940 - five years before Hiroshima and Nagaski' ('This is how debate ends - not with a bang but a whimper', 20 July).
In fact the first ever nuclear detonation occurred on 16 July 1945 as part of the Manhattan Project, the month before the weapons were used in Japan. Furthermore, the site of the test was in New Mexico and the picture you show is not of that test.
To The Scotsman (19 Jul 2016) published 21 Jul 2016
Alexander McKay (Letters, 19 July) claims that Trident has kept the world free from world war for more than 70 years, because 'it incontestably works [as a deterrent]'.
This is like claiming that nothing ill has befallen him because he always touches wood before he goes out. It is an example of the logical fallacy that [how] 'correlation does not imply causation'.
The threat of NATO retaliation during the Cold War may have kept the peace for 70 years, but it may also have been because both superpowers realised that releasing all their nuclear weapons on the other (or anywhere) would harm their own country and life everywhere. The idea of thermo-nuclear war truly was MAD (mutually assured destruction). Mankind had produced such powerful weapons that no one in their right mind would consider using them.
Countries without such weapons also enjoyed peace and it may be that, had the UK not possessed such weapons, we would have been just as safe. Who would want to invade a country that had been reduced to a radioactive ruin?
Trident may have been completely useless and renewing even more so. In the world today the threats Europe faces are not ones that Trident can bear on. We could scrap it tomorrow and spend the money instead on modern battlefield weapons and equipment that would defend us against Russian aggression.
Alexander McKay (Letters, 19 July) claims that Trident has kept the world free from world war for more than 70 years, because 'it incontestably works [as a deterrent]'.
This is like claiming that nothing ill has befallen him because he always touches wood before he goes out. It is an example of the logical fallacy that [how] 'correlation does not imply causation'.
The threat of NATO retaliation during the Cold War may have kept the peace for 70 years, but it may also have been because both superpowers realised that releasing all their nuclear weapons on the other (or anywhere) would harm their own country and life everywhere. The idea of thermo-nuclear war truly was MAD (mutually assured destruction). Mankind had produced such powerful weapons that no one in their right mind would consider using them.
Countries without such weapons also enjoyed peace and it may be that, had the UK not possessed such weapons, we would have been just as safe. Who would want to invade a country that had been reduced to a radioactive ruin?
Trident may have been completely useless and renewing even more so. In the world today the threats Europe faces are not ones that Trident can bear on. We could scrap it tomorrow and spend the money instead on modern battlefield weapons and equipment that would defend us against Russian aggression.
To The Scotsman (18 Jul 2016) published 19 Jul 2016
In last Saturday's Times, Edward Lucas, the author of The New Cold War, explained [in a newspaper last weekend] how useless Trident is for the threats we face in eastern Europe from Russia. We cannot threaten Isis with nuclear weapons nor can Trident be used to defend the Baltic states.
Lucas notes that a big Russian exercise in 2009 featured a dummy attack on Warsaw. To match Russia we need a 'battlefield' nuclear arsenal, including nuclear-capable ground-launched cruise missiles. Spending money on Trident will not help in any foreseeable conflict.
Ballistic nuclear weapons were designed to deter a conflict between two superpowers. Now that one of these has collapsed, there is no need to that type of weapon. So let's abandon it and modernise our battle groups.--
In last Saturday's Times, Edward Lucas, the author of The New Cold War, explained [in a newspaper last weekend] how useless Trident is for the threats we face in eastern Europe from Russia. We cannot threaten Isis with nuclear weapons nor can Trident be used to defend the Baltic states.
Lucas notes that a big Russian exercise in 2009 featured a dummy attack on Warsaw. To match Russia we need a 'battlefield' nuclear arsenal, including nuclear-capable ground-launched cruise missiles. Spending money on Trident will not help in any foreseeable conflict.
Ballistic nuclear weapons were designed to deter a conflict between two superpowers. Now that one of these has collapsed, there is no need to that type of weapon. So let's abandon it and modernise our battle groups.--
To The Scotsman (16 Jul 2016) published 18 Jul 2016
Perhaps electric cars are a 'bad idea' (,'Electric cars sound like a bad idea',[Perspective]16 July). Not just because they are a danger to pedestrians but because electricity is intrinsically more expensive a fuel than petrol or diesel (some charging points are now charging £7.50 for a rapid half-hour charge so that the motorists will pay an extra £1.20 to get the same mileage they get from a gallon of diesel). Moreover, it is doubtful that the electricity supply industry could cope with a wholesale shift to electric vehicles.
A more attractive environmentally-friendly alternative is using hydrogen in internal combustion engines (using hydrogen in fuel cells leads to the same silent operation as battery driven cars). We will need hydrogen anyway to replace methane in the gas network if we are to reduce CO2 emissions from buildings. So if hydrogen is to become plentiful, it may as well be used for transport.
One study has shown that converting the gas network to hydrogen is a lower-cost residential decarbonisation pathway for the UK than those previously identified.
Perhaps electric cars are a 'bad idea' (,'Electric cars sound like a bad idea',[Perspective]16 July). Not just because they are a danger to pedestrians but because electricity is intrinsically more expensive a fuel than petrol or diesel (some charging points are now charging £7.50 for a rapid half-hour charge so that the motorists will pay an extra £1.20 to get the same mileage they get from a gallon of diesel). Moreover, it is doubtful that the electricity supply industry could cope with a wholesale shift to electric vehicles.
A more attractive environmentally-friendly alternative is using hydrogen in internal combustion engines (using hydrogen in fuel cells leads to the same silent operation as battery driven cars). We will need hydrogen anyway to replace methane in the gas network if we are to reduce CO2 emissions from buildings. So if hydrogen is to become plentiful, it may as well be used for transport.
One study has shown that converting the gas network to hydrogen is a lower-cost residential decarbonisation pathway for the UK than those previously identified.
To The Scotsman (12+13 Jul 2016) not published
Fabrice Leveque claims that installing insulation (in homes) will save energy and 'carbon for decades' ('Regulations should be used to create a market for energy efficient homes', 12 July).
Increasing home insulation does save householders some expenditure on fuel, although they tend to take half the saving in increased comfort (i.e. warmer homes). But does it save energy on a national scale? Studies have tended to show that, due to various feedback effects, there is little national saving. One of these effects is the tendency for someone who finds that their heating is cheaper to run to run it more often. It is naive to believe that insulating ones house will save the country energy. Of course that's no reason not to do it.
As for any carbon saving, making and installing insulation costs energy and perhaps carbon emissions (depending on how the energy was produced). Reducing a house's carbon emission will not necessarily reduce national carbon emissions. Reducing electricity demand will only reduce carbon emissions if it is generated from a fossil fuel generator. In Scotland, the only such generation is at Peterhead where the fuel is gas.
To really make a reduction in house carbon emissions we need to replace methane by hydrogen in the gas network. But when will this happen?-
Fabrice Leveque claims that installing insulation (in homes) will save energy and 'carbon for decades' ('Regulations should be used to create a market for energy efficient homes', 12 July).
Increasing home insulation does save householders some expenditure on fuel, although they tend to take half the saving in increased comfort (i.e. warmer homes). But does it save energy on a national scale? Studies have tended to show that, due to various feedback effects, there is little national saving. One of these effects is the tendency for someone who finds that their heating is cheaper to run to run it more often. It is naive to believe that insulating ones house will save the country energy. Of course that's no reason not to do it.
As for any carbon saving, making and installing insulation costs energy and perhaps carbon emissions (depending on how the energy was produced). Reducing a house's carbon emission will not necessarily reduce national carbon emissions. Reducing electricity demand will only reduce carbon emissions if it is generated from a fossil fuel generator. In Scotland, the only such generation is at Peterhead where the fuel is gas.
To really make a reduction in house carbon emissions we need to replace methane by hydrogen in the gas network. But when will this happen?-
To The Scotsman (30 Jun 2016) not published
The present debate over the UK's future vis-a-vis the European Union is complicated enough without The Scotsman carelessly throwing in terms like 'European workers', 'EU citizens' and 'EU nationals' ('Leaders lay out stark vision for future of UK after departure from the EU', 30 June), by all of which you mean non-British workers, citizens and nationals.
Until the UK actually leaves the EU, the above terms also apply to all British workers, citizens and nationals. They apply to me and all other British people. So it would help to clarify matters if you took more care in describing those foreigners who come to the UK from other countries of the EU.
The present debate over the UK's future vis-a-vis the European Union is complicated enough without The Scotsman carelessly throwing in terms like 'European workers', 'EU citizens' and 'EU nationals' ('Leaders lay out stark vision for future of UK after departure from the EU', 30 June), by all of which you mean non-British workers, citizens and nationals.
Until the UK actually leaves the EU, the above terms also apply to all British workers, citizens and nationals. They apply to me and all other British people. So it would help to clarify matters if you took more care in describing those foreigners who come to the UK from other countries of the EU.
To The Scotsman (29 Jun 2016) not published.
Rev Dr Robert Anderson claims that Christian faith offers faith, hope, conviction and courage and these are essential for any individual, society and nation (Letters, 29 June).
Nonsense. Christianity offers only the promise of a heavenly existence if one puts one's faith in Jesus and the threat of a hellish one if one does not. Nothing to do with Jesus of course, who, as a Jew, was only concerned for the future of his fellow Jews and the prospect of his becoming the ruler of a new Israel in the Kingdom of Heaven. All this came to nothing when he was killed.
People do need hope and courage, especially in the UK at the moment, but they do not need to derive them from a superstition; about half the UK population now find them without the need of any religion and only a minority resort to Christianity. That minority should throw in the towel: their cause is lost.
Rev Dr Robert Anderson claims that Christian faith offers faith, hope, conviction and courage and these are essential for any individual, society and nation (Letters, 29 June).
Nonsense. Christianity offers only the promise of a heavenly existence if one puts one's faith in Jesus and the threat of a hellish one if one does not. Nothing to do with Jesus of course, who, as a Jew, was only concerned for the future of his fellow Jews and the prospect of his becoming the ruler of a new Israel in the Kingdom of Heaven. All this came to nothing when he was killed.
People do need hope and courage, especially in the UK at the moment, but they do not need to derive them from a superstition; about half the UK population now find them without the need of any religion and only a minority resort to Christianity. That minority should throw in the towel: their cause is lost.
To Edinburgh Evening News (28 Jun 2016)
You refer to 'EU nationals living in Edinburgh' meaning apparently non-UK EU citizens ('We're here to create jobs, not to take them', 28 June).
But I am an EU national and so are all the people who live in Scotland unless they are nationals of a non-EU country. In this time of confusion over nationality, it does not help for you to be confused.
You refer to 'EU nationals living in Edinburgh' meaning apparently non-UK EU citizens ('We're here to create jobs, not to take them', 28 June).
But I am an EU national and so are all the people who live in Scotland unless they are nationals of a non-EU country. In this time of confusion over nationality, it does not help for you to be confused.
To The Scotsman (28 Jun 2016)
You refer to 'EU nationals living in Scotland' meaning apparently non-UK EU citizens ('EU nationals in Scotland voice post-Brexit fears', 28 June).
But I am an EU national and so are all the people who live in Scotland unless they are nationals of a non-EU country. In this time of confusion over nationality, it does not help for you to be confused.
You refer to 'EU nationals living in Scotland' meaning apparently non-UK EU citizens ('EU nationals in Scotland voice post-Brexit fears', 28 June).
But I am an EU national and so are all the people who live in Scotland unless they are nationals of a non-EU country. In this time of confusion over nationality, it does not help for you to be confused.
To Edinburgh Evening News (25 Jun 2016) published 27 Jun 2016
Glen Rogers of Hope Church thinks that 'Jesus was all about having a successful life' ([News, June 24]).
Hardly. Jesus mission was to call on his people to repent in the face of an expected Kingdom of Heaven, where sex would be irrelevant. He himself seems to have had no sex life and one could not claim that his own life was a success.
Mr Rogers needs to study his Bible more thoroughly.
Glen Rogers of Hope Church thinks that 'Jesus was all about having a successful life' ([News, June 24]).
Hardly. Jesus mission was to call on his people to repent in the face of an expected Kingdom of Heaven, where sex would be irrelevant. He himself seems to have had no sex life and one could not claim that his own life was a success.
Mr Rogers needs to study his Bible more thoroughly.
To The Scotsman (16 Jun 2016) published 17 Jun 2016
Bill Stevenson of The Boys Brigade claims that the BB is still as relevant today as it was when it was founded in 1883 (Letter 15 June).
However, considering that the organisation was and still is a Christian evangelical one, it is out-of-date. Nowadays only about half the population is religious and only a minority are Christian. The activities undertaken by the BB can be done just as well, or even better, without the baggage of religion. It should certainly not be imposing a Christian ethos on 5-year-olds. If the BB cannot abandon religion, it should be disbanded.
Bill Stevenson of The Boys Brigade claims that the BB is still as relevant today as it was when it was founded in 1883 (Letter 15 June).
However, considering that the organisation was and still is a Christian evangelical one, it is out-of-date. Nowadays only about half the population is religious and only a minority are Christian. The activities undertaken by the BB can be done just as well, or even better, without the baggage of religion. It should certainly not be imposing a Christian ethos on 5-year-olds. If the BB cannot abandon religion, it should be disbanded.
To The Scotsman (11 Jun 2016) not published
I enjoyed Martin James Bartlett's very skilful performance of Arnold Bax's Burlesque in St Paul's Cathedral on the 10 June. Bit surprised at there being no applause, but perhaps the audience was deterred by the fancy dress parade going on around them.
I enjoyed Martin James Bartlett's very skilful performance of Arnold Bax's Burlesque in St Paul's Cathedral on the 10 June. Bit surprised at there being no applause, but perhaps the audience was deterred by the fancy dress parade going on around them.
To The Scotsman (9 Jun 2016) published 10 Jun 2016
Dr S J Clark seems to think that we should regret the discovery of fire because burning carbon compounds produces damaging carbon emissions (Letter, 8 June).
Fire was not exactly 'discovered'; it was a natural hazard known to our ancestors. But they did discover how to exploit and control it for various purposes, burning wood. Of course the growth of trees recycles that carbon, leaving no net surplus to damage the atmosphere. It is only the modern burning of fossil fuels that has led to the damaging increase in CO2 emissions.
Dr S J Clark seems to think that we should regret the discovery of fire because burning carbon compounds produces damaging carbon emissions (Letter, 8 June).
Fire was not exactly 'discovered'; it was a natural hazard known to our ancestors. But they did discover how to exploit and control it for various purposes, burning wood. Of course the growth of trees recycles that carbon, leaving no net surplus to damage the atmosphere. It is only the modern burning of fossil fuels that has led to the damaging increase in CO2 emissions.
To The Sunday Times (6 Jun 2016) not published
In describing the strike price for electricity to be supplied from the EDF's proposed Hinkley Point nuclear station, Danny Fortson ('Will the last energy giant to leave your home please turn off the lights', 5 June) claimed that the £92.50/MWh would be tacked onto household bills and rise every year with inflation.
Not so: EDF will always get some payment for their electricity, but if it does not reach the strike price the Government will make up the difference. Indeed, if EDF get more than that, they have to hand the surplus to the Government. So it is not clear what this will cost the consumer over the period of the contract for difference.
Because the strike price is fixed, the cost to the consumer will not rise with inflation. In fact, if inflation causes EDF's receipts to increase, the cost to the consumer will fall over time.
In describing the strike price for electricity to be supplied from the EDF's proposed Hinkley Point nuclear station, Danny Fortson ('Will the last energy giant to leave your home please turn off the lights', 5 June) claimed that the £92.50/MWh would be tacked onto household bills and rise every year with inflation.
Not so: EDF will always get some payment for their electricity, but if it does not reach the strike price the Government will make up the difference. Indeed, if EDF get more than that, they have to hand the surplus to the Government. So it is not clear what this will cost the consumer over the period of the contract for difference.
Because the strike price is fixed, the cost to the consumer will not rise with inflation. In fact, if inflation causes EDF's receipts to increase, the cost to the consumer will fall over time.
To The Scotsman (6 Jun 2016) not published
The superstitious Rev Dr Robert Anderson (Letter 6 June) seems to think that truth is measured by the number of believers, but, as Anatole France said: 'if 50 million people say a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing'. Even if the majority of humans believe in life after death, it is still foolish and without justification, certainly not in the origin of Christianity, for which I did offer a credible explanation. It lies in the curious last chapter of John's Gospel, which I urge Dr Anderson to read.
St Paul's alleged mystical episode on the road to Damascus is hardly evidence for an afterlife; he suffered some sort of seizure, probably epileptic (his 'thorn in the flesh').
To The Scotsman (4 Jun 2016) not published
I was surprised by your claim that, at only eighty years old, girls are keener on reading than boys (p. 18 yesterday).
Surely, at that age, girls are too immature to take an interest in the opposite sex. However, it is encouraging that they prefer reading than sexual distraction. Or perhaps they prefer to read about boys than actually associate with them.
The superstitious Rev Dr Robert Anderson (Letter 6 June) seems to think that truth is measured by the number of believers, but, as Anatole France said: 'if 50 million people say a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing'. Even if the majority of humans believe in life after death, it is still foolish and without justification, certainly not in the origin of Christianity, for which I did offer a credible explanation. It lies in the curious last chapter of John's Gospel, which I urge Dr Anderson to read.
St Paul's alleged mystical episode on the road to Damascus is hardly evidence for an afterlife; he suffered some sort of seizure, probably epileptic (his 'thorn in the flesh').
To The Scotsman (4 Jun 2016) not published
I was surprised by your claim that, at only eighty years old, girls are keener on reading than boys (p. 18 yesterday).
Surely, at that age, girls are too immature to take an interest in the opposite sex. However, it is encouraging that they prefer reading than sexual distraction. Or perhaps they prefer to read about boys than actually associate with them.
To The Scotsman (3 June 2016) published 4 Jun 2016
Neil Barber (Letters 2 June) was not calling for Mortonhall Crematorium to reflect any particular philosophy, certainly not one concerned with the 'meaning of life' (life has no intrinsic meaning); he was asking for it to reflect no one philosophy and no particular religion (Rev Dr Anderson's letter 3 June).
Dr Anderson's claim that Christianity originated in the Resurrection begs the question of whether or not that actually happened. The evidence for a bodily resurrection is scant and circumstantial and hinges on mistaking an elderly shepherd for Jesus in Galilee and an empty tomb in Jerusalem.
Christianity arose from a misunderstanding and a wish to believe the impossible.
Neil Barber (Letters 2 June) was not calling for Mortonhall Crematorium to reflect any particular philosophy, certainly not one concerned with the 'meaning of life' (life has no intrinsic meaning); he was asking for it to reflect no one philosophy and no particular religion (Rev Dr Anderson's letter 3 June).
Dr Anderson's claim that Christianity originated in the Resurrection begs the question of whether or not that actually happened. The evidence for a bodily resurrection is scant and circumstantial and hinges on mistaking an elderly shepherd for Jesus in Galilee and an empty tomb in Jerusalem.
Christianity arose from a misunderstanding and a wish to believe the impossible.
To Edinburgh Evening News (2 Jun 2016) published 4 Jun 2016
Considering that the membership of the Church of Scotland is down to 380,000 (7.3% of the Scottish population), Ruth Davidson's exaggerated claim that civic society would collapse without it is sheer hyperbole ('Kirk's role is crucial says Tory leader', 2 June).
Civic society functions quite well without the Kirk's involvement (some would argue that it would function better without it) and she impugns all those who contribute their time and money for the good of all without any hope of a heavenly reward.
Considering that the membership of the Church of Scotland is down to 380,000 (7.3% of the Scottish population), Ruth Davidson's exaggerated claim that civic society would collapse without it is sheer hyperbole ('Kirk's role is crucial says Tory leader', 2 June).
Civic society functions quite well without the Kirk's involvement (some would argue that it would function better without it) and she impugns all those who contribute their time and money for the good of all without any hope of a heavenly reward.
To Scotland on Sunday (30 May 2016) published 5 Jun 2016
It is disappointing that the Scottish Government's position on fracking is contingent on it being 'proven beyond doubt' that there is no risk to health, communities or the environment ('The delay isn't helpful. We think that is very bad news for Scotland', 29 May).
Perhaps it is the lack of science advisor (that's also disappointing) that means that the SG does not understand that one cannot prove a negative. What is appears to want is impossible.
All exploitations of natural resources (even renewables) involve risk. What matters is whether or not the risk is worth taking.
Some would argue that, in the case of fracking, where the benefits are huge, the risks are known and manageable. It is irresponsible to pander to ignorant and prejudiced protests.
It is disappointing that the Scottish Government's position on fracking is contingent on it being 'proven beyond doubt' that there is no risk to health, communities or the environment ('The delay isn't helpful. We think that is very bad news for Scotland', 29 May).
Perhaps it is the lack of science advisor (that's also disappointing) that means that the SG does not understand that one cannot prove a negative. What is appears to want is impossible.
All exploitations of natural resources (even renewables) involve risk. What matters is whether or not the risk is worth taking.
Some would argue that, in the case of fracking, where the benefits are huge, the risks are known and manageable. It is irresponsible to pander to ignorant and prejudiced protests.
To The Scotsman (26 May 2016) not published
I have not seen it mentioned anywhere else, but, according to John Hughes-Wilson in his recent book On Intelligence, there was an intelligence failure right at the start of the Battle of Jutland.
The senior operations officer asked Room 40 (the Admiralty' code breakers) where the High Seas Fleet commander's radio call sign was located. Not knowing why the information was needed, Room 40 reported correctly that it was at Wilhelmshaven. However they did not inform, the ops room that the call sign had been transferred ashore, routine when the flagship sailed. What the ops room really wanted to know was 'Where is the flagship of the German High Seas Fleet?'
As a result, and believing that the Fleet was still in port, the Admiralty ops room failed to get the British Grand Fleet to sea in time to cut off Scheer at Jutland and misled both Jellicoe and Beatty once they had sailed.
This failure led to changes in intelligence procedures.
I have not seen it mentioned anywhere else, but, according to John Hughes-Wilson in his recent book On Intelligence, there was an intelligence failure right at the start of the Battle of Jutland.
The senior operations officer asked Room 40 (the Admiralty' code breakers) where the High Seas Fleet commander's radio call sign was located. Not knowing why the information was needed, Room 40 reported correctly that it was at Wilhelmshaven. However they did not inform, the ops room that the call sign had been transferred ashore, routine when the flagship sailed. What the ops room really wanted to know was 'Where is the flagship of the German High Seas Fleet?'
As a result, and believing that the Fleet was still in port, the Admiralty ops room failed to get the British Grand Fleet to sea in time to cut off Scheer at Jutland and misled both Jellicoe and Beatty once they had sailed.
This failure led to changes in intelligence procedures.
To The Scotsman (25 May 2016) not published
What was Geoff Miller's point (Letters 25 May)? Does he imply that Christians behave better than non-Christians? If so, I should like to see the evidence for that?
It is true that Christians have a different world view: they have an eye on a future life, so being somewhat distracted from dealing with problems in this life. Some will be distracted by constantly looking for Christ's return. Consequently, that does to some extent 'invalidate' their experience.
What was Geoff Miller's point (Letters 25 May)? Does he imply that Christians behave better than non-Christians? If so, I should like to see the evidence for that?
It is true that Christians have a different world view: they have an eye on a future life, so being somewhat distracted from dealing with problems in this life. Some will be distracted by constantly looking for Christ's return. Consequently, that does to some extent 'invalidate' their experience.
To The Sunday Times (24 May 2016) not published
Studying the similarity of eyewitness reports of Nessie will not solve the mystery ('Nessie study doesn't duck eyewitness trends', 22 May). That is because the genuine reports are caused by sightings of at least five different kinds of stimuli, none of them a 'monster'; it would be like comparing apples, pears, oranges, bananas and cherries. However, reports are consistent within categories, the causes of which have all been identified. I know of no report that was caused by a misperception of ducks.
Studying the similarity of eyewitness reports of Nessie will not solve the mystery ('Nessie study doesn't duck eyewitness trends', 22 May). That is because the genuine reports are caused by sightings of at least five different kinds of stimuli, none of them a 'monster'; it would be like comparing apples, pears, oranges, bananas and cherries. However, reports are consistent within categories, the causes of which have all been identified. I know of no report that was caused by a misperception of ducks.
To The Scotsman (20 May 2016) not published
Jim Duffy seeks to encourage tolerance of unconventional sexual attitudes by following Jesus' allegedly liberal attitude towards the underclass ('Jesus speaks from the heart but are his days numbered?, 20 May).
Jesus' attitude to sexuality is unclear. One can presume that he would have endorsed the Mosaic Law, but he appears to have encourage breaking it and tolerated and forgave those who broke it. He is not recorded as having made any comment on sexual relationships although he seems to have had an intimate relationship with one of his disciples.
It is important to recognise that Jesus (unusually) seems to have remained unmarried and probably thought sexual relationships irrelevant in the face of the expected kingdom in which, he believed, the resurrected would be sexless.
Christianity's days are certainly numbered, with only a minority now adhering to the faith and that number declining. Only an ignorant bigot would now preach against homosexuality. First century views have no place in modern society.
Jim Duffy seeks to encourage tolerance of unconventional sexual attitudes by following Jesus' allegedly liberal attitude towards the underclass ('Jesus speaks from the heart but are his days numbered?, 20 May).
Jesus' attitude to sexuality is unclear. One can presume that he would have endorsed the Mosaic Law, but he appears to have encourage breaking it and tolerated and forgave those who broke it. He is not recorded as having made any comment on sexual relationships although he seems to have had an intimate relationship with one of his disciples.
It is important to recognise that Jesus (unusually) seems to have remained unmarried and probably thought sexual relationships irrelevant in the face of the expected kingdom in which, he believed, the resurrected would be sexless.
Christianity's days are certainly numbered, with only a minority now adhering to the faith and that number declining. Only an ignorant bigot would now preach against homosexuality. First century views have no place in modern society.
To The Sunday Times (16 May 16) published 22 May 2016
So the BBC's plan to tackle the problem of being 'too Christian' is to maintain its Christian output, not reduce it ('BBC "too Christian" and must diversify', 15 May). Considering that about half the UK population now has no religion, we could do with fewer religious broadcasts. It is time that the BBC reflected people's growing scepticism and/or disinterest in religious matters [about, or lack of interest in, matters of faith], which will only increase with time [-- and broadcast fewer religious programmes].
So the BBC's plan to tackle the problem of being 'too Christian' is to maintain its Christian output, not reduce it ('BBC "too Christian" and must diversify', 15 May). Considering that about half the UK population now has no religion, we could do with fewer religious broadcasts. It is time that the BBC reflected people's growing scepticism and/or disinterest in religious matters [about, or lack of interest in, matters of faith], which will only increase with time [-- and broadcast fewer religious programmes].
To The Scotsman (9 May 2016) published 10 May 2016
Two of your correspondents yesterday (9 May) referred to their 'polling station'. In fact we have no such thing in Scotland; it's called a 'polling place'.
Two of your correspondents yesterday (9 May) referred to their 'polling station'. In fact we have no such thing in Scotland; it's called a 'polling place'.
To The Scotsman (7 May 2016) published 9 May 2016
Scott Macnab is correct: the SNP has come out better than they would under a straight proportional representation system ('Holyrood's complex system sees SNP lose majority despite vote share rise', 7 May). In fact, on the number of constituency votes they would have only 60 seats, and on the list votes only 54![.]
This is the result of the bastard[awkward] additional member system chosen to elect the parliament. It tries to combine traditional 'first past the post' constituency voting system with a proportional (D'Hondt) system as an adjustment.
In 2011, the Electoral Reform Society concluded that it is biased against small parties and that, because it favours block votes for parties, it makes it difficult for women and, by implication, ethnic minority candidates to get elected. It recommended a change to the use of the single transferable vote system as used in Scotland's local government elections or a pure version of the additional member system using the Sainte-Laguë method of allocating votes.
The SNP has long argued for fairer voting, but only the UK Government has the power to make a change. Will the Scottish Government press Westminster, where it has some influence, on this matter, or will it prefer to enjoy the advantage the present system gives it?
Scott Macnab is correct: the SNP has come out better than they would under a straight proportional representation system ('Holyrood's complex system sees SNP lose majority despite vote share rise', 7 May). In fact, on the number of constituency votes they would have only 60 seats, and on the list votes only 54![.]
This is the result of the bastard[awkward] additional member system chosen to elect the parliament. It tries to combine traditional 'first past the post' constituency voting system with a proportional (D'Hondt) system as an adjustment.
In 2011, the Electoral Reform Society concluded that it is biased against small parties and that, because it favours block votes for parties, it makes it difficult for women and, by implication, ethnic minority candidates to get elected. It recommended a change to the use of the single transferable vote system as used in Scotland's local government elections or a pure version of the additional member system using the Sainte-Laguë method of allocating votes.
The SNP has long argued for fairer voting, but only the UK Government has the power to make a change. Will the Scottish Government press Westminster, where it has some influence, on this matter, or will it prefer to enjoy the advantage the present system gives it?
To Edinburgh Evening News (30 Apr 2016) published 5 May 2016
You praise Grassmarket traders and residents and the Council for their plan to clear up litter (Leader, 29 April) but omit to mention the other great disgrace to our environment: graffiti. Who is going to deal with that now that Police Scotland takes no interest in trying trace the culprits?
While the City Council will take immediate action on offensive graffiti, it does little about graffiti tags, which are even visible on Princes Street on Council property. It could warn private owners and public companies of their obligation to remove graffiti and, if they do not do so, charge them for cleaning it. However, my experience is that the Council would rather not bother.
You praise Grassmarket traders and residents and the Council for their plan to clear up litter (Leader, 29 April) but omit to mention the other great disgrace to our environment: graffiti. Who is going to deal with that now that Police Scotland takes no interest in trying trace the culprits?
While the City Council will take immediate action on offensive graffiti, it does little about graffiti tags, which are even visible on Princes Street on Council property. It could warn private owners and public companies of their obligation to remove graffiti and, if they do not do so, charge them for cleaning it. However, my experience is that the Council would rather not bother.
To The Scotsman (26 Apr 2016) published 27 Apr 2016
Ilona Amos's enthusiasm for solar PV generation ('Inside Environment', 26 April) should be tempered by caution. Firstly, as she mentions, one needs to spend several thousand pounds on installing the panels and wait years for that to pay off before any profit is seen. One wonders if such panels actually add to the sale value of a house; if not, then that capital will not be recovered.
Not all houses have roofs facing south or are in an area where such panels are permitted (e.g. not allowed to be visible in conservation areas).
Then what happens at night or when there's dense cloud? Evidently, power is drawn from the grid. So unless the grid has some form of massive storage system (unlikely) it has to stand by waiting for the sun to go down. Grid controllers have no control over the PV input, or any renewable generation, and have to adjust generation from reliable sources to compensate and maintain voltage. That makes the non-renewable generation inefficient and more costly.
Generating electricity from renewable sources seem fine and environmentally-friendly unless one is grid controller. Then its a headache.
How about insisting that anyone who wants to generate their own electricity should be disconnected from the grid and made to rely on their own resources?
Ilona Amos's enthusiasm for solar PV generation ('Inside Environment', 26 April) should be tempered by caution. Firstly, as she mentions, one needs to spend several thousand pounds on installing the panels and wait years for that to pay off before any profit is seen. One wonders if such panels actually add to the sale value of a house; if not, then that capital will not be recovered.
Not all houses have roofs facing south or are in an area where such panels are permitted (e.g. not allowed to be visible in conservation areas).
Then what happens at night or when there's dense cloud? Evidently, power is drawn from the grid. So unless the grid has some form of massive storage system (unlikely) it has to stand by waiting for the sun to go down. Grid controllers have no control over the PV input, or any renewable generation, and have to adjust generation from reliable sources to compensate and maintain voltage. That makes the non-renewable generation inefficient and more costly.
Generating electricity from renewable sources seem fine and environmentally-friendly unless one is grid controller. Then its a headache.
How about insisting that anyone who wants to generate their own electricity should be disconnected from the grid and made to rely on their own resources?
To Edinburgh Evening News (26 Apr 2016) not published
I'd be scared too ('Third of city drivers wheelie scared of changing a tyre', 25 April); one needs special equipment to change a tyre, equipment not normally carried by motorists.
However, changing a wheel is not so difficult, although perhaps that's what you meant. You should be clearer.
I'd be scared too ('Third of city drivers wheelie scared of changing a tyre', 25 April); one needs special equipment to change a tyre, equipment not normally carried by motorists.
However, changing a wheel is not so difficult, although perhaps that's what you meant. You should be clearer.
To Scotland on Sunday (25 Apr 2016) published 1 May 2016
The scariest comment in your edition of 24 April was Prof James Curran's warning that 'the world may be on the brink of irreversible 'runaway' climate change' ('Earth has reached 'peak carbon', says climate expert').
Our civilisation faces many challenges, such as war, terrorism and over-population, but these will hardly matter if we ruin the climate and so bring about its collapse due to 'mass extinctions, ocean acidification, melting ice caps, sea level rises and extreme weather'.
Not enough is being or will be done to reduce greenhouse gas emissions; we carry on as if nothing much will change. By the time we all realise the extent of the problem, it will be too late and only drastic and very expensive geoengineering will save us.
The scariest comment in your edition of 24 April was Prof James Curran's warning that 'the world may be on the brink of irreversible 'runaway' climate change' ('Earth has reached 'peak carbon', says climate expert').
Our civilisation faces many challenges, such as war, terrorism and over-population, but these will hardly matter if we ruin the climate and so bring about its collapse due to 'mass extinctions, ocean acidification, melting ice caps, sea level rises and extreme weather'.
Not enough is being or will be done to reduce greenhouse gas emissions; we carry on as if nothing much will change. By the time we all realise the extent of the problem, it will be too late and only drastic and very expensive geoengineering will save us.
To The Scotsman (22 Apr 2016) published 23 Apr 2016
Gosh! Girls fear mathematics more than they fear boys, or so you tell us ('Fear rather than talent affects girls' mathematics', 22 April). I don't know how that's measured but surely these must be fearsome boys. Is this only in co-educational schools?
Gosh! Girls fear mathematics more than they fear boys, or so you tell us ('Fear rather than talent affects girls' mathematics', 22 April). I don't know how that's measured but surely these must be fearsome boys. Is this only in co-educational schools?
To The Scotsman (13 Apr 2016) published 15 Apr 2016
If Lang Banks of WWF knows of research that shows that it is possible to have a secure, efficient electricity supply system based 'almost entirely' on renewable generation by 2030 ('Why no debate on moving to zero carbon economy?', 13 April), then I would like to see the source. In fact, I think that is a fanciful idea.
Nor can I see renewables replacing transport and heating fuels. Transport has to be either based on electricity or hydrogen and the latter has to replace methane in the gas grid. The main source of hydrogen is coal.
If Lang Banks of WWF knows of research that shows that it is possible to have a secure, efficient electricity supply system based 'almost entirely' on renewable generation by 2030 ('Why no debate on moving to zero carbon economy?', 13 April), then I would like to see the source. In fact, I think that is a fanciful idea.
Nor can I see renewables replacing transport and heating fuels. Transport has to be either based on electricity or hydrogen and the latter has to replace methane in the gas grid. The main source of hydrogen is coal.
To The Scotsman (7 Apr 2016) not published
By describing it as 'apparent', Bill Macdonald (Letters, 7 April) seems not to want to believe that there has been a decline in religious belief in Scotland. However, that it what the recent Social Attitudes Survey found.
But Mr Macdonald's reasons for belief are all subjective. He even seems to discount evidence, not that the story about Doubting Thomas can be taken seriously.
The evidence in the Gospels, closely examined, does not support modern Christian beliefs, certainly not that Jesus was divine. Christianity is a widespread superstition based on nothing but wish-fulfilment.
By describing it as 'apparent', Bill Macdonald (Letters, 7 April) seems not to want to believe that there has been a decline in religious belief in Scotland. However, that it what the recent Social Attitudes Survey found.
But Mr Macdonald's reasons for belief are all subjective. He even seems to discount evidence, not that the story about Doubting Thomas can be taken seriously.
The evidence in the Gospels, closely examined, does not support modern Christian beliefs, certainly not that Jesus was divine. Christianity is a widespread superstition based on nothing but wish-fulfilment.
To The Scotsman (1 Apr 2016) not published
The existence of the universe is hardly evidence for the existence of God (Richard Lucas, letter 30 March). Certainly it is awesome and requires an explanation, not just for its existence but its origin. But cosmologists have provided one without invoking mysticism.
Its 'fine tuning' (the surprising precision of nature’s physical constants), which, if they were different, would mean that our universe would not exist (sometimes referred to as the 'anthropic principle') is explicable if, as cosmologists believe, our universe is merely one of very many which appear either in sequence or in parallel within an eternal multiverse. Naturally, if each universe which appears has slightly different settings of the physical constants, one will eventually appear that has those we see in our universe. It is a cosmological version of natural selection!
Consequently, the existence of our universe is no surprise and is not evidence for a creator. Nor is life (it was bound to arise somewhere), moral obligations or consciousness.
The existence of the universe is hardly evidence for the existence of God (Richard Lucas, letter 30 March). Certainly it is awesome and requires an explanation, not just for its existence but its origin. But cosmologists have provided one without invoking mysticism.
Its 'fine tuning' (the surprising precision of nature’s physical constants), which, if they were different, would mean that our universe would not exist (sometimes referred to as the 'anthropic principle') is explicable if, as cosmologists believe, our universe is merely one of very many which appear either in sequence or in parallel within an eternal multiverse. Naturally, if each universe which appears has slightly different settings of the physical constants, one will eventually appear that has those we see in our universe. It is a cosmological version of natural selection!
Consequently, the existence of our universe is no surprise and is not evidence for a creator. Nor is life (it was bound to arise somewhere), moral obligations or consciousness.
To The Scotsman (30 Mar 2016) published 31 Mar 2016
You report that The First Minister has stated that unless it can be proved beyond doubt that there is no risk to health, the environment and communities, then fracking will never be allowed in Scotland ('Energy giant Ineos sparks fresh fracking fears with drilling plans', 29 March).
In that case, fracking will certainly not be proceeding. One cannot prove a negative.
What the First Minister should be looking for is an assurance that, so far as is known to the technologists involved, no danger to health, the environment and the communities has been found.
You report that The First Minister has stated that unless it can be proved beyond doubt that there is no risk to health, the environment and communities, then fracking will never be allowed in Scotland ('Energy giant Ineos sparks fresh fracking fears with drilling plans', 29 March).
In that case, fracking will certainly not be proceeding. One cannot prove a negative.
What the First Minister should be looking for is an assurance that, so far as is known to the technologists involved, no danger to health, the environment and the communities has been found.
To The Scotsman (28 Mar 2016) published 29 Mar 2016
Richard Lucas makes a childish attempt to justify his faith by comparing Christianity with broken windows (Letter[s], 28 March).
His belief is predicated on the notion that mankind has rebelled against God and is indifferent to him. But of course this presume that such a god exists.
The idea that we can make atonement by believing that God incarnated himself as Jesus flies in the face of the evidence in the Gospels that Jesus, as a Jew, could never have believed himself to be a god, certainly not Yahweh and even denied it.
He may have believed that he was the expected Messiah, but Messiahs are as human as any other person. Nor was Jesus out to save the world from sin; he had a plan to rule it, a plan that failed.
Richard Lucas should stop listening to evangelical Christian myths and study his New Testament more thoroughly and with more scepticism.
Richard Lucas makes a childish attempt to justify his faith by comparing Christianity with broken windows (Letter[s], 28 March).
His belief is predicated on the notion that mankind has rebelled against God and is indifferent to him. But of course this presume that such a god exists.
The idea that we can make atonement by believing that God incarnated himself as Jesus flies in the face of the evidence in the Gospels that Jesus, as a Jew, could never have believed himself to be a god, certainly not Yahweh and even denied it.
He may have believed that he was the expected Messiah, but Messiahs are as human as any other person. Nor was Jesus out to save the world from sin; he had a plan to rule it, a plan that failed.
Richard Lucas should stop listening to evangelical Christian myths and study his New Testament more thoroughly and with more scepticism.
To The Scotsman (24 Mar 2016) published 25 Mar 2016
I was surprised that Fife police have traced and, I hope, charged two youths in relation to graffiti offences ('Two 12-year-olds reported over spate of graffiti'[The Scotsman], 24 March).
Graffiti is a criminal offence and needs to be reported. But my attempts to do so over the years have not met with any results. Police tell me that only the relevant property owners should report it (they usually don't) and that I should not email them with pictures of graffiti tags unless I saw the graffiti being sprayed (very unlikely).
In fact, due to this attitude, I have stopped reporting it on behalf of my local community council. I still try to persuade the owners to remove graffiti and some do so promptly. Others take a long time and sometimes only react when one contacts the CEO!
We need a national campaign to rid our streets of this vandalism and catch the culprits.
I was surprised that Fife police have traced and, I hope, charged two youths in relation to graffiti offences ('Two 12-year-olds reported over spate of graffiti'[The Scotsman], 24 March).
Graffiti is a criminal offence and needs to be reported. But my attempts to do so over the years have not met with any results. Police tell me that only the relevant property owners should report it (they usually don't) and that I should not email them with pictures of graffiti tags unless I saw the graffiti being sprayed (very unlikely).
In fact, due to this attitude, I have stopped reporting it on behalf of my local community council. I still try to persuade the owners to remove graffiti and some do so promptly. Others take a long time and sometimes only react when one contacts the CEO!
We need a national campaign to rid our streets of this vandalism and catch the culprits.
To The Edinburgh News (22 Mar 2016) published 23 Mar 2016
Edinburgh Makar's 'poem' about the Seafield Waste Water Treatment Works (21 March) refers to the 'outlet piped far into the shining Forth' (the Firth of Forth only looks 'shining' from Fife!).
In fact, as I pointed out in my letter to you at this time last year, the discharge pipe extends only 800 metres in the Firth (not into the North Sea as Scottish Water claim). At some times in summer this discharge has polluted nearby beaches.
Has the Makar overlooked this?
Edinburgh Makar's 'poem' about the Seafield Waste Water Treatment Works (21 March) refers to the 'outlet piped far into the shining Forth' (the Firth of Forth only looks 'shining' from Fife!).
In fact, as I pointed out in my letter to you at this time last year, the discharge pipe extends only 800 metres in the Firth (not into the North Sea as Scottish Water claim). At some times in summer this discharge has polluted nearby beaches.
Has the Makar overlooked this?
To The Scotsman (21 Mar 2016) published 22 Mar 2016
You quote Business Minister Anna Soubry as claiming that laser pens under one 'megawatt' are safe ('Clampdown on laser pens urged after eye damage', 21 March).
A 1 MW laser would be a frighteningly dangerous weapon and is being used as such.
What I think was meant was laser pens under 1 milliwatt (mW, not MW), a billion times less powerful.
You quote Business Minister Anna Soubry as claiming that laser pens under one 'megawatt' are safe ('Clampdown on laser pens urged after eye damage', 21 March).
A 1 MW laser would be a frighteningly dangerous weapon and is being used as such.
What I think was meant was laser pens under 1 milliwatt (mW, not MW), a billion times less powerful.
To Radio Times (20 Mar 2016) not published
Like most clerics and nearly everyone else (not just Christians), Bishop Nick Baines misunderstands Judas ('Where's God on TV?', RT 19-25 March).
It is not all about betrayal, faith, hope and disappointment. Judas, the most loyal of Jesus' disciples (trusted with their purse) only did what he was told. The evidence is there in the Gospels. Jesus knew what Judas was going to do and told him to go and do it; he even announced that one of his friends would betray him, as if that was his plan. Indeed, if it wasn't his plan, why wait around in Gethsemane to be arrested (being anxious that it was taking so long) and fail to defend himself during interrogation and trial?
Judas was essential to this plan: told to betray Jesus so that Jesus could get arrested and crucified and so revive as the expected Messiah. Unfortunately this plan failed--Jesus died during the crucifixion.
Read all about it in my book The Rise and Fall of Jesus (WPS 2009)
Like most clerics and nearly everyone else (not just Christians), Bishop Nick Baines misunderstands Judas ('Where's God on TV?', RT 19-25 March).
It is not all about betrayal, faith, hope and disappointment. Judas, the most loyal of Jesus' disciples (trusted with their purse) only did what he was told. The evidence is there in the Gospels. Jesus knew what Judas was going to do and told him to go and do it; he even announced that one of his friends would betray him, as if that was his plan. Indeed, if it wasn't his plan, why wait around in Gethsemane to be arrested (being anxious that it was taking so long) and fail to defend himself during interrogation and trial?
Judas was essential to this plan: told to betray Jesus so that Jesus could get arrested and crucified and so revive as the expected Messiah. Unfortunately this plan failed--Jesus died during the crucifixion.
Read all about it in my book The Rise and Fall of Jesus (WPS 2009)
To The Scotsman (18 Mar 16) published 19 Mar 2016
WWF's director Lang Banks loses no opportunity to claim that nuclear power is 'unreliable' (Unplanned shutdown of Torness reactor, 18 March). This time it is merely because one reactor at Torness was taken off line due to a faulty valve, not necessarily in the reactor itself!
Mr Banks makes a fool of himself and the whole green movement by over-reacting to even the slightest defect in a nuclear power plant, displaying a complete lack of a sense of proportion and his unjustified prejudice.
In fact nuclear power has one of the highest load factors in the generation industry, while wind farms have one of the lowest, making nuclear the most reliable generation method for base load.
WWF's director Lang Banks loses no opportunity to claim that nuclear power is 'unreliable' (Unplanned shutdown of Torness reactor, 18 March). This time it is merely because one reactor at Torness was taken off line due to a faulty valve, not necessarily in the reactor itself!
Mr Banks makes a fool of himself and the whole green movement by over-reacting to even the slightest defect in a nuclear power plant, displaying a complete lack of a sense of proportion and his unjustified prejudice.
In fact nuclear power has one of the highest load factors in the generation industry, while wind farms have one of the lowest, making nuclear the most reliable generation method for base load.
To The Sunday Times (14 Mar 2016) not published
Your should take more care in describing the capacity of generation plant. You describe the price of lithium-ion batteries in relation to 'capacity' in kilowatt-hours ('You may laugh at this big battery, but it could cut your energy bills by 70%', Business 13 March). But a kWh is not a capacity unit; it is an energy unit. You got it right in your paragraph about solar panels and the capacity of Drax power station. 'Capacity' is the power that plant can produce, usually in watts or multiple watt units.
Your should take more care in describing the capacity of generation plant. You describe the price of lithium-ion batteries in relation to 'capacity' in kilowatt-hours ('You may laugh at this big battery, but it could cut your energy bills by 70%', Business 13 March). But a kWh is not a capacity unit; it is an energy unit. You got it right in your paragraph about solar panels and the capacity of Drax power station. 'Capacity' is the power that plant can produce, usually in watts or multiple watt units.
To The Scotsman (11 Mar 2016) not published
Geoff Moore claims that the electricity for water electrolysis (producing hydrogen) comes from fossil fuels (Letter, 11 March).
It could do, but, to avoid the production of greenhouse gases, it would be more sensible to get the electricity from renewables or nuclear power. A hydrogen economy does not have to add to global warming.
As to the efficiency of electrolysis, the losses are only about 30 per cent (not 60 or 70% as Mr Moore claims) and efforts are being made to reduce this heat loss. In any case, the heat does not have to be wasted; uses can be found for it.
In fact about 95 per cent of hydrogen production comes from the steam reforming of natural gas, of which there seem to be endless supplies.
Geoff Moore claims that the electricity for water electrolysis (producing hydrogen) comes from fossil fuels (Letter, 11 March).
It could do, but, to avoid the production of greenhouse gases, it would be more sensible to get the electricity from renewables or nuclear power. A hydrogen economy does not have to add to global warming.
As to the efficiency of electrolysis, the losses are only about 30 per cent (not 60 or 70% as Mr Moore claims) and efforts are being made to reduce this heat loss. In any case, the heat does not have to be wasted; uses can be found for it.
In fact about 95 per cent of hydrogen production comes from the steam reforming of natural gas, of which there seem to be endless supplies.
To The Scotsman (5 Mar 2016) not published
So now we have four parties in Holyrood opposed to fracking (SNP, Greens, Labour and the LibDems, the latter's leadership ignoring a conference vote to remove a moratorium--your report 5 March), all trying to outbid each other.
They all appear to have ignored or not even sought technical advice, which is that the technology is safe with proper safeguards.
Pandering to popular opinion is not doing Scotland any favours. Refusing to countenance the extraction of indigenous gas puts us at the mercy of those countries from which we import gas (Russia, Algeria, USA, etc.) and their prices. It also threatens the security of gas supplies.
Claiming that fracking would undermine what is described as Scotland's 'clean, green brand' appears to ignore that fact that Scotland is not all that clean. There is litter and graffiti everywhere and burning diesel and petrol for road transport is hardly 'green'.
Nor does planting wind farms across the countryside make it 'clean'.
The idea that Scotland is clean and green is fanciful as the idea that technologies like genetic modification and fracking are dangerous and harmful to Scotland's reputation.
The parties opposed to the deployment of modern technology only do so because they think there are votes in it. Perhaps there are, but that is not in Scotland's interests. Spinelessly bending popular but ignorant opinion is shameful.
So now we have four parties in Holyrood opposed to fracking (SNP, Greens, Labour and the LibDems, the latter's leadership ignoring a conference vote to remove a moratorium--your report 5 March), all trying to outbid each other.
They all appear to have ignored or not even sought technical advice, which is that the technology is safe with proper safeguards.
Pandering to popular opinion is not doing Scotland any favours. Refusing to countenance the extraction of indigenous gas puts us at the mercy of those countries from which we import gas (Russia, Algeria, USA, etc.) and their prices. It also threatens the security of gas supplies.
Claiming that fracking would undermine what is described as Scotland's 'clean, green brand' appears to ignore that fact that Scotland is not all that clean. There is litter and graffiti everywhere and burning diesel and petrol for road transport is hardly 'green'.
Nor does planting wind farms across the countryside make it 'clean'.
The idea that Scotland is clean and green is fanciful as the idea that technologies like genetic modification and fracking are dangerous and harmful to Scotland's reputation.
The parties opposed to the deployment of modern technology only do so because they think there are votes in it. Perhaps there are, but that is not in Scotland's interests. Spinelessly bending popular but ignorant opinion is shameful.
To The Scotsman (4 Mar 2016) published 7 Mar 2016 and again on 14 March!
So Scottish Labour has pledged to ban fracking (your report, 4 March). Is that with scientific support or in spite of it? Ineos is right; extraction is safe and this is a once in a generation opportunity to secure jobs and much-needed investment. But it will also secure gas supplies against interruption. At present, although some gas comes from UK gas fields, much is imported from countries who could restrict or stop supplies. Ineos will import it from the USA, presumably from fracking there.
If Labour is concerned about the safety of fracking, consider the safety of not having secure gas supplies. While gas is an evironmentally-damaging fossil fuel, which we need to stop using as soon as possible, it's less damaging than coal. Burning coal should cease immediately and we should replace it by gas in the short term until we find another gas such as hydrogen to heat our buildings and fuel road vehicles.
Fracking would enable us to undertake this transition; banning fracking only makes things worse.
So Scottish Labour has pledged to ban fracking (your report, 4 March). Is that with scientific support or in spite of it? Ineos is right; extraction is safe and this is a once in a generation opportunity to secure jobs and much-needed investment. But it will also secure gas supplies against interruption. At present, although some gas comes from UK gas fields, much is imported from countries who could restrict or stop supplies. Ineos will import it from the USA, presumably from fracking there.
If Labour is concerned about the safety of fracking, consider the safety of not having secure gas supplies. While gas is an evironmentally-damaging fossil fuel, which we need to stop using as soon as possible, it's less damaging than coal. Burning coal should cease immediately and we should replace it by gas in the short term until we find another gas such as hydrogen to heat our buildings and fuel road vehicles.
Fracking would enable us to undertake this transition; banning fracking only makes things worse.
To The Scotsman (2 Mar 2016) published 3 Mar 2016
The picture accompanying your note about Europa (Now & Then, 2 March) seems to show the swirling clouds of Jupiter, not the surface of Europa.
The picture accompanying your note about Europa (Now & Then, 2 March) seems to show the swirling clouds of Jupiter, not the surface of Europa.
To The Scotsman (20 Feb 2016) published 22 Feb 2016
Douglas Turner may well be right: that the Scottish Greens are 'blind' to the benefits of nuclear power because of the accidents at Chernobyl and Fukushima (Point of View, 19 February), although the blindness is probably more deep-rooted. Such blindness is founded on myths, not reality.
The type of reactor built at Chernobyl, and elsewhere in the former Soviet Union, was an inherently dangerous design that would not even have been considered in the West. Furthermore, it was subjected to an experiment that should never have been considered. Unfortunately 56 people died, mainly fire-fighters ill-equiped to tackle the job and some children who could have been saved from thyroid cancer by the issue of iodine tablets. The evacuation of Pripyat was an unnecessary overreaction and the so-called 'exclusion zone' was never dangerous. People still live in it without harm.
The accident at Fukushima, caused by a tsunami and inadequate back-up power supplies was unfortunate. Although about 20,000 died in the tsunami, no one has died from radiation, nor are they likely to. However, it seems that about 2000 people have died as a result of the unnecessary evacuation. They could have stayed quite safely in their homes.
In short, panic reactions seem to cause more deaths that radiation, which, at low levels, is not harmful (we live all the time with background radiation).
The irrational decision of the German government to close all its nuclear station after the Fukushima event was another panic reaction that has the potential to cause more deaths due to air pollution from brown-coal stations and power losses due to reliance on erratic renewable generation.
Some environmentalists are not as blind as the Scottish Greens and the Scottish Government and see the advantages of nuclear power, namely the generation of reliable base load electricity without the emission of greenhouse gases. The construction of new nuclear plants, delayed by several UK and Scottish governments, is long overdue.
To The Scotsman (17 Feb 2016) published 18 Feb 2016
The extension of operation granted to Torness is welcome news, not just for the more than 700 people who work there and the many more who benefit as a result, but for our electricity supply and the environment ('Seven more years for nuclear at Torness, 17 February).
However, the comments of the Scottish Greens spokesperson you quote are just silly. EDF is not 'dictating energy policy'. In fact the extension is in line with Scottish Government policy and approved by the UK's independent Office of Nuclear Regulation (energy is reserved to the UK Government). How is democracy undermined in that?
As for focusing on climate change, that's exactly what nuclear power does: it produces electricity without producing greenhouse gases. Some environmentalists approve of that, so what's makes the Scottish Greens so blind?
To Scotland on Sunday (15 Feb 2016) not published
I agree that juries should not have to decide between three options (Yes, no and maybe); they should be faced with an either/or option ('The jury's still out', 14 February).
But the way to do that is not to abandon the 'nor proven' verdict but to revert to the old Scottish practice of 'proven' or 'not proven' (i.e. discard the 'guilty' or 'not guilty' options, which were imported from English law).
Charges have to proved (i.e. tested), either beyond reasonable doubt or on the balance of probabilities. So Scots law was precise and logical. No one knows whether or not an accused is in fact guilty or not-guilty. All a verdict finds is whether or not the prosecution have proved its case.
So the solution, to enhance Scots law and rationalise it, is to go back to just two verdicts: 'proven' or 'not proven'. The public should learn to understand these verdicts and their implications.
By the way, why do you illustrated your article with a picture of a jury box with only 14 seats? It cannot be a Scots jury box.
Douglas Turner may well be right: that the Scottish Greens are 'blind' to the benefits of nuclear power because of the accidents at Chernobyl and Fukushima (Point of View, 19 February), although the blindness is probably more deep-rooted. Such blindness is founded on myths, not reality.
The type of reactor built at Chernobyl, and elsewhere in the former Soviet Union, was an inherently dangerous design that would not even have been considered in the West. Furthermore, it was subjected to an experiment that should never have been considered. Unfortunately 56 people died, mainly fire-fighters ill-equiped to tackle the job and some children who could have been saved from thyroid cancer by the issue of iodine tablets. The evacuation of Pripyat was an unnecessary overreaction and the so-called 'exclusion zone' was never dangerous. People still live in it without harm.
The accident at Fukushima, caused by a tsunami and inadequate back-up power supplies was unfortunate. Although about 20,000 died in the tsunami, no one has died from radiation, nor are they likely to. However, it seems that about 2000 people have died as a result of the unnecessary evacuation. They could have stayed quite safely in their homes.
In short, panic reactions seem to cause more deaths that radiation, which, at low levels, is not harmful (we live all the time with background radiation).
The irrational decision of the German government to close all its nuclear station after the Fukushima event was another panic reaction that has the potential to cause more deaths due to air pollution from brown-coal stations and power losses due to reliance on erratic renewable generation.
Some environmentalists are not as blind as the Scottish Greens and the Scottish Government and see the advantages of nuclear power, namely the generation of reliable base load electricity without the emission of greenhouse gases. The construction of new nuclear plants, delayed by several UK and Scottish governments, is long overdue.
To The Scotsman (17 Feb 2016) published 18 Feb 2016
The extension of operation granted to Torness is welcome news, not just for the more than 700 people who work there and the many more who benefit as a result, but for our electricity supply and the environment ('Seven more years for nuclear at Torness, 17 February).
However, the comments of the Scottish Greens spokesperson you quote are just silly. EDF is not 'dictating energy policy'. In fact the extension is in line with Scottish Government policy and approved by the UK's independent Office of Nuclear Regulation (energy is reserved to the UK Government). How is democracy undermined in that?
As for focusing on climate change, that's exactly what nuclear power does: it produces electricity without producing greenhouse gases. Some environmentalists approve of that, so what's makes the Scottish Greens so blind?
To Scotland on Sunday (15 Feb 2016) not published
I agree that juries should not have to decide between three options (Yes, no and maybe); they should be faced with an either/or option ('The jury's still out', 14 February).
But the way to do that is not to abandon the 'nor proven' verdict but to revert to the old Scottish practice of 'proven' or 'not proven' (i.e. discard the 'guilty' or 'not guilty' options, which were imported from English law).
Charges have to proved (i.e. tested), either beyond reasonable doubt or on the balance of probabilities. So Scots law was precise and logical. No one knows whether or not an accused is in fact guilty or not-guilty. All a verdict finds is whether or not the prosecution have proved its case.
So the solution, to enhance Scots law and rationalise it, is to go back to just two verdicts: 'proven' or 'not proven'. The public should learn to understand these verdicts and their implications.
By the way, why do you illustrated your article with a picture of a jury box with only 14 seats? It cannot be a Scots jury box.
To The Scotsman (11 Feb 2016) published 12 Feb 2016
Peter Kearney's grasp of science is evidently as slender as his understanding of the real origin of Christianity and the Nativity stories ('New findings about light and mass suggest that science is not the rock some say it is', Friends of the Scotsman, 10 February).
Mr Kearney seems excited by the idea (perhaps announced as I write) that gravitational waves have been detected and believes that this would overthrow Newton's law of gravity.
Too late! That was overthrown 100 years ago by Einstein's General Theory of Relativity. If gravitational waves are detected, that would merely be a confirmation of the Theory. It would not shake the foundations of science, nor will it be evidence of the work of a Creator.
Science explores the universe and tries to explain it, usually successfully. Religion explains nothing; it only obscures our view of the universe with mysticism.
Peter Kearney's grasp of science is evidently as slender as his understanding of the real origin of Christianity and the Nativity stories ('New findings about light and mass suggest that science is not the rock some say it is', Friends of the Scotsman, 10 February).
Mr Kearney seems excited by the idea (perhaps announced as I write) that gravitational waves have been detected and believes that this would overthrow Newton's law of gravity.
Too late! That was overthrown 100 years ago by Einstein's General Theory of Relativity. If gravitational waves are detected, that would merely be a confirmation of the Theory. It would not shake the foundations of science, nor will it be evidence of the work of a Creator.
Science explores the universe and tries to explain it, usually successfully. Religion explains nothing; it only obscures our view of the universe with mysticism.
To The Scotsman (9 Feb 2016) published 10 Feb 2016
You claim that last month, wind power provided half of Scotland's 'energy' needs (8 February).
In fact in seems to have provided half of Scotland's electricity demand (not all energy is in the form of electricity) and all of the domestic electricity demand on 22 days.
Of course that means that on 9 days it did not meet domestic demand and on some days it may have met none of Scotland's overall demand. As a write wind is meeting only 6.21 per cent of UK electricity demand, so perhaps the same proportion of Scotland's demand.
Electricity from wind is all very well, if one doesn't mind the damage to the landscape (and seascape) and the cost to consumers in higher bills, but when the wind drops, demand must be met from some thermal generation, of which there will not be enough in Scotland after Longannet and Boddom close, followed by Hunterston B and Torness.
By putting its trust in renewables, the Scottish Government puts our very necessary electricity supply at risk.
You claim that last month, wind power provided half of Scotland's 'energy' needs (8 February).
In fact in seems to have provided half of Scotland's electricity demand (not all energy is in the form of electricity) and all of the domestic electricity demand on 22 days.
Of course that means that on 9 days it did not meet domestic demand and on some days it may have met none of Scotland's overall demand. As a write wind is meeting only 6.21 per cent of UK electricity demand, so perhaps the same proportion of Scotland's demand.
Electricity from wind is all very well, if one doesn't mind the damage to the landscape (and seascape) and the cost to consumers in higher bills, but when the wind drops, demand must be met from some thermal generation, of which there will not be enough in Scotland after Longannet and Boddom close, followed by Hunterston B and Torness.
By putting its trust in renewables, the Scottish Government puts our very necessary electricity supply at risk.
To The Sunday Times (8 Feb 2016) not published
Bryan Appleyard claimed that Kenneth Arnold 'saw a squadron of alien spacecraft' (Aliens: The Truth is still out there', News Review, 7 February).
In fact what he saw and reported were a group of bright objects which he though were travelling very fast across the Cascade Mountains. He knew nothing about alien spaceships and thought they might be secret rocket craft. It was his description of their behaviour that coined the phrase 'flying saucers'.
To find out what he actually saw, go to http://www.steuartcampbell.com/the-arnold-report-explained.html.
Bryan Appleyard claimed that Kenneth Arnold 'saw a squadron of alien spacecraft' (Aliens: The Truth is still out there', News Review, 7 February).
In fact what he saw and reported were a group of bright objects which he though were travelling very fast across the Cascade Mountains. He knew nothing about alien spaceships and thought they might be secret rocket craft. It was his description of their behaviour that coined the phrase 'flying saucers'.
To find out what he actually saw, go to http://www.steuartcampbell.com/the-arnold-report-explained.html.
To The Scotsman (5 Feb 2016 and 6 Feb) published 8 Feb 2016
Professor James C Curren declared that 'as far as possible, we must return the climate to something more normal' ('No surprise we're getting so many storms', 3 February).
Surely, but he suggests no way of doing it (it's certainly beyond SEPA's or even the UK's ability). What's needed is global action to solve a global problem.
Let's be clear that reducing greenhouse gas emissions is not going to work; it's too little and too late. With a huge rise in sea level predicted as the ice sheets of Antarctica and Greenland melt, the matter cannot be left to the good will of everyone to stop emitting CO2. The drowning major cities like London and New York threatens the world economy and perhaps civilisation itself.
Consequently, the only technical fix left is to reduce insolation, the energy received on Earth from the Sun. Our activities have caused the planet to warm, so we have to cool it down again--and soon!
Several methods of doing this have been suggested but no one is in charge. Who is going to grasp this nettle before it is too late?
Professor James C Curren declared that 'as far as possible, we must return the climate to something more normal' ('No surprise we're getting so many storms', 3 February).
Surely, but he suggests no way of doing it (it's certainly beyond SEPA's or even the UK's ability). What's needed is global action to solve a global problem.
Let's be clear that reducing greenhouse gas emissions is not going to work; it's too little and too late. With a huge rise in sea level predicted as the ice sheets of Antarctica and Greenland melt, the matter cannot be left to the good will of everyone to stop emitting CO2. The drowning major cities like London and New York threatens the world economy and perhaps civilisation itself.
Consequently, the only technical fix left is to reduce insolation, the energy received on Earth from the Sun. Our activities have caused the planet to warm, so we have to cool it down again--and soon!
Several methods of doing this have been suggested but no one is in charge. Who is going to grasp this nettle before it is too late?
To The Scotsman (2 Feb 2016) published 3 Feb 2016
George Shering (Letter, 2 February) seems to be obsessed with energy leaking into the environment from electricity generation and supports renewables because they merely recycle energy. He overlooks the defects of renewables, especially wind with its unreliability.
Essentially electricity supply has to be reliable and stable. For that reason, although the future may be electric, it will not be a renewables future, certainly not for base load.
The energy losses in thermal generation of electricity are inevitable but no danger to the environment (the addition to global warming will be negligible). Mr Shering should note that the energy derived from uranium is energy that would be released anyway over time--we just accelerate it in reactors.
George Shering (Letter, 2 February) seems to be obsessed with energy leaking into the environment from electricity generation and supports renewables because they merely recycle energy. He overlooks the defects of renewables, especially wind with its unreliability.
Essentially electricity supply has to be reliable and stable. For that reason, although the future may be electric, it will not be a renewables future, certainly not for base load.
The energy losses in thermal generation of electricity are inevitable but no danger to the environment (the addition to global warming will be negligible). Mr Shering should note that the energy derived from uranium is energy that would be released anyway over time--we just accelerate it in reactors.
To The Scotsman (29 Jan 2016) published 30 Jan 2016
I am not sure why Joyce McMillan thinks it desirable that we meet almost all our energy needs by the mid-century (2050?) from renewables ('Sea change required in energy policy',[Perspective,] 29 January), but, in any case that would be impossible.
Even meeting all our electricity demand, if that's what she meant, will be impossible. Not even the SNP Government expects to meet all electricity consumer demand from renewables. Apparently it recognises that there will be times when renewables will be off-line and that generation will have to come from reliable sources (it suggests 2.5 GW from thermal generation and then only from plant fitted with carbon capture and storage, which has not yet been demonstrated).
[And there's no] No mention of the prospect that electricity will have to be imported from England to meet demand at such times.
Relying on expensive and landscape-ruining renewables is both stupid and unnecessary. They will not even reduce greenhouse emissions. Two or three nuclear power plants in Scotland would meet all our electricity demand (two already meet about 35 per cent of it) without damaging either the global climate or Scotland's environment.
I am not sure why Joyce McMillan thinks it desirable that we meet almost all our energy needs by the mid-century (2050?) from renewables ('Sea change required in energy policy',[Perspective,] 29 January), but, in any case that would be impossible.
Even meeting all our electricity demand, if that's what she meant, will be impossible. Not even the SNP Government expects to meet all electricity consumer demand from renewables. Apparently it recognises that there will be times when renewables will be off-line and that generation will have to come from reliable sources (it suggests 2.5 GW from thermal generation and then only from plant fitted with carbon capture and storage, which has not yet been demonstrated).
[And there's no] No mention of the prospect that electricity will have to be imported from England to meet demand at such times.
Relying on expensive and landscape-ruining renewables is both stupid and unnecessary. They will not even reduce greenhouse emissions. Two or three nuclear power plants in Scotland would meet all our electricity demand (two already meet about 35 per cent of it) without damaging either the global climate or Scotland's environment.
To The Edinburgh News (27 Jan 2016) published 28 Jan 2016
As an SNP candidate, Toni Giugliano should know that it is not SNP policy to 'generate all our electricity from renewable sources by 2020' (Platform, 26 January).
The policy is to generate the equivalent of at least 100 per cent of gross electricity consumption from renewable sources by 2020. Even the SNP realises that all our electricity cannot come from renewables. Indeed it has declared that renewable generation will be supported by a minimum of 2.5 GW of thermal generation, presumably gas-fired, progressively fitted with carbon capture and storage (CCS). Further it proposes to reduce demand by 12 per cent, but with no target date for that or any idea of how it could be done.
Whether or not all this is practical is another matter. Personally, I doubt it. More likely, the SNP's policy will, at times, lead to huge imports of electricity from England and/or power failures.
As an SNP candidate, Toni Giugliano should know that it is not SNP policy to 'generate all our electricity from renewable sources by 2020' (Platform, 26 January).
The policy is to generate the equivalent of at least 100 per cent of gross electricity consumption from renewable sources by 2020. Even the SNP realises that all our electricity cannot come from renewables. Indeed it has declared that renewable generation will be supported by a minimum of 2.5 GW of thermal generation, presumably gas-fired, progressively fitted with carbon capture and storage (CCS). Further it proposes to reduce demand by 12 per cent, but with no target date for that or any idea of how it could be done.
Whether or not all this is practical is another matter. Personally, I doubt it. More likely, the SNP's policy will, at times, lead to huge imports of electricity from England and/or power failures.
To The Scotsman (23 Jan 2016) published 26 Jan 2016
The Scottish Government's obduracy over religious observance ('Religious observance to stay in schools after review call rejected', 23 January) is disappointing and indicates a failure to move with the times.
Schools are places where young people are taught what is known and to train their minds to think. They should not be places where religious beliefs are taught as if they were fact, even less places where religious services are conducted by clerics or evangelical groups. It is specious to argue, as the SG does, that pupils are not required to worship during religious observance.
It is not even clear how many schools follow the guidelines. The City of Edinburgh Council, at our request, is conducting a survey of its schools to find out and we want a poll, as allowed by law, of Edinburgh electors to determine the future of religious observance in the City.
When more UK adults have 'no religion' than say they are Christian and this gap is even wider among young people (under 40s are nearly twice as likely to be non-religious than Christian), it is time to abandon Victorian subservience to religion, especially in schools. --
Secretary, Edinburgh Secular Society
The Scottish Government's obduracy over religious observance ('Religious observance to stay in schools after review call rejected', 23 January) is disappointing and indicates a failure to move with the times.
Schools are places where young people are taught what is known and to train their minds to think. They should not be places where religious beliefs are taught as if they were fact, even less places where religious services are conducted by clerics or evangelical groups. It is specious to argue, as the SG does, that pupils are not required to worship during religious observance.
It is not even clear how many schools follow the guidelines. The City of Edinburgh Council, at our request, is conducting a survey of its schools to find out and we want a poll, as allowed by law, of Edinburgh electors to determine the future of religious observance in the City.
When more UK adults have 'no religion' than say they are Christian and this gap is even wider among young people (under 40s are nearly twice as likely to be non-religious than Christian), it is time to abandon Victorian subservience to religion, especially in schools. --
Secretary, Edinburgh Secular Society
To Edinburgh Evening News (19 Jan 2016) published 22 Jan 2016
Your articles about cleaning up Edinburgh's streets (18 January) failed to mention the need to remove graffiti, mostly identification tags by individuals or groups who think it smart to advertise their presence. Longstone Community Council has long persisted in getting graffiti in its area removed and asking Police Scotland or The British Transport Police to try to trace and prosecute those responsible. Do other community councils try to do this?
Some property owners, especially Royal Mail and Virgin Media, are cooperative but others seem to take no notice.
The police take a note but there is little evidence of an attempt to solve these crimes. When was anyone prosecuted for such vandalism in Edinburgh?
Leaving graffiti encourages other antisocial behaviour and so should be removed ASAP.
Secretary/Longstone Community Council
Your articles about cleaning up Edinburgh's streets (18 January) failed to mention the need to remove graffiti, mostly identification tags by individuals or groups who think it smart to advertise their presence. Longstone Community Council has long persisted in getting graffiti in its area removed and asking Police Scotland or The British Transport Police to try to trace and prosecute those responsible. Do other community councils try to do this?
Some property owners, especially Royal Mail and Virgin Media, are cooperative but others seem to take no notice.
The police take a note but there is little evidence of an attempt to solve these crimes. When was anyone prosecuted for such vandalism in Edinburgh?
Leaving graffiti encourages other antisocial behaviour and so should be removed ASAP.
Secretary/Longstone Community Council
To The Scotsman (16 Jan 2016) published 18 Jan 2016
JP John Lawless summed up the matter very well (your report 16 January). Charges have to proved, either beyond reasonable doubt or on the balance of probabilities. So old Scots law was precise and logical.
The importation of (first) a 'not-guilty' verdict and (second) the 'guilty' verdict from England was a mistake. As Mr Lawless pointed out, no one knows whether or not an accused is in fact guilty or not-guilty. All a verdict finds is whether or not the prosecution have proved their case.
So the solution, to enhance Scots law and rationalise it, is to go back to just two verdicts: 'proven' or 'not proven'. The public should learn to understand these verdicts and their implications.
JP John Lawless summed up the matter very well (your report 16 January). Charges have to proved, either beyond reasonable doubt or on the balance of probabilities. So old Scots law was precise and logical.
The importation of (first) a 'not-guilty' verdict and (second) the 'guilty' verdict from England was a mistake. As Mr Lawless pointed out, no one knows whether or not an accused is in fact guilty or not-guilty. All a verdict finds is whether or not the prosecution have proved their case.
So the solution, to enhance Scots law and rationalise it, is to go back to just two verdicts: 'proven' or 'not proven'. The public should learn to understand these verdicts and their implications.
To The Scotsman (14 Jan 2016) not published
Climate change deniers often claim that we puny humans could not possibly affect the global climate machine. However, you report (14 January) that the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research has discovered that man-made greenhouse gas emissions have postponed the next ice age by 50,000 years. It seems that we can after all change our climate.
Climate change deniers often claim that we puny humans could not possibly affect the global climate machine. However, you report (14 January) that the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research has discovered that man-made greenhouse gas emissions have postponed the next ice age by 50,000 years. It seems that we can after all change our climate.
To The Scotsman (8 Jan 2016) not published
What Gordon Holmes filmed on Loch Ness will not have been a giant eel; they don't live in Loch Ness (your report 8 January). More likely what he saw was a boat wake (I bet it was a flat calm that day).
The only mystery at Loch Ness is why so many people believe in the impossible.
What Gordon Holmes filmed on Loch Ness will not have been a giant eel; they don't live in Loch Ness (your report 8 January). More likely what he saw was a boat wake (I bet it was a flat calm that day).
The only mystery at Loch Ness is why so many people believe in the impossible.
To The Scotsman (4 Jan 2016) not published
Donald M MacDonald would rather put his faith in two of the evangelists than take any notice of modern critical biblical criticism (Letter, 4 January). Perhaps he could tell us why the Gospels of Mark and John no nothing of Jesus' birth and origin; why, if Jesus was born in Bethlehem, he never claimed that; and why Luke has the holy family travelling to Bethlehem from Nazareth for a census (6 CE) that did not require such movement while Matthew has them travelling from Bethlehem to Egypt.
These travelogues are totally incompatible and show that both cannot be true. In fact neither are true. The two evangelists were both building on Marks' Gospel but independently trying to invent an origin for Jesus that suited their readers. If Mr MacDonald does not know this, he needs to read the critical literature more closely. My claims are not based on outmoded critical scholarship, although it may be that Christian scholars prefer to avoid facing the facts.
If James B Watson wants to know about me, he can easily find me on the internet as the author of a book about the life of Jesus and the origin of Christianity. But then, what does it matter who I am if what I say makes sense?
Donald M MacDonald would rather put his faith in two of the evangelists than take any notice of modern critical biblical criticism (Letter, 4 January). Perhaps he could tell us why the Gospels of Mark and John no nothing of Jesus' birth and origin; why, if Jesus was born in Bethlehem, he never claimed that; and why Luke has the holy family travelling to Bethlehem from Nazareth for a census (6 CE) that did not require such movement while Matthew has them travelling from Bethlehem to Egypt.
These travelogues are totally incompatible and show that both cannot be true. In fact neither are true. The two evangelists were both building on Marks' Gospel but independently trying to invent an origin for Jesus that suited their readers. If Mr MacDonald does not know this, he needs to read the critical literature more closely. My claims are not based on outmoded critical scholarship, although it may be that Christian scholars prefer to avoid facing the facts.
If James B Watson wants to know about me, he can easily find me on the internet as the author of a book about the life of Jesus and the origin of Christianity. But then, what does it matter who I am if what I say makes sense?
To The Scotsman (1 Jan 2016) published 2 Jan 2016
The Archbishop of Canterbury claims that Jesus was a refugee, 'fleeing as a baby with his parents' (your report, 1 January).
This story comes from Matthew 2:13-15, where an angel told Joseph to take his family to Egypt until Herod died.
However, Luke's Gospel, which contains the only other Birth Narrative, knows nothing of this escape, telling us that the family had to move from Nazareth to Bethlehem.
Clearly the two Narratives are incompatibly. That is because they were both invented separately to give Jesus an origin commensurate with his later deification and to give him a status at least equal to other contemporary saviour gods, from whose own narratives his was probably constructed.
The specific reason for Matthew's account is revealed in verse 15. The story of a return from Egypt was invented to fulfil the prophecy of Hosea (Hos. 11:1) and to indulge the Alexandrian Jews for whom Matthew wrote.
The Archbishop should know this. Yet he overlooks it to make a point not justified by Scripture (it is unlikely that Jesus was ever a refugee). Except that he came from Galilee, Jesus true origin is not known
The Archbishop of Canterbury claims that Jesus was a refugee, 'fleeing as a baby with his parents' (your report, 1 January).
This story comes from Matthew 2:13-15, where an angel told Joseph to take his family to Egypt until Herod died.
However, Luke's Gospel, which contains the only other Birth Narrative, knows nothing of this escape, telling us that the family had to move from Nazareth to Bethlehem.
Clearly the two Narratives are incompatibly. That is because they were both invented separately to give Jesus an origin commensurate with his later deification and to give him a status at least equal to other contemporary saviour gods, from whose own narratives his was probably constructed.
The specific reason for Matthew's account is revealed in verse 15. The story of a return from Egypt was invented to fulfil the prophecy of Hosea (Hos. 11:1) and to indulge the Alexandrian Jews for whom Matthew wrote.
The Archbishop should know this. Yet he overlooks it to make a point not justified by Scripture (it is unlikely that Jesus was ever a refugee). Except that he came from Galilee, Jesus true origin is not known
End of letters written in 2015
To Edinburgh Evening News (31 Dec 2015) published 4 Jan 2016
You report that Lang Banks of WWF claims that (PV) solar panels are helping to prevent thousands of tonnes of climate-changing emissions being emitted every year ('Sunny side up as Scotland's solar power capacity rises', 30 December).
That claim is an assumption and not one well founded. No one can tell where electricity comes from. For all Mr Banks knows, the electricity saved came from emission-free nuclear power stations or renewable energy generation.
In any case, if the total PV capacity now stands at 179 MW, that only 2.5 per cent of Scotland's total generation capacity.
To The Scotsman (30 Dec 2015) not published
John Milne (Letters, 30 December) claims that Jesus was 'born in squalor, the son of refugees'. He seems to be unaware the stories about the circumstances of Jesus birth are mythical, added to the Gospels of Matthew and Luke to give Jesus an origin and background commensurate with his deification as a saviour god. One consequence is that the accounts of the two Gospels are incompatible.
All we know of Jesus' origin is that he came from Galilee, but not from Nazareth which was hardly more than a hamlet at the time. More likely he came from a fairly well-to-do family in Capernaum.
Consequently, the Church does not speak for Jesus, who was only interested in the fate of the Jewish people and then only in respect of the Kingdom Of God, which he thought imminent.
Politics without religion is not blind. The blindness comes from mixing politics with religion, as in Jesus' own country and in modern states like Iran.
Author of The Rise and Fall of Jesus (WPS 2009)
You report that Lang Banks of WWF claims that (PV) solar panels are helping to prevent thousands of tonnes of climate-changing emissions being emitted every year ('Sunny side up as Scotland's solar power capacity rises', 30 December).
That claim is an assumption and not one well founded. No one can tell where electricity comes from. For all Mr Banks knows, the electricity saved came from emission-free nuclear power stations or renewable energy generation.
In any case, if the total PV capacity now stands at 179 MW, that only 2.5 per cent of Scotland's total generation capacity.
To The Scotsman (30 Dec 2015) not published
John Milne (Letters, 30 December) claims that Jesus was 'born in squalor, the son of refugees'. He seems to be unaware the stories about the circumstances of Jesus birth are mythical, added to the Gospels of Matthew and Luke to give Jesus an origin and background commensurate with his deification as a saviour god. One consequence is that the accounts of the two Gospels are incompatible.
All we know of Jesus' origin is that he came from Galilee, but not from Nazareth which was hardly more than a hamlet at the time. More likely he came from a fairly well-to-do family in Capernaum.
Consequently, the Church does not speak for Jesus, who was only interested in the fate of the Jewish people and then only in respect of the Kingdom Of God, which he thought imminent.
Politics without religion is not blind. The blindness comes from mixing politics with religion, as in Jesus' own country and in modern states like Iran.
Author of The Rise and Fall of Jesus (WPS 2009)
To The Scotsman (29 Dec 2015) not published
You report that WWF wants to reduce electricity demand to 'avoid the need to build expensive fossil fuel power stations and cut emissions' ('Call for national electricity strategy to cut demand by 1 per cent a year', 29 December).
Of course consumers should make the most efficient use they can of their electricity supply, if only to reduce costs, but electricity is the 'life blood' of our civilisation.
In any case, WWF's reasoning is specious. No more coal-fired stations will be built and gas-fired ones are relatively cheap to build. If WWF wants reliable environmentally-friendly generation, they should support nuclear new build, the power of the future. Instead of reducing the amount of electricity available, we should be increasing it.
You report that WWF wants to reduce electricity demand to 'avoid the need to build expensive fossil fuel power stations and cut emissions' ('Call for national electricity strategy to cut demand by 1 per cent a year', 29 December).
Of course consumers should make the most efficient use they can of their electricity supply, if only to reduce costs, but electricity is the 'life blood' of our civilisation.
In any case, WWF's reasoning is specious. No more coal-fired stations will be built and gas-fired ones are relatively cheap to build. If WWF wants reliable environmentally-friendly generation, they should support nuclear new build, the power of the future. Instead of reducing the amount of electricity available, we should be increasing it.
To The Scotsman (22 Dec 2015) not published
David Robertson's claims about Jesus ('Looking a gift hobby horse in the mouth', Friends of the Scotsman 22 December) should not go unchallenged.
The Birth Narratives of Matthew and Luke are (incompatible) inventions devised to give Jesus an origin and background commensurate with his later deification to put him on a par with other contemporary deities. Consequently, he was not born in 'a byre in Bethlehem' or 'born of a teenage virgin'. His origin seems have been in Galilee (not Nazareth, but probably Capernaum). His father may have been a tradesman: 'tekton' in the Greek, but that does not translate as 'carpenter'. It really means 'builder', which is why Jesus spoke in parables about construction.
It is true that he associated with the lower orders, but only because he believed that they would become the upper classes in the coming Kingdom of Heaven (the law of reversal). However, he also had some rich friends.
If he paid taxes, we have not been told so. The incident of the coin (it was not his coin) was a trap which he avoided by seeming to refute use of Roman money altogether.
Jesus 'failed miserably' if you believe that he had a plan to survive crucifixion and become the de facto Messiah expected by his people (my belief). If he was attempting to expiate sin, he was doing so only for Jews, who were obsessed with their god punishing them for imagined sins; he had no concept of universal salvation, even though he thought Israel would rule the world in the Kingdom.
Jesus gave no gift to humanity. Christianity was founded by others, particularly Paul, who mistook Jesus' mission and so misrepresented him.
Steuart Campbell is the author of The Rise and Fall of Jesus (WPS 2009)
David Robertson's claims about Jesus ('Looking a gift hobby horse in the mouth', Friends of the Scotsman 22 December) should not go unchallenged.
The Birth Narratives of Matthew and Luke are (incompatible) inventions devised to give Jesus an origin and background commensurate with his later deification to put him on a par with other contemporary deities. Consequently, he was not born in 'a byre in Bethlehem' or 'born of a teenage virgin'. His origin seems have been in Galilee (not Nazareth, but probably Capernaum). His father may have been a tradesman: 'tekton' in the Greek, but that does not translate as 'carpenter'. It really means 'builder', which is why Jesus spoke in parables about construction.
It is true that he associated with the lower orders, but only because he believed that they would become the upper classes in the coming Kingdom of Heaven (the law of reversal). However, he also had some rich friends.
If he paid taxes, we have not been told so. The incident of the coin (it was not his coin) was a trap which he avoided by seeming to refute use of Roman money altogether.
Jesus 'failed miserably' if you believe that he had a plan to survive crucifixion and become the de facto Messiah expected by his people (my belief). If he was attempting to expiate sin, he was doing so only for Jews, who were obsessed with their god punishing them for imagined sins; he had no concept of universal salvation, even though he thought Israel would rule the world in the Kingdom.
Jesus gave no gift to humanity. Christianity was founded by others, particularly Paul, who mistook Jesus' mission and so misrepresented him.
Steuart Campbell is the author of The Rise and Fall of Jesus (WPS 2009)
To The Sunday Times (21 Dec 2015) not published
You claim that Jesus was born in Bethlehem ('Stabbings dim Christmas spirit in Bethlehem', 20 December).
The Christian Church certainly believes this but I fail to see why you should endorse this belief when historians and biblical critics have grave doubts about it. It is believed that the (incompatible) Birth Narratives in Matthew and Luke were separately invented to give Jesus an origin and background commensurate with his later deification. Jesus himself did not claim to have been born in Bethlehem, even thought prophecy expected it.
The best guess is that Jesus came from Capernaum in Galilee. Nothing more can be known about the circumstances of his birth. You should have made this clear
Author: The Rise and Fall of Jesus (WPS, 2009)
You claim that Jesus was born in Bethlehem ('Stabbings dim Christmas spirit in Bethlehem', 20 December).
The Christian Church certainly believes this but I fail to see why you should endorse this belief when historians and biblical critics have grave doubts about it. It is believed that the (incompatible) Birth Narratives in Matthew and Luke were separately invented to give Jesus an origin and background commensurate with his later deification. Jesus himself did not claim to have been born in Bethlehem, even thought prophecy expected it.
The best guess is that Jesus came from Capernaum in Galilee. Nothing more can be known about the circumstances of his birth. You should have made this clear
Author: The Rise and Fall of Jesus (WPS, 2009)
To The Scotsman (14 Dec 2015) published 15 Dec 2015
Lesley Riddoch's views on nuclear power and Hinkley Point C in particular ('It's time to plan a future without oil', 14 December) are very confused and inaccurate.
A Chinese company is not exactly 'funding' Hinkley Point C; it is taking a one third stake in the construction cost. The remaining stake is with the owner of the site, Electricity de France (EdF), who, incidentally, operated all the other civil nuclear power stations in the UK. 'Home-grown investors' have not eschewed investment in the project; they have had no opportunity to do so. Even shares in EdF are almost entirely owned by the French government.
The idea that some 'hidden capabilities' will be built into the station's software is quite fanciful and ridiculous. Nor is it true that the UK Government is subsidising nuclear power. The high 'strike price' for power from Hinkley Point C is due to the risk the developer is taking with a new one-off design.
The claim that nuclear power is 'more expensive than other forms of baseload energy because it can't be quickly switched on and off and stops research cash to nascent marine technologies' is utter nonsense. Nuclear plants are not switched on and off because they supply baseload and are more economic to operate that way. In 2011, the UK's Committee on Climate Change reported (inter alia) that nuclear power appears likely to be the lowest-cost low-carbon technology. Nuclear power is not depriving marine technologies of research cash; the UK puts no research into nuclear power.
As for nuclear power creating 'Fukoshima [sic] levels of risk'; what does that mean? The accident at Fukushima Daishi was caused by a tsunami and inadequate power resilience in an old plant quite unlike modern reactors. It holds no lessons for British nuclear power developments.
Uranium supplies 'non-renewable'? Well, that depends on one's time horizon. At the present rate of consumption, known sources will last 230 years and could easily be doubled (to 460 years). Extracting uranium from seawater could fuel every nuclear plant on the planet for 6500 years. Some describe uranium as 'quasi-renewable'. How long to do we expect our civilisation to last?
Lesley Riddoch is entitled to her view on nuclear power, but not entitled to misrepresent it.
Lesley Riddoch's views on nuclear power and Hinkley Point C in particular ('It's time to plan a future without oil', 14 December) are very confused and inaccurate.
A Chinese company is not exactly 'funding' Hinkley Point C; it is taking a one third stake in the construction cost. The remaining stake is with the owner of the site, Electricity de France (EdF), who, incidentally, operated all the other civil nuclear power stations in the UK. 'Home-grown investors' have not eschewed investment in the project; they have had no opportunity to do so. Even shares in EdF are almost entirely owned by the French government.
The idea that some 'hidden capabilities' will be built into the station's software is quite fanciful and ridiculous. Nor is it true that the UK Government is subsidising nuclear power. The high 'strike price' for power from Hinkley Point C is due to the risk the developer is taking with a new one-off design.
The claim that nuclear power is 'more expensive than other forms of baseload energy because it can't be quickly switched on and off and stops research cash to nascent marine technologies' is utter nonsense. Nuclear plants are not switched on and off because they supply baseload and are more economic to operate that way. In 2011, the UK's Committee on Climate Change reported (inter alia) that nuclear power appears likely to be the lowest-cost low-carbon technology. Nuclear power is not depriving marine technologies of research cash; the UK puts no research into nuclear power.
As for nuclear power creating 'Fukoshima [sic] levels of risk'; what does that mean? The accident at Fukushima Daishi was caused by a tsunami and inadequate power resilience in an old plant quite unlike modern reactors. It holds no lessons for British nuclear power developments.
Uranium supplies 'non-renewable'? Well, that depends on one's time horizon. At the present rate of consumption, known sources will last 230 years and could easily be doubled (to 460 years). Extracting uranium from seawater could fuel every nuclear plant on the planet for 6500 years. Some describe uranium as 'quasi-renewable'. How long to do we expect our civilisation to last?
Lesley Riddoch is entitled to her view on nuclear power, but not entitled to misrepresent it.
To The Scotsman (11 Dec 2015) published 12 Dec 2015
You refer to granite as 'volcanic stone' ('Outrage as builders bring Chinese stone to Scotland's Granite City' (10 December).
Granite does not come from volcanoes; it is a type of felsic intrusive igneous rock. That means that it has crystallized from magmas (molten or semi-molten rock) intruding into the Earth's crust. Volcanoes can be fed by magma but do not create granite.
You refer to granite as 'volcanic stone' ('Outrage as builders bring Chinese stone to Scotland's Granite City' (10 December).
Granite does not come from volcanoes; it is a type of felsic intrusive igneous rock. That means that it has crystallized from magmas (molten or semi-molten rock) intruding into the Earth's crust. Volcanoes can be fed by magma but do not create granite.
To The Scotsman (1 Dec 2015) not published
We all know that the First Minister believes in miracles: that an independent Scotland could survive financially, for example, but now we see that she believes in supernatural miracles (your report of her St Andrew's Day message, 1 November). She claimed that (five) loaves and (two) fish 'eventually fed the 5,000'.
Well the gullible may believe that, but any rational person would be sceptical. Moreover, comparison with the Greek text of John 6:11 shows that King James' translators inserted the claim that the disciples distributed the food to the crowd, presumably because that's what they believed happened.
The obvious interpretation of the Greek is that Jesus distributed the food to his disciples, while the crowd ate their own packed lunches. This was the conclusion of David Strauss, who observed that it was the Feast of Unleavened Bread.
We all know that the First Minister believes in miracles: that an independent Scotland could survive financially, for example, but now we see that she believes in supernatural miracles (your report of her St Andrew's Day message, 1 November). She claimed that (five) loaves and (two) fish 'eventually fed the 5,000'.
Well the gullible may believe that, but any rational person would be sceptical. Moreover, comparison with the Greek text of John 6:11 shows that King James' translators inserted the claim that the disciples distributed the food to the crowd, presumably because that's what they believed happened.
The obvious interpretation of the Greek is that Jesus distributed the food to his disciples, while the crowd ate their own packed lunches. This was the conclusion of David Strauss, who observed that it was the Feast of Unleavened Bread.
To Scotland on Sunday (30 Nov 2015) published 6 Dec 2015
It would be good if the Church of Scotland disinvested itself of shares in fossil fuel companies but not if the alternative is to invest in renewables ('Pressure on Kirk to sell fossil fuel shares', 29 November).
Renewable generation methods spoil the landscape, damage the ground, generate intermittently (disrupting the grid network), need backup from stations burning gas (a fossil fuel), cost all consumers extra on their bills and waste resources that could be put to better use. Some allege wind farms kill birds and create noise pollution. Does the CoS have no care about these matters?
Anyway, what methods of heating their buildings does the CoS use? Are they burning fossil fuels?
It would be good if the Church of Scotland disinvested itself of shares in fossil fuel companies but not if the alternative is to invest in renewables ('Pressure on Kirk to sell fossil fuel shares', 29 November).
Renewable generation methods spoil the landscape, damage the ground, generate intermittently (disrupting the grid network), need backup from stations burning gas (a fossil fuel), cost all consumers extra on their bills and waste resources that could be put to better use. Some allege wind farms kill birds and create noise pollution. Does the CoS have no care about these matters?
Anyway, what methods of heating their buildings does the CoS use? Are they burning fossil fuels?
To The Scotsman (27 Nov 2015) published 28 Nov 2015
(Dr) A MacCormick (Letter[s], 27 November) rightly took issue with Les Reid ([Letters] 26 November) about hydro power stations, asking for 'numbers'.
However, I doubt that the amount generated from such schemes could be doubled--the best sites have all been used up. The last one completed was at Glendoe, with only 100 MW capacity.
As I write ([on] a Friday afternoon) only 1.94 per cent of the UK electricity demand of 40.6 GW is being met from hydro and Gridwatch notes that 'many [hydro] stations deliberately reduce output to get the best renewable subsidy rates'.
Considering the environmental damage done by hydro schemes and in fact all renewable generation, we would be better not to bother with these mediaeval methods. They are inherently unreliable, causing irregular inputs to the grid and expensive re-engineering of it (e.g. the Beauly to Denny line).
Central generation is more economic and suited to grid as originally built. Moreover, thermal methods are reliable and predictable.
Generation from coal should be phased out ASAP, replaced by gas until we can get more nuclear online.
However, I wonder why the UK is bothering to try to reduce greenhouse gas emissions when countries like Germany and India are actually going all out for generation from fossil fuels, especially coal. Why should we play by the rules when others do not?--
(Dr) A MacCormick (Letter[s], 27 November) rightly took issue with Les Reid ([Letters] 26 November) about hydro power stations, asking for 'numbers'.
However, I doubt that the amount generated from such schemes could be doubled--the best sites have all been used up. The last one completed was at Glendoe, with only 100 MW capacity.
As I write ([on] a Friday afternoon) only 1.94 per cent of the UK electricity demand of 40.6 GW is being met from hydro and Gridwatch notes that 'many [hydro] stations deliberately reduce output to get the best renewable subsidy rates'.
Considering the environmental damage done by hydro schemes and in fact all renewable generation, we would be better not to bother with these mediaeval methods. They are inherently unreliable, causing irregular inputs to the grid and expensive re-engineering of it (e.g. the Beauly to Denny line).
Central generation is more economic and suited to grid as originally built. Moreover, thermal methods are reliable and predictable.
Generation from coal should be phased out ASAP, replaced by gas until we can get more nuclear online.
However, I wonder why the UK is bothering to try to reduce greenhouse gas emissions when countries like Germany and India are actually going all out for generation from fossil fuels, especially coal. Why should we play by the rules when others do not?--
To Scotland on Sunday (23 Nov 2015) published 29 Nov 2015
Ian Johnstone suggests storing the 'sustainable' energy of winter storms to supply electricity (Letter[s], 22 November).
The storage problem applies already to all renewable generation methods. No one has found a cheap and accessible system to store the energy already generated from wind and waves. Pumped storage schemes in Scotland can only store enough energy to supply about 700 MW of electricity. Scotland's peak demand requires about ten times that and there are hardly any sites left that are suitable for such storage schemes.
It is true that oil, coal and peat are stores of energy (from the sun). But uranium also contains stored energy (from exploding stars). In fact its energy density is much higher than any other fuel.
It can be argued that all the fossil fuels and uranium are 'sustainable', in that they could sustain modern civilisation for a long time, depending on what price one is prepared to pay for them and the environmental consequences.
Ian Johnstone suggests storing the 'sustainable' energy of winter storms to supply electricity (Letter[s], 22 November).
The storage problem applies already to all renewable generation methods. No one has found a cheap and accessible system to store the energy already generated from wind and waves. Pumped storage schemes in Scotland can only store enough energy to supply about 700 MW of electricity. Scotland's peak demand requires about ten times that and there are hardly any sites left that are suitable for such storage schemes.
It is true that oil, coal and peat are stores of energy (from the sun). But uranium also contains stored energy (from exploding stars). In fact its energy density is much higher than any other fuel.
It can be argued that all the fossil fuels and uranium are 'sustainable', in that they could sustain modern civilisation for a long time, depending on what price one is prepared to pay for them and the environmental consequences.
To Edinburgh Evening News (22 Nov 2015) published 30 Nov 2015
Subscribing to the 'Broken windows theory' (the idea that dealing with low-level crime helps to reduce more serious crime), we have assiduously reported graffiti in our area and encouraged the owners of the property involved to remove it.
We get willing cooperation from Virgin Media, Royal Mail, SP Networks and the City of Edinburgh and we wait to see how Openreach responds to requests to deal with BT street cabinets. However, we get no action from Network Rail.
To help identification of the culprits, we report the tags to police, but this is complicated by Police Scotland operating only within ward boundaries (we cover part of two City wards). The British Transport Police are more responsive, but police investigations usually lead nowhere.
Before reorganisation, Lothian & Borders Police were more cooperative and had teams working through tag records, sometimes with success.
Secretary, Longstone Community Council
Subscribing to the 'Broken windows theory' (the idea that dealing with low-level crime helps to reduce more serious crime), we have assiduously reported graffiti in our area and encouraged the owners of the property involved to remove it.
We get willing cooperation from Virgin Media, Royal Mail, SP Networks and the City of Edinburgh and we wait to see how Openreach responds to requests to deal with BT street cabinets. However, we get no action from Network Rail.
To help identification of the culprits, we report the tags to police, but this is complicated by Police Scotland operating only within ward boundaries (we cover part of two City wards). The British Transport Police are more responsive, but police investigations usually lead nowhere.
Before reorganisation, Lothian & Borders Police were more cooperative and had teams working through tag records, sometimes with success.
Secretary, Longstone Community Council
To The Scotsman (20 Nov 2015) published 21 Nov 2015
It is typical of Lang Banks of WWF to describe the cracked graphite bricks at Hunterston as 'the problem spreading' ('More cracks discovered in nuclear reactor core', [your report,]20 November).
Operator EDF did not describe it as a 'problem'; it's an anticipated result of ageing having no implications for the safety or operation of the reactor.
To describe five cracked bricks out of some 12,000 in the two reactors as a problem spreading is a wild overreaction by someone who evidently does not understand the technology. More cracked bricks will probably be found but this will not stop the reactors operating before closure in 2023.
Nuclear power operators are too open about even the slightest fault; it just gives opponents ammunition to belittle this high-tech method of generating essential pollution-free base load electricity.
It is typical of Lang Banks of WWF to describe the cracked graphite bricks at Hunterston as 'the problem spreading' ('More cracks discovered in nuclear reactor core', [your report,]20 November).
Operator EDF did not describe it as a 'problem'; it's an anticipated result of ageing having no implications for the safety or operation of the reactor.
To describe five cracked bricks out of some 12,000 in the two reactors as a problem spreading is a wild overreaction by someone who evidently does not understand the technology. More cracked bricks will probably be found but this will not stop the reactors operating before closure in 2023.
Nuclear power operators are too open about even the slightest fault; it just gives opponents ammunition to belittle this high-tech method of generating essential pollution-free base load electricity.
|
To The Scotsman (17 Nov 2015) published 19 Nov 2015
Subscribing to the 'Broken windows theory' (Letters, Andy Aitken, 16 November), we have assiduously reported graffiti in our area and encouraged the owners of the property involved to remove it. We get willing cooperation from Virgin Media, Royal Mail and the City of Edinburgh and we wait to see how Openreach responds to requests to deal with BT street cabinets. However, we get no action from Network Rail. To help identification of the culprits, we report the tags to police, but this is complicated by Police Scotland operating only within ward boundaries (we cover part of two City wards). The British Transport Police are more responsive, but police investigations usually lead nowhere. Before reorganisation, Lothian & Borders Police were more cooperative and had teams working through tag records, sometimes with success. Secretary, Longstone Community Council To The Scotsman (14 Nov 2015) not published
Chris Harte quoted Einstein ('Welcome to the new normal, where only uncertainty is certain', 14 November), but not quite accurately. Here I show Harte’s version corrected to show what Einstein actually said: 'While [As far as] the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not in and of themselves certain, and as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality'. The difference may seem trivial, but there is dispute about how far mathematics underlies reality. To Radio Times Feedback (12 Nov 2015)
I wish the BBC, especially in science programmes, would discourage scientists from introducing themselves with title (Dr, Prof, whatever); they were not born with those titles and it sounds like bragging. They would not be on such programmes if they didn't have the appropriate qualifications. It is OK for others to refer to them with their title and fine to have a subtitle giving their title and name. But please stop them showing off. It is embarrassing. To The Scotsman (11 Nov 2015) published 12 Nov 2015
Ages ago, The Scotsman, like many other newspapers, published anonymous letters by correspondents who used obscure pseudonyms. Fortunately this was eventually stopped and all letters have to carry a full address and phone number (as now, but it's strange that you don't insist on a name being given [though only an abbreviated address is published]). Unfortunately, some anonymity has returned with the use of Twitter, where many tweets are pseudonymous. This is regrettable because we have the right to know the authors of the expressed opinions, which are often trite, ignorant and/or provocative. It is true that we can discover a tweeter's real name from Twitter, but why can't you show it? We could also respond to a tweet via Twitter. What's more regrettable is that your letters page has been invaded by a panel of tweets, which squats like a cuckoo pushing aside letters, which seem to be fewer now. Then there's even more tweets under 'SCOTSMAN.COM VIEW'. Presumably this is all part of the newly-designed Scotsman, with its micky-mouse typefaces and complete lack of letters. Please give Twitter the bird and give more space to well-thought-out letters, like this one. To The Scotsman (9 Nov 2015) not published
Dr A McCormick thinks that the breath of 2 billion extra human beings will increase the planet's CO2 by 500 Mt per year (Letter, 7 November). He forgets that we are not carbon generators like fossil fuels; we recycle carbon, absorbing it in our food and releasing it in expiration and waste products. So no matter how many people live on Earth, their respiration will make no difference to global warming. However, their activities and the industrial processes required to support them certainly will. To The Scotsman (7 Nov 2015) not published
What sort of doctor is A McCormick (Letter, 7 November)? He blames the breath of 2 billion extra human beings for increasing the planet's CO2. He forgets that we are not carbon generators like fossil fuels; we recycle carbon, absorbing it in our food and releasing it in expiration. So no matter how many people live on Earth, their respiration will make no difference to global warming. However, their activities and the industrial processes required to support them certainly will. To Edinburgh Evening News (4 Nov 2015) published 6 Nov 2015
Gerry Farrell struggles with atheism because atheists 'have no empirical proof that they are right' and 'choose to disbelieve in the possibility of an afterlife' (his column on 4 November[News, November 4]). In fact atheism is merely the belief that God does not exist; it is not a disbelief in an afterlife, even though it is likely that all atheists share that disbelief also. I fail to understand why Gerry should have more of a struggle with atheism than theism (belief in a god). There is no proof either way; nor any evidence for either belief. Atheists would justify their stance on lack of evidence for the existence of a god, perhaps also on the unlikelihood of there being one in the face of the discoveries of modern science. Gerry also misunderstands agnosticism. It is not, as he appears to think, a neutral ('I don't know') position; it is a belief that nothing is known or can be known of the existence or nature of God. As such it is a belief alongside theism and atheism. To The Scotsman (3 Nov 2015) published 4 Nov 2015
Finding alternative work for the highly skilled workers at Faslane might be difficult without there being another high-tech industry in Scotland. Fortunately there is, for some of them anyway: the nuclear power plants at Hunterston, not far from Faslane, and at Torness. Working with nuclear reactors on a submarine is not all that different from working on a civil nuclear reactor, although they are not of the same design. Unfortunately, these nuclear stations will be decommissioned within the next 8 [eight] years[;] our anti-science Scottish Government would not permit their replacement, risking a shortage of electricity and probably forcing skilled workers to go to England and Wales for similar jobs. What a way to run a country. |
|
To The Scotsman (30 Oct 2015) published 31 Oct 2015
The clocks go back, giving us darker evenings, and what do we find? People being killed on the roads in the extra hour of darkness between 5pm and 6pm ('Boy, 6, among three killed as road death toll rises' [your report], 30 October).
It appears that three of the accidents you report occurred during that hour, one where in addition someone was injured, while other accidents occurred much later.
We should keep daylight saving all year round to reduce the number of these accidents.
The clocks go back, giving us darker evenings, and what do we find? People being killed on the roads in the extra hour of darkness between 5pm and 6pm ('Boy, 6, among three killed as road death toll rises' [your report], 30 October).
It appears that three of the accidents you report occurred during that hour, one where in addition someone was injured, while other accidents occurred much later.
We should keep daylight saving all year round to reduce the number of these accidents.
To The Scotsman (28 Oct 2015) published 29 Oct 2015
Aidan Smith claimed that 'We invented the goggle-box' ('History of television puts comic heroes in their place', 27 October). By 'We' does he mean the Scots, or just John Logie Baird?
Primacy in this matter is disputed, with many people being involved in various attempts and systems. Baird did invented an electro-mechanical form of television apparatus, but one that was eventually abandoned in favour of the more practical and clearer all-electronic system invented by the American Philo Farnsworth and later marketed by Marconi-EMI.
Some credit for the invention of modern TV [should go] to Vladimir Kosma Zworykin, a Russian-born American inventor working for Westinghouse, although Farnsworth was able to demonstrate a working system.
The urge to claim modern TV as a Scottish invention should be resisted.
Aidan Smith claimed that 'We invented the goggle-box' ('History of television puts comic heroes in their place', 27 October). By 'We' does he mean the Scots, or just John Logie Baird?
Primacy in this matter is disputed, with many people being involved in various attempts and systems. Baird did invented an electro-mechanical form of television apparatus, but one that was eventually abandoned in favour of the more practical and clearer all-electronic system invented by the American Philo Farnsworth and later marketed by Marconi-EMI.
Some credit for the invention of modern TV [should go] to Vladimir Kosma Zworykin, a Russian-born American inventor working for Westinghouse, although Farnsworth was able to demonstrate a working system.
The urge to claim modern TV as a Scottish invention should be resisted.
To The Times (25 Oct 2015) not published?
In commenting on the Clutha report, you referred back to the 1994 crash of an RAF Chinook helicopter (Leader, 24 October). Unfortunatenot published?ly, your brief description is mistaken in most respects.
The accident occurred on the Mull of Kintyre, not on the Isle of Mull.
The RAF Board of Inquiry found that the captain (Tapper) made an 'error of judgement' in attempting to climb over the Mull, but its conclusions were subject to 'remarks' (review) by senior officers. The latter concluded that the pilots were to blame for ignoring safety procedures, which, if complied with, would have saved the aircraft.
There can be no doubt that this conclusion was justified, but it was never accepted by the pilots' families and their powerful supporters, all of whom insisted that there must have been a problem with the aircraft (none was known to the AAIB).
Their campaign eventually led to the Tories promising to reopen the case and in 2010 (only 9 years after the RAF report became public) it was announced that there would be an independent inquiry by Lord Philip.
In 2011 this recommended that the verdict of 'gross negligence' should be 'set aside' (i.e. quashed) and an apology be given to the families of the pilots. This was based on a legal technicality that not even the RAF should draw a conclusion based on there being 'no doubt whatsoever'. However, this did not 'clear the pilots' (they might still have been guilty of another degree of negligence), although everyone thought it did. Lord Philip did not 'blame a technical malfunction' and thought that the cause would never be known.
You failed to mention that, in this case, there was a Fatal Accident Inquiry (in Paisley in 1996), which could not determine the cause of the accident.
In commenting on the Clutha report, you referred back to the 1994 crash of an RAF Chinook helicopter (Leader, 24 October). Unfortunatenot published?ly, your brief description is mistaken in most respects.
The accident occurred on the Mull of Kintyre, not on the Isle of Mull.
The RAF Board of Inquiry found that the captain (Tapper) made an 'error of judgement' in attempting to climb over the Mull, but its conclusions were subject to 'remarks' (review) by senior officers. The latter concluded that the pilots were to blame for ignoring safety procedures, which, if complied with, would have saved the aircraft.
There can be no doubt that this conclusion was justified, but it was never accepted by the pilots' families and their powerful supporters, all of whom insisted that there must have been a problem with the aircraft (none was known to the AAIB).
Their campaign eventually led to the Tories promising to reopen the case and in 2010 (only 9 years after the RAF report became public) it was announced that there would be an independent inquiry by Lord Philip.
In 2011 this recommended that the verdict of 'gross negligence' should be 'set aside' (i.e. quashed) and an apology be given to the families of the pilots. This was based on a legal technicality that not even the RAF should draw a conclusion based on there being 'no doubt whatsoever'. However, this did not 'clear the pilots' (they might still have been guilty of another degree of negligence), although everyone thought it did. Lord Philip did not 'blame a technical malfunction' and thought that the cause would never be known.
You failed to mention that, in this case, there was a Fatal Accident Inquiry (in Paisley in 1996), which could not determine the cause of the accident.
To The Scotsman (20 Oct 2015) not published
It is not true, as Vivienne Cockburn claimed ('Street lighting toolkit gives Scotland's councils power to save millions', Friends of the Scotsman, 20 October) that street lights 'release nearly 200,000 tonnes of CO2 into the atmosphere'.
Only lamps burning a fossil fuel would emit CO2; lamps lit by electricity emit none.
Perhaps this is an oblique claim that the electricity used in street lighting comes from power plants burning a fossil fuel (coal or gas). This assumption should be challenged. No one can know the source of their electricity once it enters the grid network. Some does come from fossil fuel plants, but a good third in Scotland comes from nuclear power, emitting no CO2.
Since street lights use electricity at night, it is very likely that the source at that time is nuclear, stations that generate baseload.
It is not true, as Vivienne Cockburn claimed ('Street lighting toolkit gives Scotland's councils power to save millions', Friends of the Scotsman, 20 October) that street lights 'release nearly 200,000 tonnes of CO2 into the atmosphere'.
Only lamps burning a fossil fuel would emit CO2; lamps lit by electricity emit none.
Perhaps this is an oblique claim that the electricity used in street lighting comes from power plants burning a fossil fuel (coal or gas). This assumption should be challenged. No one can know the source of their electricity once it enters the grid network. Some does come from fossil fuel plants, but a good third in Scotland comes from nuclear power, emitting no CO2.
Since street lights use electricity at night, it is very likely that the source at that time is nuclear, stations that generate baseload.
To Sunday Times (12 Oct 2015) not published
It is true, as Atticus observed (11 October) that the SDP still exists, but it has turned into an anti-EU party abandoning the internationalist Limehouse Declaration of the founders.
It is true, as Atticus observed (11 October) that the SDP still exists, but it has turned into an anti-EU party abandoning the internationalist Limehouse Declaration of the founders.
To The Times (11 Oct 2015) probably not published
Matthew Parris or his father should have known that our electric world is powered by electrons, not protons (Opinion, 10 October).
Matthew Parris or his father should have known that our electric world is powered by electrons, not protons (Opinion, 10 October).
To The Scotsman (9 Oct 2015) published 10 Oct 2015
It is surprising that you have published no letters about the Scotsman's new design and layout. Did you not receive any?
It is always upsetting when one's favourite publication overhauls itself and reappears in an unfamiliar guise. That would not worry me if I liked the result. Unfortunately I do not.
The redesign, by Spanish journalist Javier Errea's design studio, is chaotic, with many different typefaces, mixing serif and non-serif fonts. The main headline font (Sueca Banner) is too fancy and even fancier is the Brunel Poster italic font used for some headings. These fonts are not appropriate for a serious newspaper. Particularly irritating is the use of a bold, italic capital letter at the start of text. In think a qualified graphic designer would have done a better job, producing something like the restrained and ordered Guardian.
I now turn the pages with dread and revulsion.
It is surprising that you have published no letters about the Scotsman's new design and layout. Did you not receive any?
It is always upsetting when one's favourite publication overhauls itself and reappears in an unfamiliar guise. That would not worry me if I liked the result. Unfortunately I do not.
The redesign, by Spanish journalist Javier Errea's design studio, is chaotic, with many different typefaces, mixing serif and non-serif fonts. The main headline font (Sueca Banner) is too fancy and even fancier is the Brunel Poster italic font used for some headings. These fonts are not appropriate for a serious newspaper. Particularly irritating is the use of a bold, italic capital letter at the start of text. In think a qualified graphic designer would have done a better job, producing something like the restrained and ordered Guardian.
I now turn the pages with dread and revulsion.
To Edinburgh Evening News (8 Oct 2015) published 10 Oct 2015
I think I wholeheartedly agree with Gerry Farrell's argument against renewing the UK's nuclear capability.
The only reason we have our own weapon system (our bombs on US missiles) is because, out of spite when the USA refused cooperation in 1950, we decided to develop our own weapon. Presumably this was also to guarantee our seat at the UN Security Council.
We should not have been strutting on the international stage. Even now, although we could launch our own weapons independently, there is an agreement that we would not do so without consultation with our allies and NATO. Consequently, it's not truly an independent deterrent and we don't have a nuclear-armed enemy.
So let's not renew it and save the money for something more useful.
I think I wholeheartedly agree with Gerry Farrell's argument against renewing the UK's nuclear capability.
The only reason we have our own weapon system (our bombs on US missiles) is because, out of spite when the USA refused cooperation in 1950, we decided to develop our own weapon. Presumably this was also to guarantee our seat at the UN Security Council.
We should not have been strutting on the international stage. Even now, although we could launch our own weapons independently, there is an agreement that we would not do so without consultation with our allies and NATO. Consequently, it's not truly an independent deterrent and we don't have a nuclear-armed enemy.
So let's not renew it and save the money for something more useful.
To Scotland on Sunday (5 Oct 2015) published 11 Oct 2015
Comparing homeopathy with quantum entanglement to justify belief in the former (CD Boisseau, Letters, 4 October) is bizarre. Pace Einstein, there is evidence that quantum entanglement really exists, whereas there is no reliable scientific evidence for homeopathy.
Comparing homeopathy with quantum entanglement to justify belief in the former (CD Boisseau, Letters, 4 October) is bizarre. Pace Einstein, there is evidence that quantum entanglement really exists, whereas there is no reliable scientific evidence for homeopathy.
To The Edinburgh News (2 Oct 2015) published 5 Oct 2015
There is nothing 'short-sighted' about nuclear power (Alison Johnstone in her comment on climate change, 1 October).
Plans for nuclear power stations, because of the long build-time, take the long view, anticipating the need for reliable, environmentally-friendly base load to the electricity supply system when all the stations burning fossil fuels have closed because of their damaging CO2 emissions.
If Ms Johnstone is really concerned about global warming, she should embrace nuclear power and eschew unreliable, ugly, costly and destabilising renewables.
There is nothing 'short-sighted' about nuclear power (Alison Johnstone in her comment on climate change, 1 October).
Plans for nuclear power stations, because of the long build-time, take the long view, anticipating the need for reliable, environmentally-friendly base load to the electricity supply system when all the stations burning fossil fuels have closed because of their damaging CO2 emissions.
If Ms Johnstone is really concerned about global warming, she should embrace nuclear power and eschew unreliable, ugly, costly and destabilising renewables.
To The Scotsman (1 Oct 2015) published 2 Oct 2015
Ian Stuart in Elgin (Point of View, 1 October) seems to think that Scotland is already independent. However, the truth is that both he and Jeremy Corbyn live in the same country: The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
Ian Stuart in Elgin (Point of View, 1 October) seems to think that Scotland is already independent. However, the truth is that both he and Jeremy Corbyn live in the same country: The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
To The Scotsman (26 Sep 2015) published 28 Sep 2015
The Precautionary Principle, as described by Fenton Robb (Letter, 26 September) is flawed because it involves trying to prove a negative, something that is impossible. For example: it is not possible to prove that GM crops are not harmful.
Every innovation involves risk, but that has not stopped the advance of technology. For example it has not stopped the continued development of diesel engines, even though we know that their emissions are harmful.
The guiding principle ought to be that the innovation does no harm, or at least very little harm compared with the benefit (this is assessed by cost-benefit analysis). It should be allowed to proceed if, in its implementation, no evidence, or very little evidence, is found that it is harmful.
The Precautionary Principle, as described by Fenton Robb (Letter, 26 September) is flawed because it involves trying to prove a negative, something that is impossible. For example: it is not possible to prove that GM crops are not harmful.
Every innovation involves risk, but that has not stopped the advance of technology. For example it has not stopped the continued development of diesel engines, even though we know that their emissions are harmful.
The guiding principle ought to be that the innovation does no harm, or at least very little harm compared with the benefit (this is assessed by cost-benefit analysis). It should be allowed to proceed if, in its implementation, no evidence, or very little evidence, is found that it is harmful.
To Edinburgh Evening News (24 Sep 2015) published 29 Sep 2015
Gerry Farrell reported how his wife upbraided a Hungarian bishop about his attitude to refugees, citing the example of the story of the Good Samaritan 'despite the fact that the Jews and the Samaritans traditionally despised each other'.
In fact both Jews and Samaritans were Israelites, only differing in certain beliefs and practices within Judaism. Jesus even preached in Samaria and may have told the story to encourage rapprochement between the two tribes.
It is foolish to interpret this incident as encouraging neighbourliness worldwide. Jesus was not speaking to Gentiles and declared that he was only concerned with 'the house of Israel' (Matthew 15:24).
Gerry Farrell reported how his wife upbraided a Hungarian bishop about his attitude to refugees, citing the example of the story of the Good Samaritan 'despite the fact that the Jews and the Samaritans traditionally despised each other'.
In fact both Jews and Samaritans were Israelites, only differing in certain beliefs and practices within Judaism. Jesus even preached in Samaria and may have told the story to encourage rapprochement between the two tribes.
It is foolish to interpret this incident as encouraging neighbourliness worldwide. Jesus was not speaking to Gentiles and declared that he was only concerned with 'the house of Israel' (Matthew 15:24).
To The Scotsman (23 Sep 2015) published 24 Sep 2015
Willie Rennie says 'We're Liberals'. In fact his party is called the 'Liberal Democrats', the latter word the result of the merger of the Liberal Party with the SDP, which I joined just before the merger. So his party is only partly 'Liberal', but also supposed to be social democratic. Unfortunately the policies of the SDP have got lost in a Liberal takeover.
Allowing anyone in the LibDems to campaign for Scottish independence is taking liberalism too far and, as you claim, 'unprincipled' (your 2nd leader, 23 September).
Willie Rennie says 'We're Liberals'. In fact his party is called the 'Liberal Democrats', the latter word the result of the merger of the Liberal Party with the SDP, which I joined just before the merger. So his party is only partly 'Liberal', but also supposed to be social democratic. Unfortunately the policies of the SDP have got lost in a Liberal takeover.
Allowing anyone in the LibDems to campaign for Scottish independence is taking liberalism too far and, as you claim, 'unprincipled' (your 2nd leader, 23 September).
To The Scotsman (21 Sep 2015) not published but a correction was published
The picture in your Picture Gallery (21 September) does not show, as the caption claims, 'a longboat'; it shows a narrow boat, the traditional working boat on Britain's canals. A 'longboat' is a large boat that may be launched from a sailing ship.
The picture in your Picture Gallery (21 September) does not show, as the caption claims, 'a longboat'; it shows a narrow boat, the traditional working boat on Britain's canals. A 'longboat' is a large boat that may be launched from a sailing ship.
To The Scotsman (16 Sep 2015) Published 17 Sep 2015
As an atheist and republican, I've sent my congratulations to MP Jeremy Corbyn for not singing the National Anthem, a dull prayer to God on behalf of the monarch. It is refreshing to see a party leader taking a principled stance. He expressed his respect on this occasion by his presence and by standing. I also stand in silence at any religious funeral.
In fact there is a better objection: that is that no one in a free country should be forced to say (or sing) anything which which they disagree.
The UK needs a new anthem that is about this country, not its monarch.
As an atheist and republican, I've sent my congratulations to MP Jeremy Corbyn for not singing the National Anthem, a dull prayer to God on behalf of the monarch. It is refreshing to see a party leader taking a principled stance. He expressed his respect on this occasion by his presence and by standing. I also stand in silence at any religious funeral.
In fact there is a better objection: that is that no one in a free country should be forced to say (or sing) anything which which they disagree.
The UK needs a new anthem that is about this country, not its monarch.
To The Sunday Times (14 Sep 2015) not published
On the whole I agree with Stuart Paton ('Wind is not the only answer to lasting power', 13 September), but Scotland is not 'on course to generate 100% of its electricity consumption from renewables by 2020' because that is not the government's aim. Its ambition is to generate the equivalent of 'at least' 100 per cent of gross electricity consumption from those sources by that year (i.e. the total generated from renewable sources over a year is to match consumption). The government recognises that renewables will need to be supported by a minimum of 2.5 GW of thermal generation, which it hopes will be progressively fitted with carbon capture and storage. Generation from renewables has now reached about 50 per cent.
On the whole I agree with Stuart Paton ('Wind is not the only answer to lasting power', 13 September), but Scotland is not 'on course to generate 100% of its electricity consumption from renewables by 2020' because that is not the government's aim. Its ambition is to generate the equivalent of 'at least' 100 per cent of gross electricity consumption from those sources by that year (i.e. the total generated from renewable sources over a year is to match consumption). The government recognises that renewables will need to be supported by a minimum of 2.5 GW of thermal generation, which it hopes will be progressively fitted with carbon capture and storage. Generation from renewables has now reached about 50 per cent.
To Scotland on Sunday (7 Sep 2015) published 13 Sep 29015
Einstein did not propose any theory about the origin of the universe ('Scottish space mission to boldly go after Einstein', 6 September). In fact, originally, he thought the universe had always existed and bitterly regretted introducing a term into his equations to make his theory fit that idea. Otherwise he could have been the first to propose that the universe is expanding.
Nor do gravitational waves (predicted by Einstein) have anything to do with 'the origins of life as we know it'. If they exist, they will merely (!) be caused by collapsing black holes or merging neutron stars.
Einstein did not propose any theory about the origin of the universe ('Scottish space mission to boldly go after Einstein', 6 September). In fact, originally, he thought the universe had always existed and bitterly regretted introducing a term into his equations to make his theory fit that idea. Otherwise he could have been the first to propose that the universe is expanding.
Nor do gravitational waves (predicted by Einstein) have anything to do with 'the origins of life as we know it'. If they exist, they will merely (!) be caused by collapsing black holes or merging neutron stars.
To The Scotsman (3 Sep 2015) not published
I write on what Oliver Cromwell called 'The glorious third [of September]', because it was on that day that his army won both the Battle of Dunbar (1650), which, in 'Skeletons dug up in England are lost Scots Covenanters' (this day) you could have described as 'exactly 365 years ago' (not 'almost 400 years ago') and the Battle of Worcester (1651), which inexplicably you omitted from your 'Now and Then' column.
I write on what Oliver Cromwell called 'The glorious third [of September]', because it was on that day that his army won both the Battle of Dunbar (1650), which, in 'Skeletons dug up in England are lost Scots Covenanters' (this day) you could have described as 'exactly 365 years ago' (not 'almost 400 years ago') and the Battle of Worcester (1651), which inexplicably you omitted from your 'Now and Then' column.
To The Sunday Times (31 Aug 2015) published 6 Sep 2015
Contrary to Peter Cunningham's claim (Letter, 30 August), the government is not about to give £24bn of taxpayers' money to the French and Chinese to build a new nuclear power station in Somerset (Hinkley Point C).
The new station will be built by EDF Energy, who will meet the total cost of about £24bn, making nonsense of Mr Cunningham's 'subsidy' of £76bn, which he reaches by adding in the strike price of the electricity sold, which is high on account of the risk and uncertainty involved in the UK's first new nuclear station in nearly 30 years.
Nuclear power is needed for environmentally-friendly base-load electricity, hardly any of which can come from the sources mentioned by Mr Cunningham (what low-cost energy storage systems did he have in mind?). Shifting generation from central plants to local generation and storage is a recipe for chaos and breakdowns on the electricity network.
Contrary to Peter Cunningham's claim (Letter, 30 August), the government is not about to give £24bn of taxpayers' money to the French and Chinese to build a new nuclear power station in Somerset (Hinkley Point C).
The new station will be built by EDF Energy, who will meet the total cost of about £24bn, making nonsense of Mr Cunningham's 'subsidy' of £76bn, which he reaches by adding in the strike price of the electricity sold, which is high on account of the risk and uncertainty involved in the UK's first new nuclear station in nearly 30 years.
Nuclear power is needed for environmentally-friendly base-load electricity, hardly any of which can come from the sources mentioned by Mr Cunningham (what low-cost energy storage systems did he have in mind?). Shifting generation from central plants to local generation and storage is a recipe for chaos and breakdowns on the electricity network.
To The Scotsman (27 Aug 2015) not published
I am not aware that the Central Electricity Generation Board (CEGB) had any policy regarding Scotland (Letter from Prof Tony Trewavas, 27 August).
The CEGB's remit was for generation only in England and Wales. Responsibility for both generation and supply in Scotland lay with the South of Scotland Electricity Board (SSEB) and the North of Scotland Hydro-Electric Board respectively. Both these boards had merely a fraternal relationship with the CEGB.
Both the Scottish Boards live on as electricity distribution companies (Scottish Power Energy Networks and Scottish Hydro Electric Power Distribution).
I am not aware that the Central Electricity Generation Board (CEGB) had any policy regarding Scotland (Letter from Prof Tony Trewavas, 27 August).
The CEGB's remit was for generation only in England and Wales. Responsibility for both generation and supply in Scotland lay with the South of Scotland Electricity Board (SSEB) and the North of Scotland Hydro-Electric Board respectively. Both these boards had merely a fraternal relationship with the CEGB.
Both the Scottish Boards live on as electricity distribution companies (Scottish Power Energy Networks and Scottish Hydro Electric Power Distribution).
To Scotland on Sunday (24 Aug 2015) published 30 Aug 2015
Miles Fielding (Letter, 23 August) claimed that the public has 'always been wary of technology'.
In October 2000, the Office of Science and Technology and the Welcome Trust published A Review of Science Communication and Public Attitudes to Science in Britain.
This found that three-quarters of the British population were ‘amazed’ by the achievements of science. Largely this is because they can see the benefits for themselves. Two-thirds agreed that science and technology are making our lives healthier, easier and more comfortable.
Eight out of ten people agreed that Britain needs to develop science and technology in order to enhance its international competitiveness.The need to invest in basic research was also appreciated: 72 per cent agreed that, even if it brings no immediate benefits, scientific research that advances knowledge is necessary and should be supported by the Government.
When asked whether they thought the benefits of science are greater than any harmful effects, the response was ambivalent: 43 per cent agreed, 17 per cent disagreed, and a third preferred to give no opinion.
Other surveys have found similar result and none of these findings supports Mr Fielding's claim.
Miles Fielding (Letter, 23 August) claimed that the public has 'always been wary of technology'.
In October 2000, the Office of Science and Technology and the Welcome Trust published A Review of Science Communication and Public Attitudes to Science in Britain.
This found that three-quarters of the British population were ‘amazed’ by the achievements of science. Largely this is because they can see the benefits for themselves. Two-thirds agreed that science and technology are making our lives healthier, easier and more comfortable.
Eight out of ten people agreed that Britain needs to develop science and technology in order to enhance its international competitiveness.The need to invest in basic research was also appreciated: 72 per cent agreed that, even if it brings no immediate benefits, scientific research that advances knowledge is necessary and should be supported by the Government.
When asked whether they thought the benefits of science are greater than any harmful effects, the response was ambivalent: 43 per cent agreed, 17 per cent disagreed, and a third preferred to give no opinion.
Other surveys have found similar result and none of these findings supports Mr Fielding's claim.
To The Scotsman (23 Aug 2015) published 24 Aug 2015
Brian Wilson's argument ('Energy switch shames Scotland', 22 August) is all very well, but seems to overlook the fact that the Longannet power station burns coal, the fossil fuel that produces the most carbon dioxide. Consequently, since the Scottish Government is so keen to reduce Scotland's greenhouse gas emissions, why did it not heartily endorse the closure? Why did it not claim that its beloved wind farms produce all the electricity Scotland needs and that there is therefore no need to keep Longannet in operation?
Brian Wilson's argument ('Energy switch shames Scotland', 22 August) is all very well, but seems to overlook the fact that the Longannet power station burns coal, the fossil fuel that produces the most carbon dioxide. Consequently, since the Scottish Government is so keen to reduce Scotland's greenhouse gas emissions, why did it not heartily endorse the closure? Why did it not claim that its beloved wind farms produce all the electricity Scotland needs and that there is therefore no need to keep Longannet in operation?
To Edinburgh News (20 Aug 2015) not published
Brighton Place, and many other streets in Edinburgh are not laid with cobbles ('Public consultations are becoming pile of cobbles', Letter from John M Tulloch, 19 August). Cobblestones are small round stones set to project from the surface, usually set in concrete.
Our streets are laid with setts, granite paving blocks.
Brighton Place, and many other streets in Edinburgh are not laid with cobbles ('Public consultations are becoming pile of cobbles', Letter from John M Tulloch, 19 August). Cobblestones are small round stones set to project from the surface, usually set in concrete.
Our streets are laid with setts, granite paving blocks.
To The Sunday Times (17 Aug 2015) not published
Asking what Jesus would do in the modern world is a silly question (India Knight's 'What would Jesus do? Join the migrant in Songs of Praise from Calais', 16 August).
It displays a lack of understanding of Jesus' life, times and purpose. He did not come from a poor background and nor did he associate only with the poor; the Last Supper was held in a rich man's house, possibly that of Joseph of Arimathea.
In any case, Jesus has no relevance to life in the 21st century.
Asking what Jesus would do in the modern world is a silly question (India Knight's 'What would Jesus do? Join the migrant in Songs of Praise from Calais', 16 August).
It displays a lack of understanding of Jesus' life, times and purpose. He did not come from a poor background and nor did he associate only with the poor; the Last Supper was held in a rich man's house, possibly that of Joseph of Arimathea.
In any case, Jesus has no relevance to life in the 21st century.
To The Scotsman (10 Aug 2015) published 13 Aug 2015
Brian Monteith may be right, that privatisation has benefited several formerly state-owned services, some of which he mentions ('Labour has learned nothing from past failures', 10 August).
However, he failed to mention one, the electricity supply industry, that has not benefited. Under state control, the CEGB in England and Wales and two separate electricity boards in Scotland, were efficient as far as we can tell and provided reliable electricity under all circumstances. It generated the power, including from nuclear power plants it developed, and was also responsible for its main distribution via the national grid.
Unfortunately, privatisation has led to a proliferation of competing generation companies, including those involved in generation from renewable sources. Generation is also now coming from scattered sources of solar-powered generation.
The latter has led to the need to re-engineer the grid, away from the central generation.
Who could regard all this change as an improvement and a way of reducing costs? The French have sensibly retained government control of their generation system, including building a series of standard nuclear plants, and even benefit from exporting 2 GW across the Channel to power-starved UK.
Electricity supply is a vital public service, the nervous system of our civilisation. It should not be left to be run by private industry. Let us have state control for a state service.
Brian Monteith may be right, that privatisation has benefited several formerly state-owned services, some of which he mentions ('Labour has learned nothing from past failures', 10 August).
However, he failed to mention one, the electricity supply industry, that has not benefited. Under state control, the CEGB in England and Wales and two separate electricity boards in Scotland, were efficient as far as we can tell and provided reliable electricity under all circumstances. It generated the power, including from nuclear power plants it developed, and was also responsible for its main distribution via the national grid.
Unfortunately, privatisation has led to a proliferation of competing generation companies, including those involved in generation from renewable sources. Generation is also now coming from scattered sources of solar-powered generation.
The latter has led to the need to re-engineer the grid, away from the central generation.
Who could regard all this change as an improvement and a way of reducing costs? The French have sensibly retained government control of their generation system, including building a series of standard nuclear plants, and even benefit from exporting 2 GW across the Channel to power-starved UK.
Electricity supply is a vital public service, the nervous system of our civilisation. It should not be left to be run by private industry. Let us have state control for a state service.
To The Scotsman (8 Aug 2015) not published
Richard Lucas mischievously portrays me as having claimed to have been 'trapped' in a persecuting Christian society and of exaggeration (Letter, 8 August).
Is that because he does not believe me? Or because he cannot bear to see anyone disparaging Christianity?
I was 'trapped' in a branch of the Christian Church, which tries to hold on to its adherents by continually reminding them how they have been saved from hell by Jesus' (alleged) sacrifice and how grateful they should be that he has forgiven their sins (many must wonder, as I did, what sins those were).
Christianity's grip relaxes once one realises that much of the Gospels was written as propaganda for the Early Church and that reports of miracles were either misunderstandings and/or created to glorify Jesus. The grip disappears altogether when one realises that an empty tomb is not evidence of a resurrection and that reports of Jesus' survival were wishful thinking. The dead do not come back to life; not now, not then.
Richard Lucas mischievously portrays me as having claimed to have been 'trapped' in a persecuting Christian society and of exaggeration (Letter, 8 August).
Is that because he does not believe me? Or because he cannot bear to see anyone disparaging Christianity?
I was 'trapped' in a branch of the Christian Church, which tries to hold on to its adherents by continually reminding them how they have been saved from hell by Jesus' (alleged) sacrifice and how grateful they should be that he has forgiven their sins (many must wonder, as I did, what sins those were).
Christianity's grip relaxes once one realises that much of the Gospels was written as propaganda for the Early Church and that reports of miracles were either misunderstandings and/or created to glorify Jesus. The grip disappears altogether when one realises that an empty tomb is not evidence of a resurrection and that reports of Jesus' survival were wishful thinking. The dead do not come back to life; not now, not then.
To The Edinburgh News (7 Aug 2015) not published
It is sad enough to read about the death of 14-year-old Peter Ashton but sadder to see his family believing that he is now being looked after in heaven by his friend Jak Trueman ('I know that Jak will be taking care of Peter up in heaven', 5 August).
This ubiquitous superstition appeared again recently when it was revealed that Cilla Black was looking forward to meeting her husband again in heaven.
Heaven does not exist and even Jesus, who believed that it did, did not plan to go there (mistakenly, he thought he would be resurrected to live on a reformed Earth).
Belief in an afterlife diverts people's attention from the work that they can do here in the only life they have. Worse, it can lead to suicidal and sometimes murderous attempts to reach it. It is the motivation behind Islamic suicide bombers.
It is sad enough to read about the death of 14-year-old Peter Ashton but sadder to see his family believing that he is now being looked after in heaven by his friend Jak Trueman ('I know that Jak will be taking care of Peter up in heaven', 5 August).
This ubiquitous superstition appeared again recently when it was revealed that Cilla Black was looking forward to meeting her husband again in heaven.
Heaven does not exist and even Jesus, who believed that it did, did not plan to go there (mistakenly, he thought he would be resurrected to live on a reformed Earth).
Belief in an afterlife diverts people's attention from the work that they can do here in the only life they have. Worse, it can lead to suicidal and sometimes murderous attempts to reach it. It is the motivation behind Islamic suicide bombers.
To The Scotsman (6 Aug 2015) published 7 Aug 2015
Richard Lucas refers to the 'life changing teachings of Christianity' (Letters, 6 August).
I can confirm that they are 'life-changing'; I was trapped in the religion as a teenager and spent 17 years embroiled in it. I only escaped after improving my education and the application of rational thought. It was huge relief to live a life free of superstition and mysticism.
As a result, as your readers may have noticed, I still take great interest in the origins of Christianity and am the author of a book about it. So it was 'life-changing' in a different way.
Richard Lucas refers to the 'life changing teachings of Christianity' (Letters, 6 August).
I can confirm that they are 'life-changing'; I was trapped in the religion as a teenager and spent 17 years embroiled in it. I only escaped after improving my education and the application of rational thought. It was huge relief to live a life free of superstition and mysticism.
As a result, as your readers may have noticed, I still take great interest in the origins of Christianity and am the author of a book about it. So it was 'life-changing' in a different way.
To The Scotsman (4 Aug 2015) not published
The lack of any mention of nuclear power in President Obama's climate change initiative is surprising. Nuclear power in the USA provided 19.5 per cent of electricity in 2014. Cutting back on generation from burning coal will necessitate expansion of nuclear generation, the only thermal method of generating bulk electricity without damaging the climate.
You did not help to clarify matters by confusingly claiming that 'Power plants account for roughly one-third of all US emissions...' ('Obama sets stricter greenhouse gas cuts', 4 August). Such plants cannot include nuclear ones.
The lack of any mention of nuclear power in President Obama's climate change initiative is surprising. Nuclear power in the USA provided 19.5 per cent of electricity in 2014. Cutting back on generation from burning coal will necessitate expansion of nuclear generation, the only thermal method of generating bulk electricity without damaging the climate.
You did not help to clarify matters by confusingly claiming that 'Power plants account for roughly one-third of all US emissions...' ('Obama sets stricter greenhouse gas cuts', 4 August). Such plants cannot include nuclear ones.
To Scotland on Sunday (3 Aug 2015) published 9 Aug 2015
There is still debate over why the Japanese surrendered in 1945 ('The Big Bang', 2 August) and the casualty figures.
Perhaps, as Hannah McGill reports, 'between 129,000 and 246,000...were killed' at Hiroshima and Nagasaki. But it is often forgotten that conventional bombing by the US in March 1945 on Tokyo, Nagoya, Osaka and Kobe killed about 300,000 people. Consequently the number killed by the atomic bombs was not exceptional. If Japan had not surrendered, firebombing would undoubtedly have continued until not a single Japanese city was left standing.
So why did Japan surrender? There is evidence that the Japanese knew that a new type of bomb was being used, but what is the difference between one bomb that can destroy a city and multitudes of bombs doing the same thing?
We can only judge from the Emperor's radio broadcast to his people, in which he referred to the employment of 'a new and most cruel bomb, the power of which to do damage is, indeed, incalculable'. He warned that, if they continued to fight, not only would it lead to the collapse of the Japanese nation but 'to the total extinction of human civilisation'.
This response seems an overreaction; continuation of conventional bombing could have had the same result. It is difficult to understand why the different quality of the bomb and the fact that one bomb could now do the work of thousands made any difference.
I think that the Allies were lucky that the Japanese feared the 'new type of bomb' and saw it as evidence of the superior technical power of the Allies, a power they could never resist.
There is still debate over why the Japanese surrendered in 1945 ('The Big Bang', 2 August) and the casualty figures.
Perhaps, as Hannah McGill reports, 'between 129,000 and 246,000...were killed' at Hiroshima and Nagasaki. But it is often forgotten that conventional bombing by the US in March 1945 on Tokyo, Nagoya, Osaka and Kobe killed about 300,000 people. Consequently the number killed by the atomic bombs was not exceptional. If Japan had not surrendered, firebombing would undoubtedly have continued until not a single Japanese city was left standing.
So why did Japan surrender? There is evidence that the Japanese knew that a new type of bomb was being used, but what is the difference between one bomb that can destroy a city and multitudes of bombs doing the same thing?
We can only judge from the Emperor's radio broadcast to his people, in which he referred to the employment of 'a new and most cruel bomb, the power of which to do damage is, indeed, incalculable'. He warned that, if they continued to fight, not only would it lead to the collapse of the Japanese nation but 'to the total extinction of human civilisation'.
This response seems an overreaction; continuation of conventional bombing could have had the same result. It is difficult to understand why the different quality of the bomb and the fact that one bomb could now do the work of thousands made any difference.
I think that the Allies were lucky that the Japanese feared the 'new type of bomb' and saw it as evidence of the superior technical power of the Allies, a power they could never resist.
To The Scotsman (2 Aug 2015) published 3 Aug 2015
Donald Hardie suggests reform of the House of Lords along the lines of the Irish Senate, which is appointed, not elected (Letters, 1 August).
However, the latter has come in for a lot of criticism, including many calls for reform and even abolition. Some point out that both Denmark and New Zealand got rid of their second chambers 60 years ago and seem to manage well without.
Probably the need for a revising chamber, proposing but not able to enact the revisions, depends on what other revision process exists (e.g. committees). If powerful committees exist then a second chamber is probably not needed. But in Scotland, unfortunately, we have a unicameral legislature lacking adequate oversight and revision.
Donald Hardie suggests reform of the House of Lords along the lines of the Irish Senate, which is appointed, not elected (Letters, 1 August).
However, the latter has come in for a lot of criticism, including many calls for reform and even abolition. Some point out that both Denmark and New Zealand got rid of their second chambers 60 years ago and seem to manage well without.
Probably the need for a revising chamber, proposing but not able to enact the revisions, depends on what other revision process exists (e.g. committees). If powerful committees exist then a second chamber is probably not needed. But in Scotland, unfortunately, we have a unicameral legislature lacking adequate oversight and revision.
To The Scotsman (30 Jul 2015) published 31 Jul 2015
Perhaps it was, as you suggest, astrologers who decided that the second of two full moons in a calendar month constitutes a 'blue moon' ('Eyes on the skies as blue moon expected on Friday', 30 July). However this has absolutely no astronomical significance and is merely an accident of our irregular calendar. The full moon today is unlikely to appear blue.
The term 'blue moon' has its origin when, very occasionally, dust or smoke high in the atmosphere filter the Moon's light turning in blue. The same thing can cause the Sun to appear blue. In fact, as you reported on 27 September 1950, both a blue Sun and a blue Moon were seen from Scotland and the North of England the previous day due to forest fires in Canada.
It is the rarity of this phenomenon that has given rise to the phrase 'once in a blue moon'.
Perhaps it was, as you suggest, astrologers who decided that the second of two full moons in a calendar month constitutes a 'blue moon' ('Eyes on the skies as blue moon expected on Friday', 30 July). However this has absolutely no astronomical significance and is merely an accident of our irregular calendar. The full moon today is unlikely to appear blue.
The term 'blue moon' has its origin when, very occasionally, dust or smoke high in the atmosphere filter the Moon's light turning in blue. The same thing can cause the Sun to appear blue. In fact, as you reported on 27 September 1950, both a blue Sun and a blue Moon were seen from Scotland and the North of England the previous day due to forest fires in Canada.
It is the rarity of this phenomenon that has given rise to the phrase 'once in a blue moon'.
To The Scotsman (24 Jul 2015) not published
While Jesus is recorded as upholding the Jewish law, which did condemn male homosexuality (Lev. 18,22), Ron Shewan (Letter, 24 July) should note that on several occasions Jesus ignored the law.
In John 8 he refused to agree to the stoning of an aldulterous woman; in Mark 3 he healed a man's withered hand and in Mark 2 his disciples plucked corn. In both these latter cases he was accused of breaking the Sabbath law, yet he justified his actions, even to the extent of putting himself (as Messiah) above the law (Mk. 2,28). In Matthew 19 he is recorded as revising the Mosaic law on divorce.
So claiming that Matthew 5,17-21 justifies the belief that Jesus condemned homosexuality is perverse speculation that flies in the face of the evidence that he put himself above the law, making it less severe.
I think that it is Mr Shewan who needs more Bible study.
While Jesus is recorded as upholding the Jewish law, which did condemn male homosexuality (Lev. 18,22), Ron Shewan (Letter, 24 July) should note that on several occasions Jesus ignored the law.
In John 8 he refused to agree to the stoning of an aldulterous woman; in Mark 3 he healed a man's withered hand and in Mark 2 his disciples plucked corn. In both these latter cases he was accused of breaking the Sabbath law, yet he justified his actions, even to the extent of putting himself (as Messiah) above the law (Mk. 2,28). In Matthew 19 he is recorded as revising the Mosaic law on divorce.
So claiming that Matthew 5,17-21 justifies the belief that Jesus condemned homosexuality is perverse speculation that flies in the face of the evidence that he put himself above the law, making it less severe.
I think that it is Mr Shewan who needs more Bible study.
To The Scotsman (23 Jul 2015) published 24 Jul 2015
It is good to see that BBC4 will broadcast programmes on the UK's nuclear power industry ('Cameras allowed behind the scenes at nuclear power station for BBC4 show', 23 July), but please note that Sellafield is waste reprocessing plant, not a power station.
It is good to see that BBC4 will broadcast programmes on the UK's nuclear power industry ('Cameras allowed behind the scenes at nuclear power station for BBC4 show', 23 July), but please note that Sellafield is waste reprocessing plant, not a power station.
To The Scotsman (21 Jul 2015) published 22 Jul 2015
David Maddox draws attention to the incongruity of the new LibDem leader being unable to accept homosexuality ('Inside Politics', 21 July).
Christians make a rod to beat their own back by paying too much attention to the unenlightened views on this matter by the Jewish scriptures, which they presume were endorsed wholesale by Jesus. However, Jesus himself is not recorded as having made any comment on the matter. In fact he seems to have had an intimate relationship with one of his disciples.
It is important to recognise that Jesus (unusually) seems to have remained unmarried and probably thought sexual relationships irrelevant in the face of the expected kingdom in which, he believed, the resurrected would be sexless.
So Christians would do themselves a favour by taking a similar disinterested attitude to homosexuality and all other modern sexual relationships, including abortion. They should follow their leader.
David Maddox draws attention to the incongruity of the new LibDem leader being unable to accept homosexuality ('Inside Politics', 21 July).
Christians make a rod to beat their own back by paying too much attention to the unenlightened views on this matter by the Jewish scriptures, which they presume were endorsed wholesale by Jesus. However, Jesus himself is not recorded as having made any comment on the matter. In fact he seems to have had an intimate relationship with one of his disciples.
It is important to recognise that Jesus (unusually) seems to have remained unmarried and probably thought sexual relationships irrelevant in the face of the expected kingdom in which, he believed, the resurrected would be sexless.
So Christians would do themselves a favour by taking a similar disinterested attitude to homosexuality and all other modern sexual relationships, including abortion. They should follow their leader.
To The Scotsman (17 July 2015) published 18 Jul 2015
You report that Policy Exchange calls for the Government to tackle climate change by improving household energy efficiency and encouraging more onshore wind farms ('Government's green vision adds £60 to energy bills', 16 July).
Unfortunately, since the mid 19th century, it has been known that increasing the efficiency with which a fuel is used actually increases demand for it and greater use. Despite laudable attempts to reduce the household use of electricity, national demand continues to increase.
There is also evidence that, for various reasons, renewable energy systems do not reduce overall greenhouse gas emissions (emissions are still increasing).
The only effective way to reduce carbon and other emissions is to switch fuels. For electricity generation there should be an immediate switch from burning to coal to burning gas, with the hope that even gas can be phased out in preference to nuclear and hydro with more storage systems. For road transport, petrol and diesel need to be replaced in the short term by LPG and later by electricity and/or fuel cells.
However, I despair at the short-sightedness and overall technical ignorance of governments and expect that whatever is done will be too little too late and that anthropogenic global warming will relentlessly continue with dire effects for civilisation.
You report that Policy Exchange calls for the Government to tackle climate change by improving household energy efficiency and encouraging more onshore wind farms ('Government's green vision adds £60 to energy bills', 16 July).
Unfortunately, since the mid 19th century, it has been known that increasing the efficiency with which a fuel is used actually increases demand for it and greater use. Despite laudable attempts to reduce the household use of electricity, national demand continues to increase.
There is also evidence that, for various reasons, renewable energy systems do not reduce overall greenhouse gas emissions (emissions are still increasing).
The only effective way to reduce carbon and other emissions is to switch fuels. For electricity generation there should be an immediate switch from burning to coal to burning gas, with the hope that even gas can be phased out in preference to nuclear and hydro with more storage systems. For road transport, petrol and diesel need to be replaced in the short term by LPG and later by electricity and/or fuel cells.
However, I despair at the short-sightedness and overall technical ignorance of governments and expect that whatever is done will be too little too late and that anthropogenic global warming will relentlessly continue with dire effects for civilisation.
To The Scotsman (15 July 2015) not published
Lindsay C F Watt is probably right that more books have been written about Jesus than any other person (mine is one of them).
It has been estimated that, in the last century alone, 60,000 books were written about Jesus, while it has also been estimated that the total number of monographs on Jesus is 80,000 (amazon.uk lists 170,296 books with the word 'Jesus' in their title and amazon.com lists 219,854).
But only those books critical of the central claims of Christianity examine the evidence properly and in context. Books by Christian authors tend to follow traditional beliefs without question.
Jesus was no 'Palestinian peasant'; he was literate and steeped in the Jewish scriptures. There is even evidence that he came from a well-off family.
Rather than read David Roberston's book (Magnificent Obsession: Why Jesus is Great), I would urge people to read Christopher Hitchens's book God is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything.
Lindsay C F Watt is probably right that more books have been written about Jesus than any other person (mine is one of them).
It has been estimated that, in the last century alone, 60,000 books were written about Jesus, while it has also been estimated that the total number of monographs on Jesus is 80,000 (amazon.uk lists 170,296 books with the word 'Jesus' in their title and amazon.com lists 219,854).
But only those books critical of the central claims of Christianity examine the evidence properly and in context. Books by Christian authors tend to follow traditional beliefs without question.
Jesus was no 'Palestinian peasant'; he was literate and steeped in the Jewish scriptures. There is even evidence that he came from a well-off family.
Rather than read David Roberston's book (Magnificent Obsession: Why Jesus is Great), I would urge people to read Christopher Hitchens's book God is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything.
To The Edinburgh News (07 July 2015) published 09 July 2015
Clark Cross thinks it hypocritical of the developed West, which became so by exploiting fossil fuels, to want to prevent developing countries from doing the same so as to slow climate change (Letter, 7 July).
So because the West (ignorantly) made a mistake, Mr Cross wants developing countries to make the same mistake, so increasing the likelihood that global warming will do for us all!
Mr Cross may not believe in global warming but he is ignoring the evidence and the views of expert climatologists. The whole world has to stop burning coal, the most damaging of all fossil fuels. If we cannot stop doing so ourselves we can at least try to help developing countries from going down the same cul-de-sac.
Clark Cross thinks it hypocritical of the developed West, which became so by exploiting fossil fuels, to want to prevent developing countries from doing the same so as to slow climate change (Letter, 7 July).
So because the West (ignorantly) made a mistake, Mr Cross wants developing countries to make the same mistake, so increasing the likelihood that global warming will do for us all!
Mr Cross may not believe in global warming but he is ignoring the evidence and the views of expert climatologists. The whole world has to stop burning coal, the most damaging of all fossil fuels. If we cannot stop doing so ourselves we can at least try to help developing countries from going down the same cul-de-sac.
To The Scotsman (05 July 2015) published 6 July 2015
You ask 'What's not to like?' about generating electricity from photovoltaics [solar panels (Comment] ('A powerful argument for a glass roof', 4 July). Well, the cost for a start. The average domestic solar PV system is 4kWp and costs £5000-8000 (including VAT at 5% [per cent]). Not everyone has that spare cash. Moreover[,] PV is not competitive without the subsidy it presently receives and will not be until it generates at least 1.5 times the energy used in its installation.
The UK government calculates that the electricity generated by a 4kW installation costs £310/MWh (total levelised). That's about three times that of from conventional hydro power or onshore wind farms.
Apart from all that, all forms of renewable electricity generation are a headache for the grid controllers, charged with maintaining an adequate electricity supply at the right frequency. They have no control over these scattered generating inputs and [so](instead) have to ask thermal stations (except nuclear) to come on and offline to balance the load on the network. That makes these thermal stations inefficient and [likely]probably unprofitable. While the output from wind farms is wind-dependent, PV is sun-dependent and so is useless at night. Until efficient means are found to store electricity at a reasonable cost, all renewables will suffer these defects.
You ask 'What's not to like?' about generating electricity from photovoltaics [solar panels (Comment] ('A powerful argument for a glass roof', 4 July). Well, the cost for a start. The average domestic solar PV system is 4kWp and costs £5000-8000 (including VAT at 5% [per cent]). Not everyone has that spare cash. Moreover[,] PV is not competitive without the subsidy it presently receives and will not be until it generates at least 1.5 times the energy used in its installation.
The UK government calculates that the electricity generated by a 4kW installation costs £310/MWh (total levelised). That's about three times that of from conventional hydro power or onshore wind farms.
Apart from all that, all forms of renewable electricity generation are a headache for the grid controllers, charged with maintaining an adequate electricity supply at the right frequency. They have no control over these scattered generating inputs and [so](instead) have to ask thermal stations (except nuclear) to come on and offline to balance the load on the network. That makes these thermal stations inefficient and [likely]probably unprofitable. While the output from wind farms is wind-dependent, PV is sun-dependent and so is useless at night. Until efficient means are found to store electricity at a reasonable cost, all renewables will suffer these defects.
To The Sunday Times (30 June 2015) published 5 July 2015
I am no royalist but it irritates me that you and other newspapers
take every opportunity to mock the Queen for using the impersonal
pronoun ('Phew! One is not going off the rails', 28 June).
She was brought up in the correct use of the English language
(unlike journalists perhaps) and does not deserve such mockery. Nor do
others who use this pronoun in the relevant circumstances. You merely
expose your ignorance.
Please stop it.
I am no royalist but it irritates me that you and other newspapers
take every opportunity to mock the Queen for using the impersonal
pronoun ('Phew! One is not going off the rails', 28 June).
She was brought up in the correct use of the English language
(unlike journalists perhaps) and does not deserve such mockery. Nor do
others who use this pronoun in the relevant circumstances. You merely
expose your ignorance.
Please stop it.
To Scotland on Sunday (29 June 2015) published 5 July 2015
MSP Fiona Hyslop should not believe all the green propaganda she hears and no doubt welcomes.
Her claim that Japan is looking to divest itself from its reliance on nuclear power ('Following in the footsteps of Scotland's first Samurai', 28 June) is incorrect.
Japan's new energy plan, approved by the Liberal Democratic Party cabinet in April 2014, calls nuclear power 'the country's most important power source' and the government aims for a realistic and balanced energy structure. It hopes that nuclear power will produce 20 per cent of Japan’s electricity by 2030. Although many plants are off-line, they will be recommissioned after safety checks.
MSP Fiona Hyslop should not believe all the green propaganda she hears and no doubt welcomes.
Her claim that Japan is looking to divest itself from its reliance on nuclear power ('Following in the footsteps of Scotland's first Samurai', 28 June) is incorrect.
Japan's new energy plan, approved by the Liberal Democratic Party cabinet in April 2014, calls nuclear power 'the country's most important power source' and the government aims for a realistic and balanced energy structure. It hopes that nuclear power will produce 20 per cent of Japan’s electricity by 2030. Although many plants are off-line, they will be recommissioned after safety checks.
To Scotland on Sunday (27 June 2015)
You claim that, among the City buildings that will have solar
panels fitted ('Let there be light as solar panel sites are revealed',
27 June) is 'Redhall Primary'.
In fact there is no such school. Perhaps you mean 'Longstone
Primary [School]'. Or perhaps 'Redhall School', which is a special
school built in the grounds of Longstone Primary School. Could you clarify?
You claim that, among the City buildings that will have solar
panels fitted ('Let there be light as solar panel sites are revealed',
27 June) is 'Redhall Primary'.
In fact there is no such school. Perhaps you mean 'Longstone
Primary [School]'. Or perhaps 'Redhall School', which is a special
school built in the grounds of Longstone Primary School. Could you clarify?
To Scotland on Sunday (26 June 2015) not published
I agree that the use of helium in party balloons is 'frivolous'
and could jeopardise its vital use in medical equipment (your report 26
June). Helium is extracted economically only from natural gas and so is
not inexhaustible.
But there is another objection. These balloons eventually burst at
height and fall to ground or sea, not only an environmental nuisance but
a danger to wildlife. In seas, they look just like jellyfish and can
kill creatures that live off the latter.
Such irresponsible balloon releases should be banned.
I agree that the use of helium in party balloons is 'frivolous'
and could jeopardise its vital use in medical equipment (your report 26
June). Helium is extracted economically only from natural gas and so is
not inexhaustible.
But there is another objection. These balloons eventually burst at
height and fall to ground or sea, not only an environmental nuisance but
a danger to wildlife. In seas, they look just like jellyfish and can
kill creatures that live off the latter.
Such irresponsible balloon releases should be banned.
To The Scotsman (22 June 2015) published today 24 June 2015
B McGuire (Letter 22 June) seems to confuse religious observance
in schools assemblies with religious and philosophical education
classes. Children should certainly have the opportunity to learn about
the world's various religious beliefs and customs, but they should not
be subjected to 'instruction' in one particular religion (Christianity),
which is what happens at present in assemblies (it's a legal requirement).
Consequently I have started a petition calling on the Scottish
Government to end compulsory worship in schools by repealing that law.
Readers who agree with me can sign the petition at www.change.org and
searching for my name.
B McGuire (Letter 22 June) seems to confuse religious observance
in schools assemblies with religious and philosophical education
classes. Children should certainly have the opportunity to learn about
the world's various religious beliefs and customs, but they should not
be subjected to 'instruction' in one particular religion (Christianity),
which is what happens at present in assemblies (it's a legal requirement).
Consequently I have started a petition calling on the Scottish
Government to end compulsory worship in schools by repealing that law.
Readers who agree with me can sign the petition at www.change.org and
searching for my name.
To The Edinburgh News (20 June 2015) not published
Following your publication of my letter suggesting that the effluent from the Seafield sewage treatment plant might be responsible for the poor quality of the water on Portobello's West Beach, I received an anonymous note claiming that the effluent outfall is 2800 m (1.75 miles) out (that was from a document issued in 1978 by the then Edinburgh Sewage Disposal Service). I had claimed that it extends only 800 metres out into the Firth of Forth.
But my information comes firstly from a Powerpoint presentation currently available from Scottish Water which states that it extends out 'about a mile' (about 1600 m) and secondly from a contradictory email I received on 18 March from SW this year stating that it extends '800m out to sea' (SW is still pretending that the outfall reaches the North Sea).
Scottish Water has not commented publicly on this matter, although perhaps it should.
Following your publication of my letter suggesting that the effluent from the Seafield sewage treatment plant might be responsible for the poor quality of the water on Portobello's West Beach, I received an anonymous note claiming that the effluent outfall is 2800 m (1.75 miles) out (that was from a document issued in 1978 by the then Edinburgh Sewage Disposal Service). I had claimed that it extends only 800 metres out into the Firth of Forth.
But my information comes firstly from a Powerpoint presentation currently available from Scottish Water which states that it extends out 'about a mile' (about 1600 m) and secondly from a contradictory email I received on 18 March from SW this year stating that it extends '800m out to sea' (SW is still pretending that the outfall reaches the North Sea).
Scottish Water has not commented publicly on this matter, although perhaps it should.
To The Edinburgh News (13 June 2015) published 16 June 2015
I think that the poor water quality at Portobello West Beach is most likely due to the fact that the liquid waste discharge from Scottish Water's Seafield sewage treatment plant only a short distance north-west extends only 800 metres into the Firth of Forth (not into the North Sea as SW claim).
SW claims that, during the 'bathing season', this effluent is given extra treatment to kill bacteria. This indicates that they are aware of the possibility of polluting nearby bathing waters.
The solution is for SW to extend its pipeline much further out into the Firth.
I think that the poor water quality at Portobello West Beach is most likely due to the fact that the liquid waste discharge from Scottish Water's Seafield sewage treatment plant only a short distance north-west extends only 800 metres into the Firth of Forth (not into the North Sea as SW claim).
SW claims that, during the 'bathing season', this effluent is given extra treatment to kill bacteria. This indicates that they are aware of the possibility of polluting nearby bathing waters.
The solution is for SW to extend its pipeline much further out into the Firth.
To The Scotsman (19 June 2015) not published
You question the safety of nuclear power and 'the problem of the
disposal of nuclear waste' (Leader today).
No British nuclear power plant has ever endangered the public or
indeed those who work in the industry, nor is any ever likely to.
Problems with plants abroad which have not been built to the UK's
exacting standards should not influence opinion here.
Waste disposal is not a problem; Sellafield has been handling all
levels of radioactive waste for decades and only waits for government
approval to construct a geological repository for the small proportion
of high-level waste that arises from various reactors in the UK. It even
handles foreign radioactive waste, returning the equivalent amount of
treated high-level waste.
You think that the waste will be a problem for future generations,
but perhaps you overlook the possibility that our descendants will
themselves operate nuclear plants, the only way that they will be able
to continue generating bulk electricity without damaging the climate. In
that event, they will continue to need safe storage of their own waste.
In any case, such waste ceases to be dangerous after only a few hundred
years.
You question the safety of nuclear power and 'the problem of the
disposal of nuclear waste' (Leader today).
No British nuclear power plant has ever endangered the public or
indeed those who work in the industry, nor is any ever likely to.
Problems with plants abroad which have not been built to the UK's
exacting standards should not influence opinion here.
Waste disposal is not a problem; Sellafield has been handling all
levels of radioactive waste for decades and only waits for government
approval to construct a geological repository for the small proportion
of high-level waste that arises from various reactors in the UK. It even
handles foreign radioactive waste, returning the equivalent amount of
treated high-level waste.
You think that the waste will be a problem for future generations,
but perhaps you overlook the possibility that our descendants will
themselves operate nuclear plants, the only way that they will be able
to continue generating bulk electricity without damaging the climate. In
that event, they will continue to need safe storage of their own waste.
In any case, such waste ceases to be dangerous after only a few hundred
years.
To The Scotsman (09 June 2015) published 10 June 2015
Today (9 June) the Scottish Government (SG) has released the latest data on Scotland's greenhouse gas emissions (for 2013). It claims that there has been a reduction of 14 per cent since 2012 and that it has only missed its target reduction for 2013 by 1.7 million tonnes CO2 equivalent (MtCO2e).
However, by taking advantage of the EU Emissions Trading System, the SG has managed to portray Scotland's emission as lower than they really were.
Instead of a reduction to 49.7 MtCOe, the reduction was only to 53.0 MtCO2e, a reduction of only 3.4 per cent (from 54.9 MtCOe in 2012). This minimal reduction appears to be mainly due, not to greater use of renewable energy but to less use of coal and gas for electricity generation and greater use of nuclear power.
It is ironic that Scotland is relying more and more on nuclear generation to reduce its emissions when the SG is set on closing our nuclear stations when they reach the end of their operational use and not replacing them.
Today (9 June) the Scottish Government (SG) has released the latest data on Scotland's greenhouse gas emissions (for 2013). It claims that there has been a reduction of 14 per cent since 2012 and that it has only missed its target reduction for 2013 by 1.7 million tonnes CO2 equivalent (MtCO2e).
However, by taking advantage of the EU Emissions Trading System, the SG has managed to portray Scotland's emission as lower than they really were.
Instead of a reduction to 49.7 MtCOe, the reduction was only to 53.0 MtCO2e, a reduction of only 3.4 per cent (from 54.9 MtCOe in 2012). This minimal reduction appears to be mainly due, not to greater use of renewable energy but to less use of coal and gas for electricity generation and greater use of nuclear power.
It is ironic that Scotland is relying more and more on nuclear generation to reduce its emissions when the SG is set on closing our nuclear stations when they reach the end of their operational use and not replacing them.
To The Sunday Times (02 June 2015) not published
Tom Holland ('In search of the true prophet', 31 May 2015) says that we know less about the historical Muhammad than we do about the historical Jesus.
This is probably true, but was he implying that we know little about the real Jesus? If so, that is untrue; due to the gospel record we know a great deal about Jesus, albeit most people misunderstand it.
Jesus' true plan is revealed in my book The Rise and Fall of Jesus (WPS 2009).
Tom Holland ('In search of the true prophet', 31 May 2015) says that we know less about the historical Muhammad than we do about the historical Jesus.
This is probably true, but was he implying that we know little about the real Jesus? If so, that is untrue; due to the gospel record we know a great deal about Jesus, albeit most people misunderstand it.
Jesus' true plan is revealed in my book The Rise and Fall of Jesus (WPS 2009).
To The Edinburgh News (30 May 2015) not published
Colin Cookson (Letter, 29 May) should note that there is no way in
which Westminster is 'The Mother of all [sic] Parliaments'.
The phrase 'Mother of Parliaments' was coined by MP John Bright in
1865 when he described 'England [sic] as the mother of parliaments'
because it gives birth to successive parliaments. Indeed, the UK gave
birth to another on 7 May.
Colin Cookson (Letter, 29 May) should note that there is no way in
which Westminster is 'The Mother of all [sic] Parliaments'.
The phrase 'Mother of Parliaments' was coined by MP John Bright in
1865 when he described 'England [sic] as the mother of parliaments'
because it gives birth to successive parliaments. Indeed, the UK gave
birth to another on 7 May.
To The Scotsman (27 May 2015) published 29 May
It is not often that one sees comment on the 1994 crash of an RAF Chinook helicopter into the Mull of Kintyre, killing 29 people.
So it was a surprise to see (Rev Dr) John Cameron's reference to what he evidently thinks was the RAF's 'blame the pilot' mindset in that case.
In fact, the RAF Inquiry justifiably blamed the pilots for ignoring safety rules (they flew too fast and too low in almost zero visibility). This conclusion was not reached hastily, nor I guess with pleasure. Later inquiries found nothing wrong with the aircraft and many failures by the crew.
Anyone who wants to see the full account of the incident and its aftermath, including the actual probable cause, should read the only book about the incident, my Chinook Crash (2004).
It is not often that one sees comment on the 1994 crash of an RAF Chinook helicopter into the Mull of Kintyre, killing 29 people.
So it was a surprise to see (Rev Dr) John Cameron's reference to what he evidently thinks was the RAF's 'blame the pilot' mindset in that case.
In fact, the RAF Inquiry justifiably blamed the pilots for ignoring safety rules (they flew too fast and too low in almost zero visibility). This conclusion was not reached hastily, nor I guess with pleasure. Later inquiries found nothing wrong with the aircraft and many failures by the crew.
Anyone who wants to see the full account of the incident and its aftermath, including the actual probable cause, should read the only book about the incident, my Chinook Crash (2004).
To The Scotsman (26 May 2015) not published
Rev Dr Robert Anderson claims that Europe is returning to its
pre-Christian state (Letter, 25 May).
It is true that Christianity is in decline, especially in the UK,
but that does not mean a return to the paganism that preceded
Christianity. It means the abandonment of religious belief altogether.
Already in the UK about half the population has no religious beliefs and
there are indications that this proportion will increase.
The UK in particular is becoming a post-Christian society where
religious beliefs are irrelevant. This trend should be welcomed by all
rational people.
Rev Dr Robert Anderson claims that Europe is returning to its
pre-Christian state (Letter, 25 May).
It is true that Christianity is in decline, especially in the UK,
but that does not mean a return to the paganism that preceded
Christianity. It means the abandonment of religious belief altogether.
Already in the UK about half the population has no religious beliefs and
there are indications that this proportion will increase.
The UK in particular is becoming a post-Christian society where
religious beliefs are irrelevant. This trend should be welcomed by all
rational people.
To The Edinburgh News (26 May 2015) published 27 May 2015
Cllr Chas Booth mentions several abuses of public spaces ('We must take pride in our vital public spaces', 25 May): litter, dog-fouling, broken glass in parks, etc. But no mention of graffiti, an 'in your face' insult to the public by anti-social elements. It is hard enough trying to get the owners of the property involved to remove graffiti, although Edinburgh Council will do so when asked and the graffiti is on their property. However, Police Scotland seems disinclined to trace the culprits.
It has been shown that dealing with low-level crime like graffiti and malicious damage helps to reduce higher-level crime. Does Police Scotland not believe this?
Cllr Chas Booth mentions several abuses of public spaces ('We must take pride in our vital public spaces', 25 May): litter, dog-fouling, broken glass in parks, etc. But no mention of graffiti, an 'in your face' insult to the public by anti-social elements. It is hard enough trying to get the owners of the property involved to remove graffiti, although Edinburgh Council will do so when asked and the graffiti is on their property. However, Police Scotland seems disinclined to trace the culprits.
It has been shown that dealing with low-level crime like graffiti and malicious damage helps to reduce higher-level crime. Does Police Scotland not believe this?
To The Scotsman (21 May 2015) published 22 May 2015
I did not claim that religious people could not be scientists (Ian Maxfield in his letter 21 May), in fact I acknowledged that this was the case in the past and is sometimes the case today.
I also explained that religious scientists tend to separate their religious beliefs from their scientific beliefs; they would not be taken seriously if they did not. Applicants are assessed on their publications and work records, not on their religious beliefs and I doubt that any applicant for a science post has been asked about the latter.
I did not claim that religious people could not be scientists (Ian Maxfield in his letter 21 May), in fact I acknowledged that this was the case in the past and is sometimes the case today.
I also explained that religious scientists tend to separate their religious beliefs from their scientific beliefs; they would not be taken seriously if they did not. Applicants are assessed on their publications and work records, not on their religious beliefs and I doubt that any applicant for a science post has been asked about the latter.
To The Scotsman (19 May 2015) published 20 May 2015
If a Christian scientist believed in an 'originator' (C Badenoch's
letter 19 May), then s/he could not be a cosmologist (there is no room
for an originator in modern cosmology).
Even if this Christian scientist believed in an originator the
latter would have to be one that set the universe going and then left it
to develop on its own. No scientist, certainly not a biologist, could
believe that some divine agency is manipulating everyday events. As for
this originator being omniscient, it may well be a god who does not care
or does not know what the result of his/her/its experiment is.
Jesus' own god (Jehovah) created stars on the fourth day but light
itself, which comes to us from a star, on the first day. That of course
is impossible. Anyone who thinks that Christianity is compatible with
modern science (knowledge) is deluded.
If a Christian scientist believed in an 'originator' (C Badenoch's
letter 19 May), then s/he could not be a cosmologist (there is no room
for an originator in modern cosmology).
Even if this Christian scientist believed in an originator the
latter would have to be one that set the universe going and then left it
to develop on its own. No scientist, certainly not a biologist, could
believe that some divine agency is manipulating everyday events. As for
this originator being omniscient, it may well be a god who does not care
or does not know what the result of his/her/its experiment is.
Jesus' own god (Jehovah) created stars on the fourth day but light
itself, which comes to us from a star, on the first day. That of course
is impossible. Anyone who thinks that Christianity is compatible with
modern science (knowledge) is deluded.
To The Scotsman (15 May 2015) published 16 May 2015
I am well aware that major scientific discoveries have been made
by people who profess to be Christians (Letter from Ian Maxfield 15
May). His examples all come from a time when hardly anyone was
irreligious and professing faith was necessary for continued employment.
Scientists compartmentalise their lives so that their science does not
conflict with their spiritual dimension (it still happens).
However, this does not change the fact that the precepts of
religion are in conflict with those of science. Religion believes in
absolute truth; science does not. To the religious the world/universe
was divinely created; to science it is a natural emergent phenomenon. To
the religious, God intervenes in our lives and performs miracles;
scientists reject miracles and accept only natural laws.
In short, religion cannot be reconciled with science. Science has
given us our highly technological civilisation; religion has given us
nothing but superstition and conflict, lately exemplified by IS in Syria
and Iraq who would take us back to the Middle Ages.
I am well aware that major scientific discoveries have been made
by people who profess to be Christians (Letter from Ian Maxfield 15
May). His examples all come from a time when hardly anyone was
irreligious and professing faith was necessary for continued employment.
Scientists compartmentalise their lives so that their science does not
conflict with their spiritual dimension (it still happens).
However, this does not change the fact that the precepts of
religion are in conflict with those of science. Religion believes in
absolute truth; science does not. To the religious the world/universe
was divinely created; to science it is a natural emergent phenomenon. To
the religious, God intervenes in our lives and performs miracles;
scientists reject miracles and accept only natural laws.
In short, religion cannot be reconciled with science. Science has
given us our highly technological civilisation; religion has given us
nothing but superstition and conflict, lately exemplified by IS in Syria
and Iraq who would take us back to the Middle Ages.
To The Scotsman (13 May 2015) not published
Gary Otton of the Scottish Secular Society misleads you by writing
from an address in Broughton Street, Edinburgh (Letter, 13 May).
All one would find there is a scruffy door in a basement area. In
fact his organisation is based in Glasgow.
The only secular organisation in Edinburgh is the Edinburgh
Secular Society.
Gary Otton of the Scottish Secular Society misleads you by writing
from an address in Broughton Street, Edinburgh (Letter, 13 May).
All one would find there is a scruffy door in a basement area. In
fact his organisation is based in Glasgow.
The only secular organisation in Edinburgh is the Edinburgh
Secular Society.
To The Edinburgh News (12 May 2015) not published
It is disappointing to see Malcolm Robinson and Ron Halliday again stirring up interest in 'the paranormal', including discussion of UFOs as if they are real phenomena (your report on a conference on 20 June, 12 May).
The 'paranormal' is defined as 'events or phenomena that are claimed to be beyond the scope of normal scientific understanding' (COD). However nothing is beyond the scope of science and limits cannot be set on its enquiries. Interest in the paranormal is merely a reflection of the deluded ideas of some people, those who instinctively reject reason and prefer superstition.
All my life I have fought against such superstitions and will not be attending this indulgence. I encourage others to avoid it.
It is disappointing to see Malcolm Robinson and Ron Halliday again stirring up interest in 'the paranormal', including discussion of UFOs as if they are real phenomena (your report on a conference on 20 June, 12 May).
The 'paranormal' is defined as 'events or phenomena that are claimed to be beyond the scope of normal scientific understanding' (COD). However nothing is beyond the scope of science and limits cannot be set on its enquiries. Interest in the paranormal is merely a reflection of the deluded ideas of some people, those who instinctively reject reason and prefer superstition.
All my life I have fought against such superstitions and will not be attending this indulgence. I encourage others to avoid it.
To The Scotsman (12 May 2015) published 14 May 2015
Bishop John Keenan's claim that 'we all know that logos means reason' ('Science and belief are not exclusive', Friends of The Scotsman, 12 May) is a bit optimistic; I doubt that many know what it means while studious Christians may believe that it means 'word' as translated in John's Gospel.
Originally the word logos meant 'a ground', 'a plea', 'an opinion', 'an expectation', 'word', 'speech', 'account', 'to reason' but to ancient philosophers it became a technical term for a principle of order and knowledge or simply the way in which an inward thought is expressed: a word as embodying a conception or idea. The latter was probably John's intention.
So in no way do[es] logos mean 'reason'. There is nothing reasonable about Christianity, which is why science and religion remain incompatible.
Bishop John Keenan's claim that 'we all know that logos means reason' ('Science and belief are not exclusive', Friends of The Scotsman, 12 May) is a bit optimistic; I doubt that many know what it means while studious Christians may believe that it means 'word' as translated in John's Gospel.
Originally the word logos meant 'a ground', 'a plea', 'an opinion', 'an expectation', 'word', 'speech', 'account', 'to reason' but to ancient philosophers it became a technical term for a principle of order and knowledge or simply the way in which an inward thought is expressed: a word as embodying a conception or idea. The latter was probably John's intention.
So in no way do[es] logos mean 'reason'. There is nothing reasonable about Christianity, which is why science and religion remain incompatible.
To The Sunday Times (11 May 2015) Not published but acknowledged by the editor who had already noticed the error.
How could your subs miss the fact that 'Culture' on 10 May (p. 37) attributed The Vital Question (Why is Life the Way it is?) to 'Nick Lake', when his surname is actually 'Lane', the name used throughout by the reviewer Bryan Appleyard?
How could your subs miss the fact that 'Culture' on 10 May (p. 37) attributed The Vital Question (Why is Life the Way it is?) to 'Nick Lake', when his surname is actually 'Lane', the name used throughout by the reviewer Bryan Appleyard?
To The Scotsman (05 May 2015) not published
Eddie Izzard and MSP Alex Johnstone confuse democracy with freedom
of speech ('Eddie Izzard hits out at aggressive Nationalist protests', 5
May).
The protestors in Glasgow were exercising their freedom to speak
but at the same time hindering Jim Murphy's right to speak. Stopping
people expressing their views in certainly ill-mannered, but it has
nothing to do with democracy. Mr Murphy was not using his democratic
rights; he was using his right to free speech. We will be able to exercise our
democratic rights on Thursday.
To The Scotsman (30 April 2015) not published
Understandably Rev Dr Robert Anderson thinks that the election
campaigns have ignored Christianity, which he claims offers practical
empathy with the poorest, criticism of false equalities, a higher vision
for human life and a restraining influence on political megalomania
(Letter, 30 April).
However, these 'perspectives' are not unique to Christians; they
are also those of non-Christians, of whom there are now more in the UK
than there are Christians. We now live in a post-Christian country, one
of the most irreligious in the world, albeit its institutions hang on to
religious habits. Most of its citizens now recognise the need to keep
religion and politics apart and to establish a secular state.
Understandably Rev Dr Robert Anderson thinks that the election
campaigns have ignored Christianity, which he claims offers practical
empathy with the poorest, criticism of false equalities, a higher vision
for human life and a restraining influence on political megalomania
(Letter, 30 April).
However, these 'perspectives' are not unique to Christians; they
are also those of non-Christians, of whom there are now more in the UK
than there are Christians. We now live in a post-Christian country, one
of the most irreligious in the world, albeit its institutions hang on to
religious habits. Most of its citizens now recognise the need to keep
religion and politics apart and to establish a secular state.
To The Edinburgh News (28 April 2015) published 01 May 2015
Never mind the potholes that can damage one's car; what about the
sunken manhole covers that can do the same? I've drawn CEC's attention
to some, which turned out to belong to Scottish Water and only one of
which has since been raised to road level.
Never mind the potholes that can damage one's car; what about the
sunken manhole covers that can do the same? I've drawn CEC's attention
to some, which turned out to belong to Scottish Water and only one of
which has since been raised to road level.
To The Scotsman (24 April 2015) published 25 April 2015
You claim that the earliest recorded mention of Nessie 'dates
back to the sixth century' ('Nessie bid to oust unicorn as beast of
Scotland', 23 April).
This was an allusion to the report in Adomnan's account of the
life of St Columba, written about 665 CE (i.e. in the seventh century).
He claimed that Columba prevented a savage beast from biting a swimmer
in the river (sic) Ness.
However, Adomnan would never have heard of Nessie and was merely
inventing a story (100 years after the 'event') to show the power of
Christianity over the water gods of the Picts.
The first report alleged to be of the monster in Loch Ness was in
1933.
You claim that the earliest recorded mention of Nessie 'dates
back to the sixth century' ('Nessie bid to oust unicorn as beast of
Scotland', 23 April).
This was an allusion to the report in Adomnan's account of the
life of St Columba, written about 665 CE (i.e. in the seventh century).
He claimed that Columba prevented a savage beast from biting a swimmer
in the river (sic) Ness.
However, Adomnan would never have heard of Nessie and was merely
inventing a story (100 years after the 'event') to show the power of
Christianity over the water gods of the Picts.
The first report alleged to be of the monster in Loch Ness was in
1933.
To The Scotsman (21 April 2015) not published
Does one of your subs not know the difference between 'historical'
and 'historic' ('Fears police child abuse unit will be overwhelmed by
rush of historic cases', 23 April)?
Chris Marshall used the word 'historical' all through his article,
but I guess someone thought that word too long for the strapline. But in
English 'historic' has a special meaning ('famous or important in
history'), whereas 'historical' just means 'of or concerning history, etc.
In no sense are these old abuse allegations 'historic' and your
staff should learn the difference.
Does one of your subs not know the difference between 'historical'
and 'historic' ('Fears police child abuse unit will be overwhelmed by
rush of historic cases', 23 April)?
Chris Marshall used the word 'historical' all through his article,
but I guess someone thought that word too long for the strapline. But in
English 'historic' has a special meaning ('famous or important in
history'), whereas 'historical' just means 'of or concerning history, etc.
In no sense are these old abuse allegations 'historic' and your
staff should learn the difference.
To The Scotsman (13 April 2015) published 14 April 2015
I expected Lesley Riddoch to know better than to describe
Westminster as the 'Mother of Parliaments' ('Election stakes could not
be higher', 13 April.
This phrase was first used by MP John Bright in 1865 when he
described 'England [sic] as the mother of parliaments' because it gives
birth to successive parliaments. Indeed, the UK will give birth to
another on 7 May.
To The Scotsman (09 April 2015) not published
Ellis Thorpe thinks that a UK federal state involves each part
retaining full powers except for defence and foreign affairs
(Letters, 9 April).
In fact, no federal state in the world allows such a situation,
which is probably unstable. Canada, which allows its provinces to raise
40 per cent of their funding, is the country that gives the greatest
devolution. In any case, we already know that Scotland could not fund
itself in the situation imagined.
Ellis Thorpe thinks that a UK federal state involves each part
retaining full powers except for defence and foreign affairs
(Letters, 9 April).
In fact, no federal state in the world allows such a situation,
which is probably unstable. Canada, which allows its provinces to raise
40 per cent of their funding, is the country that gives the greatest
devolution. In any case, we already know that Scotland could not fund
itself in the situation imagined.
To Scotland on Sunday (06 April 2015) not published
Nicholas Christian got confused ('Nats look set for 43 seats', 5 April);
mistaking the percentages in your poll of polls for seats in the UK
parliament. However, John Curtice, in the adjacent article ('Small
sample, big message') got it right.
Nicholas Christian got confused ('Nats look set for 43 seats', 5 April);
mistaking the percentages in your poll of polls for seats in the UK
parliament. However, John Curtice, in the adjacent article ('Small
sample, big message') got it right.
To The Scotsman (04 April 2015) published 6 April 2015
In an otherwise excellent comment on mankind's (in this case just
American's) space probes ('An existential moment as we gaze at the
stars', 4 April), Alex Massie claimed, somewhat irrelevantly, that
'Christ died on the cross for our sins'.
The Church may believe that, but the evidence is that he died in a
deliberate attempt to fulfil prophecies about the Messiah (two Messiahs
in fact) and to demonstrate evidence for resurrection, something
rejected by the ruling Sadducees. He was not attempting to save the
world; just to rule it.
It is ironic that, although he failed (he got killed accidentally)
and was never seen again (stories to the contrary are flawed), that
failure has formed the basis of a worldwide religion that Jesus, as a
Jew, would find alien.
In an otherwise excellent comment on mankind's (in this case just
American's) space probes ('An existential moment as we gaze at the
stars', 4 April), Alex Massie claimed, somewhat irrelevantly, that
'Christ died on the cross for our sins'.
The Church may believe that, but the evidence is that he died in a
deliberate attempt to fulfil prophecies about the Messiah (two Messiahs
in fact) and to demonstrate evidence for resurrection, something
rejected by the ruling Sadducees. He was not attempting to save the
world; just to rule it.
It is ironic that, although he failed (he got killed accidentally)
and was never seen again (stories to the contrary are flawed), that
failure has formed the basis of a worldwide religion that Jesus, as a
Jew, would find alien.
To The Scotsman (31 Mar 2015) published 04 April 2015
[Earlier this year] In January, wondering what was happening to Edinburgh sewage, I asked Scottish Water, which operates the treatment plant at Seafield. It was five weeks before I was sent a PDF showing a slide presentation, originally I think in Powerpoint format. This shows that, after several treatments, liquid waste is discharged 'to the north sea [sic] about a mile from the shore'.
However, further inquiry revealed that in fact it is discharged only
half that distance (800 m) into the Firth of Forth (i.e. just off
Seafield).
During the 'bathing season' this effluent is given extra
treatment to kill bacteria.
Solid waste is dried and turned into a 'cake', which is then
loaded into lorries and taken away to landfill sites and forestry land.
It can also be taken to certain farms, where it is used as fertiliser
for industrial crops.
Every day, about 150 tonnes of cake are removed from Seafield.
I am not sure [Am I alone in thinking] that these methods of disposal are sufficiently safe[?].
[Earlier this year] In January, wondering what was happening to Edinburgh sewage, I asked Scottish Water, which operates the treatment plant at Seafield. It was five weeks before I was sent a PDF showing a slide presentation, originally I think in Powerpoint format. This shows that, after several treatments, liquid waste is discharged 'to the north sea [sic] about a mile from the shore'.
However, further inquiry revealed that in fact it is discharged only
half that distance (800 m) into the Firth of Forth (i.e. just off
Seafield).
During the 'bathing season' this effluent is given extra
treatment to kill bacteria.
Solid waste is dried and turned into a 'cake', which is then
loaded into lorries and taken away to landfill sites and forestry land.
It can also be taken to certain farms, where it is used as fertiliser
for industrial crops.
Every day, about 150 tonnes of cake are removed from Seafield.
I am not sure [Am I alone in thinking] that these methods of disposal are sufficiently safe[?].
To The Scotsman (28 Mar 2015) published 30 Mar 2015
British Summer Times does not promise 'an extra hour of daylight'
(caption to your picture of the One O'Clock Gun's clock, 28 March). The
hours of daylight are dependent only on the date (longer in summer than
in winter).
All daylight saving does is shift an hour of daylight from the
beginning of the day to the end of the day, so making evening lighter
longer. It would make sense to do this all the year round; not just in
summer.
British Summer Times does not promise 'an extra hour of daylight'
(caption to your picture of the One O'Clock Gun's clock, 28 March). The
hours of daylight are dependent only on the date (longer in summer than
in winter).
All daylight saving does is shift an hour of daylight from the
beginning of the day to the end of the day, so making evening lighter
longer. It would make sense to do this all the year round; not just in
summer.
To The Edinburgh News (23 Mar 2015) not published
In January, wondering what was happening to Edinburgh sewage, I
asked Scottish Water, which operates the treatment plant at Seafield.
It was five weeks before I was sent a PDF showing a slide
presentation, originally I think in Powerpoint format.
This shows that, after several treatments, liquid waste is
discharged 'to the north sea [sic] about a mile from the shore'.
However, further inquiry revealed that in fact it is discharged only
half that distance (800 m) into the Firth of Forth (i.e. just off
Seafield). During the 'bathing season' this effluent is given extra
treatment to kill bacteria.
Solid waste is dried and turned into a 'cake', which is then
loaded into lorries and taken away to landfill sites and forestry land.
It can also be taken to certain farms, where it is used as fertiliser
for industrial crops. Every day, about 150 tonnes of cake are removed
from Seafield.
In January, wondering what was happening to Edinburgh sewage, I
asked Scottish Water, which operates the treatment plant at Seafield.
It was five weeks before I was sent a PDF showing a slide
presentation, originally I think in Powerpoint format.
This shows that, after several treatments, liquid waste is
discharged 'to the north sea [sic] about a mile from the shore'.
However, further inquiry revealed that in fact it is discharged only
half that distance (800 m) into the Firth of Forth (i.e. just off
Seafield). During the 'bathing season' this effluent is given extra
treatment to kill bacteria.
Solid waste is dried and turned into a 'cake', which is then
loaded into lorries and taken away to landfill sites and forestry land.
It can also be taken to certain farms, where it is used as fertiliser
for industrial crops. Every day, about 150 tonnes of cake are removed
from Seafield.
|
To The Scotsman (21 Mar 2015) not published Stephen McGinty decided to 'set aside the colander' in preparation to view the partial eclipse ('Grey sky saves a city's sight', 21 March. I decided to use our colander to produce multiple images of the eclipse projected onto a wall. |
|
To The Edinburgh Evening News (14 Mar 2015) published 20 Mar 2015
Recently I attended a funeral ceremony at Mortonhall Crematorium (Main Chapel) but was appalled by the poor PA system.
Some of the speakers were inaudible and playing classical music through the cheap loudspeakers was insulting. These facilities are not good enough. Both the deceased and their mourners deserve better.
Recently I attended a funeral ceremony at Mortonhall Crematorium (Main Chapel) but was appalled by the poor PA system.
Some of the speakers were inaudible and playing classical music through the cheap loudspeakers was insulting. These facilities are not good enough. Both the deceased and their mourners deserve better.
To The Edinburgh Evening News (12 Mar 2015) not published
Prof. Norman Bonney, whose obituary you published on 12 March, was
not 69 when he died. He was 71.
Donations in his memory can be made to Prostate Cancer UK.
Steuart Campbell, Treasurer/Edinburgh Secular Society
Prof. Norman Bonney, whose obituary you published on 12 March, was
not 69 when he died. He was 71.
Donations in his memory can be made to Prostate Cancer UK.
Steuart Campbell, Treasurer/Edinburgh Secular Society
To The Scotsman (12 Mar 2015) published 13 Mar 2015
Recently I attended a funeral ceremony [in the main chapel] at Mortonhall Crematorium (Main Chapel) but [and] was appalled by the poor PA system.
[The classical music being played was] Some of the speakers were inaudible and playing classical music through [some of] the cheap loudspeakers[. It] was insulting.
These facilities are not good enough. Both the deceased and their mourners deserve better.
Recently I attended a funeral ceremony [in the main chapel] at Mortonhall Crematorium (Main Chapel) but [and] was appalled by the poor PA system.
[The classical music being played was] Some of the speakers were inaudible and playing classical music through [some of] the cheap loudspeakers[. It] was insulting.
These facilities are not good enough. Both the deceased and their mourners deserve better.
To The Radio Times (07 Mar 2015) not published
Joan Woddis is right that the case was not entirely ignored for 100 years although I know of no mention of it before the 1960s. As one of the real Inspector Campbell's grandson's I was interested in the dramatisations she lists, which were unknown to me.
However, one should also note that the case was referred to by Compton Mackenzie in his On Moral Courage (1962); by Peter Costello in his The Real World of Sherlock Holmes (1991) and by Russell Miller in his The Adventures of Arthur Conan Doyle (2008). On 12 Dec 1987 BBC Radio 4 broadcast the play Conan Doyle and the Edalji Case and on 25 Dec 2005 BBC4 aired a documentary about the it.
David Edgar has turned Julian Barnes's book into a play, which was performed at the Birmingham Repertory Theatre and the Nottingham Playhouse in 2010. The script of the play and a copy of David Edgar's Guardian article (13 Mar 2010) has been published in a booklet by Nick Hern Books Ltd.
The most reliable book on the case is Roger Oldfield's Outrage: The Edalji Five and the Shadow of Sherlock Holmes (Vanguard Press, 2010).
Joan Woddis is right that the case was not entirely ignored for 100 years although I know of no mention of it before the 1960s. As one of the real Inspector Campbell's grandson's I was interested in the dramatisations she lists, which were unknown to me.
However, one should also note that the case was referred to by Compton Mackenzie in his On Moral Courage (1962); by Peter Costello in his The Real World of Sherlock Holmes (1991) and by Russell Miller in his The Adventures of Arthur Conan Doyle (2008). On 12 Dec 1987 BBC Radio 4 broadcast the play Conan Doyle and the Edalji Case and on 25 Dec 2005 BBC4 aired a documentary about the it.
David Edgar has turned Julian Barnes's book into a play, which was performed at the Birmingham Repertory Theatre and the Nottingham Playhouse in 2010. The script of the play and a copy of David Edgar's Guardian article (13 Mar 2010) has been published in a booklet by Nick Hern Books Ltd.
The most reliable book on the case is Roger Oldfield's Outrage: The Edalji Five and the Shadow of Sherlock Holmes (Vanguard Press, 2010).
To The Sunday Times (03 Mar 2015) not published
In your article 'Scots scientists find ideal spot for power from
the sun', 1 March), you refer to 'dwindling supplies'. As far as I know,
electricity supplies are not 'dwindling'; demand may be increasing but
there is no shortage of generation methods (just controversy over which
ones are environmentally-friendly). Consequently it is not necessary to
embark on beaming power from satellites, which surely will only help to
cause further global warming.
In your article 'Scots scientists find ideal spot for power from
the sun', 1 March), you refer to 'dwindling supplies'. As far as I know,
electricity supplies are not 'dwindling'; demand may be increasing but
there is no shortage of generation methods (just controversy over which
ones are environmentally-friendly). Consequently it is not necessary to
embark on beaming power from satellites, which surely will only help to
cause further global warming.
To The Scotsman (02 Mar 2015) published 03 Mar 2015
Your claim that Sir Tim Berners-Lee invented the internet ('Ignorant
Brits don't know great men', 2 March) is incorrect. Sir Tim invented the
world-wide-web!
I could also quibble about your claim that Isaac Newton discovered
gravity. What he discovered was a way of explaining it, albeit his
explanation has since been replaced by Einstein's.
Your claim that Sir Tim Berners-Lee invented the internet ('Ignorant
Brits don't know great men', 2 March) is incorrect. Sir Tim invented the
world-wide-web!
I could also quibble about your claim that Isaac Newton discovered
gravity. What he discovered was a way of explaining it, albeit his
explanation has since been replaced by Einstein's.
To The Scotsman (26 Feb 2015) not published
Geoff Miller's crass allusion to Jesus (Letters, 26 February) is
founded on the mistaken view that he was a divine being who impoverished
himself.
However, Jesus did not regard himself as divine (the Messiah was
mortal) and the idea that he and his followers were poor is wrong. They
had a treasurer (Judas) and alluded to giving funds to 'the poor'.
Geoff Miller's crass allusion to Jesus (Letters, 26 February) is
founded on the mistaken view that he was a divine being who impoverished
himself.
However, Jesus did not regard himself as divine (the Messiah was
mortal) and the idea that he and his followers were poor is wrong. They
had a treasurer (Judas) and alluded to giving funds to 'the poor'.
To The Scotsman (23 Feb 2015) not published
Lesley Riddoch claims that, on calm days, Scotland imports nuclear energy from France and coal-fired energy from England ('Fire down below, money up above?', 23 February).
In fact she's referring to electricity (not all energy is in the form of electricity), the source of which cannot be identified once it is supplied to the grid.
I would be surprised if Scotland imports any electricity from England (if we do it won't be much); we export about 25 per cent of our generation. At times England imports electricity from France, although whether or not that was from nuclear generation cannot be proved.
Lesley Riddoch claims that, on calm days, Scotland imports nuclear energy from France and coal-fired energy from England ('Fire down below, money up above?', 23 February).
In fact she's referring to electricity (not all energy is in the form of electricity), the source of which cannot be identified once it is supplied to the grid.
I would be surprised if Scotland imports any electricity from England (if we do it won't be much); we export about 25 per cent of our generation. At times England imports electricity from France, although whether or not that was from nuclear generation cannot be proved.
To The Edinburgh Evening News (19 Feb 2015) not published
You described Derek Thomson as a 'community councillor' ('Abuse
charge community stalwart quits council role', 18 February).
In fact those elected to community councils are merely described
as 'members'; they are not 'councillors', a term reserved for those
elected to local government councils. Please try to observe this
distinction.
You described Derek Thomson as a 'community councillor' ('Abuse
charge community stalwart quits council role', 18 February).
In fact those elected to community councils are merely described
as 'members'; they are not 'councillors', a term reserved for those
elected to local government councils. Please try to observe this
distinction.
To The Scotsman (18 Feb 2015) published 19 Feb 2015
The news that the Kirk Moderator has invited the Pope to visit
Scotland and that this would be welcomed by 'all people of faith'
(strongly objected to by some Protestants) makes one wonder if this is
the end of traditional Christian beliefs and the onset of a vague 'be
nice to everyone' creed, untroubled by salvation or punishment for sin.
The half of the population that, like me, has no religious belief
must think 'a plague on both your sects' and that the sooner we all
abandon superstition the better. We live in a 'Post-Christian' Britain,
where we can get on better without religion.
The news that the Kirk Moderator has invited the Pope to visit
Scotland and that this would be welcomed by 'all people of faith'
(strongly objected to by some Protestants) makes one wonder if this is
the end of traditional Christian beliefs and the onset of a vague 'be
nice to everyone' creed, untroubled by salvation or punishment for sin.
The half of the population that, like me, has no religious belief
must think 'a plague on both your sects' and that the sooner we all
abandon superstition the better. We live in a 'Post-Christian' Britain,
where we can get on better without religion.
To The Sunday Times (16 Feb 2015) not published
It is true, as Andrew Neame claims (Points, 15 February) that, in
1865, John Bright described 'England' as 'the mother of parliaments',
but that was his unconscious synecdoche ('England' representing the
whole of the UK, which at the time included the whole of Ireland).
Parliament was not then and is not now elected only by voters in England.
So AA Gill was correct in describing Britain as the 'mother of
parliaments' (that's what Bright meant). In fact the UK is pregnant
again and will give birth to a new parliament in May.
It is true, as Andrew Neame claims (Points, 15 February) that, in
1865, John Bright described 'England' as 'the mother of parliaments',
but that was his unconscious synecdoche ('England' representing the
whole of the UK, which at the time included the whole of Ireland).
Parliament was not then and is not now elected only by voters in England.
So AA Gill was correct in describing Britain as the 'mother of
parliaments' (that's what Bright meant). In fact the UK is pregnant
again and will give birth to a new parliament in May.
To The Edinburgh Evening News (13 Feb 2015) not published
Brian Monteith refers to Westminster as 'the mother of
parliaments' ('Fitting home for first Portakabin Parliament', 13 February).
In fact this phrase was first used by MP John Bright in 1865 when
he described 'England [sic] as the mother of parliaments'.
In no way is Westminster the mother of parliaments, but, in a
sense, the UK is, giving birth to one after another (she's pregnant
again now).
Brian Monteith refers to Westminster as 'the mother of
parliaments' ('Fitting home for first Portakabin Parliament', 13 February).
In fact this phrase was first used by MP John Bright in 1865 when
he described 'England [sic] as the mother of parliaments'.
In no way is Westminster the mother of parliaments, but, in a
sense, the UK is, giving birth to one after another (she's pregnant
again now).
To The Scotsman (11 Feb 2015) not published
'Doubts remain over the safety and ultimate costs of developing
nuclear energy from fission' (Letter from Stan Grodynski, 11 February),
but only in the minds of those prejudiced against it.
Nuclear fission has provided reliable, economical and safe
base-load electricity in the UK for some 60 years. It is a brilliant
exploitation of the massive energy stored in the uranium nucleus, for
which the only other use is in nuclear weapons. So it is sad to see the
SNP setting their face against it. A mere handful of nuclear stations
could provide all Scotland's base-load without the need for electricity
from inefficient and unreliable low-grade renewable energy systems, most
of them blots on the landscape.
I find it odd that opponents of nuclear fission welcome the idea of
nuclear fusion, something that may never become a commercial prospect
and, if it does, will create even larger central generating stations
that we have at present and at a huge cost.
'Doubts remain over the safety and ultimate costs of developing
nuclear energy from fission' (Letter from Stan Grodynski, 11 February),
but only in the minds of those prejudiced against it.
Nuclear fission has provided reliable, economical and safe
base-load electricity in the UK for some 60 years. It is a brilliant
exploitation of the massive energy stored in the uranium nucleus, for
which the only other use is in nuclear weapons. So it is sad to see the
SNP setting their face against it. A mere handful of nuclear stations
could provide all Scotland's base-load without the need for electricity
from inefficient and unreliable low-grade renewable energy systems, most
of them blots on the landscape.
I find it odd that opponents of nuclear fission welcome the idea of
nuclear fusion, something that may never become a commercial prospect
and, if it does, will create even larger central generating stations
that we have at present and at a huge cost.
To The Sunday Times (09 Feb 2015) not published
Michael Spencer claimed that James Watt invented the steam engine
(Letter, 8 February).
In 1781 James Watt patented a steam engine that produced
continuous rotative motion but the steam engine per se was first
patented in 1606 by the Spanish inventor Jeronimo de Ayanz y Beaumont.
In 1698 Thomas Savery patented a steam pump and the first commercial
true steam engine using a piston was developed by Thomas Newcomen in
1712 for pumping water out of mines.
Michael Spencer claimed that James Watt invented the steam engine
(Letter, 8 February).
In 1781 James Watt patented a steam engine that produced
continuous rotative motion but the steam engine per se was first
patented in 1606 by the Spanish inventor Jeronimo de Ayanz y Beaumont.
In 1698 Thomas Savery patented a steam pump and the first commercial
true steam engine using a piston was developed by Thomas Newcomen in
1712 for pumping water out of mines.
To The Scotsman (02 Feb 2015) published 03 Feb 2015
(Dr) Angus Mair thinks I mentioned my book about Nessie (Letter 31 January) 'to turn a profit' (Letter, 2 February).
I only write to inform and educate and not to make money. In fact that particular book has been out-of-print for several years, although copies can still be found for sale on the internet, but with no profit to me.
Niche writers like me rely on measly payments, insufficient to live on. For example, the Public Lending Right Office will shortly pay me 47p for 7 library loans of that book during the year 1 July 2013 to 30 June 2014.
(Dr) Angus Mair thinks I mentioned my book about Nessie (Letter 31 January) 'to turn a profit' (Letter, 2 February).
I only write to inform and educate and not to make money. In fact that particular book has been out-of-print for several years, although copies can still be found for sale on the internet, but with no profit to me.
Niche writers like me rely on measly payments, insufficient to live on. For example, the Public Lending Right Office will shortly pay me 47p for 7 library loans of that book during the year 1 July 2013 to 30 June 2014.
To The Scotsman (30 Jan 2015) published 31 January 2015
I deplore the idea of putting a mythical creature at the centre of a £2 million tourism campaign (your report 29 January). I could say the same about making Bonnybridge a centre for UFOs.
By all means invite tourists to visit a genuine Scottish phenomenon but don't mislead them by implying that Nessie really exists (it doesn't and never has). Anyone who still thinks it exists only has to read my book on the subject. Every single report of Nessie has a natural explanation, often misperceived by people wanting to see the monster. In fact one of the exhibitions at [the Loch Ness Centre at] Drumnadrochit provides good examples of these misperceptions. Visitors are doomed to disappointment.
I deplore the idea of putting a mythical creature at the centre of a £2 million tourism campaign (your report 29 January). I could say the same about making Bonnybridge a centre for UFOs.
By all means invite tourists to visit a genuine Scottish phenomenon but don't mislead them by implying that Nessie really exists (it doesn't and never has). Anyone who still thinks it exists only has to read my book on the subject. Every single report of Nessie has a natural explanation, often misperceived by people wanting to see the monster. In fact one of the exhibitions at [the Loch Ness Centre at] Drumnadrochit provides good examples of these misperceptions. Visitors are doomed to disappointment.
To The Scotsman (27 Jan 2015) published 28 January 2015
You report that children in St Peter's Square in Rome released balloons as a symbol of peace (26 January).
One wonders where the children, and the Pope, imagine these balloons will end up. Do they think they'll go to heaven?
Unfortunately they'll end up on land or water as pollutants and a nuisance and a menace to the 'birds and other creatures of the wild' which St Francis of Assisi, whose name the Pope adopted, loved.
Such good-intentioned releases occur all over the world without the organisers realising the environmental damage they are causing. Shame on the Vatican for allowing it.
You report that children in St Peter's Square in Rome released balloons as a symbol of peace (26 January).
One wonders where the children, and the Pope, imagine these balloons will end up. Do they think they'll go to heaven?
Unfortunately they'll end up on land or water as pollutants and a nuisance and a menace to the 'birds and other creatures of the wild' which St Francis of Assisi, whose name the Pope adopted, loved.
Such good-intentioned releases occur all over the world without the organisers realising the environmental damage they are causing. Shame on the Vatican for allowing it.
To The Edinburgh Evening News (22 Jan 2015) published 24 January 2015
Bruce Whitehead supports the idea that, in an accident between a cyclist and motor vehicle, the driver of the vehicle should be presumed to be to blame (Letter, 21 January).
This turns the burden of proof on its head. In law, a prosecutor has to prove his case beyond reasonable doubt; defendants do not have to prove their innocence.
How could drivers 'prove that they driving with due care and attention'? No driver should have to 'prove' that he was not at fault, in fact it may be impossible to do so.
Bruce Whitehead supports the idea that, in an accident between a cyclist and motor vehicle, the driver of the vehicle should be presumed to be to blame (Letter, 21 January).
This turns the burden of proof on its head. In law, a prosecutor has to prove his case beyond reasonable doubt; defendants do not have to prove their innocence.
How could drivers 'prove that they driving with due care and attention'? No driver should have to 'prove' that he was not at fault, in fact it may be impossible to do so.
To The Scotsman (21 Jan 2015) not published
Rev Dr Robert Anderson (Letter, 21 January) writes about 'Faith knowledge of God' as if merely believing in a supernatural power makes it a fact (known).
In fact, 'faith' is merely belief, some would say necessarily without evidence. Believers are free to claim knowledge of God (or a god) but not to claim that this evidence for a god's existence. That many see through the claims of believers is now demonstrated by the fact that about half the population now have no religious belief.
As for the UK being 'An avowedly Christian nation', a nation without a constitution can hardly be 'avowedly' anything. The domination by the Church of England, led by the monarch, gives a false impression. Today, the UK is a post-Christian nation heading for a confused multicultural state.
Rev Dr Robert Anderson (Letter, 21 January) writes about 'Faith knowledge of God' as if merely believing in a supernatural power makes it a fact (known).
In fact, 'faith' is merely belief, some would say necessarily without evidence. Believers are free to claim knowledge of God (or a god) but not to claim that this evidence for a god's existence. That many see through the claims of believers is now demonstrated by the fact that about half the population now have no religious belief.
As for the UK being 'An avowedly Christian nation', a nation without a constitution can hardly be 'avowedly' anything. The domination by the Church of England, led by the monarch, gives a false impression. Today, the UK is a post-Christian nation heading for a confused multicultural state.
To The Scotsman (14 Jan 2015) not published - but an online version was published
Christians used to preach at us via your letters column. But now they do so on a platform provided by you for 'Friends of the Scotsman'. Is David Robertson of SOLAS really your Friend?
His used his article published on 14 January about 'renewal and regeneration' as a vehicle for old-fashioned evangelism, exhorting readers to believe the Christian message of hope.
In particular he gives us four reason why Jesus 'did not come', one of which was that 'He did not come to kill'. But Mr Robertson seems to have overlooked Matt. 10:34-36, where Jesus explained that he came, not to bring peace but a sword (i.e. war).
How little preachers like Mr Robertson understand Jesus' the real intentions. The 'good news' they proclaim is an invention of Early Christianity and has nothing to do with the historical Jesus. He did not 'come' and was not sent by anyone.
Christians used to preach at us via your letters column. But now they do so on a platform provided by you for 'Friends of the Scotsman'. Is David Robertson of SOLAS really your Friend?
His used his article published on 14 January about 'renewal and regeneration' as a vehicle for old-fashioned evangelism, exhorting readers to believe the Christian message of hope.
In particular he gives us four reason why Jesus 'did not come', one of which was that 'He did not come to kill'. But Mr Robertson seems to have overlooked Matt. 10:34-36, where Jesus explained that he came, not to bring peace but a sword (i.e. war).
How little preachers like Mr Robertson understand Jesus' the real intentions. The 'good news' they proclaim is an invention of Early Christianity and has nothing to do with the historical Jesus. He did not 'come' and was not sent by anyone.
To The Scotsman (14 Jan 2015) published 15 January 2015
So your answer is not to offend (irrational) Muslim sensibilities (Leader, 14 January) by refraining from showing the cover of the latest issue of Charlie Hebdo. But is that not just what the killers wanted? To so intimidate the free press that they fear to express any anti-Islamic sentiment?
You believe that the killers wanted to create a state of war between the West and the Islamic world. But this war already exists - most clearly in Syria and Iraq but also in conflicts between religious communities everywhere.
By submitting to a self-imposed ordinance, you declare that free expression has limitations, but freedom has no bounds. Once you start to limit it, the end is tyranny.
So your answer is not to offend (irrational) Muslim sensibilities (Leader, 14 January) by refraining from showing the cover of the latest issue of Charlie Hebdo. But is that not just what the killers wanted? To so intimidate the free press that they fear to express any anti-Islamic sentiment?
You believe that the killers wanted to create a state of war between the West and the Islamic world. But this war already exists - most clearly in Syria and Iraq but also in conflicts between religious communities everywhere.
By submitting to a self-imposed ordinance, you declare that free expression has limitations, but freedom has no bounds. Once you start to limit it, the end is tyranny.
To The Edinburgh Evening News (10 Jan 2015) not published
James E Fraser (Letter, 9 January) wants us to respect the views of religious factions by not provoking them. In other words, he is against free speech in case it offends someone. In fact, this is already the case in several countries, including Russia and Pakistan. Do we want to live in country where one dare not express any criticism? Surely not.
James E Fraser (Letter, 9 January) wants us to respect the views of religious factions by not provoking them. In other words, he is against free speech in case it offends someone. In fact, this is already the case in several countries, including Russia and Pakistan. Do we want to live in country where one dare not express any criticism? Surely not.
To The Scotsman (09 Jan 2015) published 10 January 2015
While 20 mph seems appropriate for all the City's side roads (many are unsuitable for any higher speed), it is overkill to apply that limit to the main through routes, even to minor ones, especially where they are bus routes.
Slowing the buses jeopardises Lothian Buses's good reputation for efficiency and punctuality and slowing all traffic will increase air pollution. In whose interest is it to have traffic on major routes crawling along and a snail's pace? Aren't most accidents on side roads?
The City is only proposing 20 mph because it can do so under present law. To introduce a more sensible limit for through routes, of say 25 mph, as is usual abroad, would require a change in the law, something the City seems reluctant to ask for.
While 20 mph seems appropriate for all the City's side roads (many are unsuitable for any higher speed), it is overkill to apply that limit to the main through routes, even to minor ones, especially where they are bus routes.
Slowing the buses jeopardises Lothian Buses's good reputation for efficiency and punctuality and slowing all traffic will increase air pollution. In whose interest is it to have traffic on major routes crawling along and a snail's pace? Aren't most accidents on side roads?
The City is only proposing 20 mph because it can do so under present law. To introduce a more sensible limit for through routes, of say 25 mph, as is usual abroad, would require a change in the law, something the City seems reluctant to ask for.
To The Sunday Times (08 Jan 2015) not published
The Rt Rev John Chalmers's solution to 'religious understanding' ('We have to reclaim our faith from the fanatics', 4 January) appears to be to continue force children to participate in Christian religious observance, whether or not they and/or their parents are Christian or even religious (this is already required by law in Scotland).
All that does, is instil cynicism in children, who can see through the charade and know that they have to pretend to pray to please their teachers. It also forces some parents to withdraw their children from these services, as they are allowed to do, causing those children to feel different and targets for bullies.
Religious practice has no place in schools and should be prohibited. Let children be taught what religions are about and what they teach, but leave that in the classroom. Keep it out of the assembly hall.
Treasurer/Edinburgh Secular Society
The Rt Rev John Chalmers's solution to 'religious understanding' ('We have to reclaim our faith from the fanatics', 4 January) appears to be to continue force children to participate in Christian religious observance, whether or not they and/or their parents are Christian or even religious (this is already required by law in Scotland).
All that does, is instil cynicism in children, who can see through the charade and know that they have to pretend to pray to please their teachers. It also forces some parents to withdraw their children from these services, as they are allowed to do, causing those children to feel different and targets for bullies.
Religious practice has no place in schools and should be prohibited. Let children be taught what religions are about and what they teach, but leave that in the classroom. Keep it out of the assembly hall.
Treasurer/Edinburgh Secular Society
To The Edinburgh Evening News ( 07 Jan 2015) not published
While 20 mph seems appropriate for all the City's side roads (many are unsuitable for any higher speed), it is overkill to apply that limit to the main through routes, even to minor ones, especially where they are bus routes.
Slowing the buses jeopardises Lothian Buses's good reputation for efficiency and punctuality and slowing all traffic will increase air pollution. In whose interest is it to have traffic on major routes crawling along and a snail's pace? Aren't most accidents on side roads?
The City is only proposing 20 mph because it can do so under present law. To introduce a more sensible limit for through routes, of say 25 mph, as is usual abroad, would require a change in the law, something the City seems reluctant to ask for.
While 20 mph seems appropriate for all the City's side roads (many are unsuitable for any higher speed), it is overkill to apply that limit to the main through routes, even to minor ones, especially where they are bus routes.
Slowing the buses jeopardises Lothian Buses's good reputation for efficiency and punctuality and slowing all traffic will increase air pollution. In whose interest is it to have traffic on major routes crawling along and a snail's pace? Aren't most accidents on side roads?
The City is only proposing 20 mph because it can do so under present law. To introduce a more sensible limit for through routes, of say 25 mph, as is usual abroad, would require a change in the law, something the City seems reluctant to ask for.
End of letters written in 2014
To The Sunday Times (30 Dec 2014) not published
You report the Queen's reference to Jesus as the 'Prince of Peace' ('Queen takes "most moral leader" title', 28 December), but I wonder how she reconciles this with Jesus' statement: 'Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword' (Matt.10:34).
Evidently the Queen's faith is of the simple variety, uncomplicated by biblical contradictions. She is not qualified to pronounce on biblical interpretation and so should renounce her position as head of the Church of England.
You report the Queen's reference to Jesus as the 'Prince of Peace' ('Queen takes "most moral leader" title', 28 December), but I wonder how she reconciles this with Jesus' statement: 'Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword' (Matt.10:34).
Evidently the Queen's faith is of the simple variety, uncomplicated by biblical contradictions. She is not qualified to pronounce on biblical interpretation and so should renounce her position as head of the Church of England.
To The Scotsman ( 29 Dec 2014) published 30 December 2014
Alastair Gentleman (Letter, 29 December) should read my letters more carefully. I did not refer Hugh Reilly's 'confidence in Christianity' (Letter, 27 December); Mr Reilly is an atheist. I referred to Gavin Cargill's confidence in Christianity being misplaced (his letter of 24 December). Consequently that part of Mr Gentleman's letter is nonsense.
He can define faith as something that does not require proof, but all beliefs should be based on evidence. Since there is no evidence for the existence of life after death, it is foolish to believe in it and calling it 'faith' makes no difference. Is Mr Gentleman admitting that the Christian belief in an afterlife is not based on any evidence ('proof' is a mathematical term inapplicable elsewhere where only disproof is possible).
Alastair Gentleman (Letter, 29 December) should read my letters more carefully. I did not refer Hugh Reilly's 'confidence in Christianity' (Letter, 27 December); Mr Reilly is an atheist. I referred to Gavin Cargill's confidence in Christianity being misplaced (his letter of 24 December). Consequently that part of Mr Gentleman's letter is nonsense.
He can define faith as something that does not require proof, but all beliefs should be based on evidence. Since there is no evidence for the existence of life after death, it is foolish to believe in it and calling it 'faith' makes no difference. Is Mr Gentleman admitting that the Christian belief in an afterlife is not based on any evidence ('proof' is a mathematical term inapplicable elsewhere where only disproof is possible).
To The Scotsman (29 Dec 2014) not published
You claim that the missing Air Asia pilot lost contact with traffic control (Headline, 29 December).
That is surely a trivial truism, although there is no evidence for it. The evidence is that local air traffic controllers lost contact with the aircraft. So why did you not report that?
You claim that the missing Air Asia pilot lost contact with traffic control (Headline, 29 December).
That is surely a trivial truism, although there is no evidence for it. The evidence is that local air traffic controllers lost contact with the aircraft. So why did you not report that?
To The Edinburgh Evening News (24 Dec 2014)
If he is as learned as his title suggests, the Rev. Dr George Whyte, principal clerk of the presbytery of Edinburgh, surely knows that the gospel Birth Narrative, including the story of a birth in a Bethlehem manger, was invented to give Jesus an origin commensurate with his deification ('You don't have to be an angel over Christmas', Comment on 24 December).
The Narrative appears in only two of the Gospels, which appear to share the same source. The Gospels of Mark and John know nothing of it. Nor, apparently, did Jesus.
Aspects of the story can be found in other contemporary myths, such as those about the birth of the Mithras, the god of the Roman army. These were mined to construct the Christmas story.
By all means, let us 'recognise the human in ourselves and others', but this has nothing to do with Christmas.
If he is as learned as his title suggests, the Rev. Dr George Whyte, principal clerk of the presbytery of Edinburgh, surely knows that the gospel Birth Narrative, including the story of a birth in a Bethlehem manger, was invented to give Jesus an origin commensurate with his deification ('You don't have to be an angel over Christmas', Comment on 24 December).
The Narrative appears in only two of the Gospels, which appear to share the same source. The Gospels of Mark and John know nothing of it. Nor, apparently, did Jesus.
Aspects of the story can be found in other contemporary myths, such as those about the birth of the Mithras, the god of the Roman army. These were mined to construct the Christmas story.
By all means, let us 'recognise the human in ourselves and others', but this has nothing to do with Christmas.
To The Scotsman (24 Dec 2014) published 27 December 2014
Gavin Cargill chides Hugh Reilly for his confident atheism (Letter, 24 December) but forgets that confidence in a belief does not justify it. His own confidence in Christianity may be misplaced and, an atheist myself, I think it is.
Beliefs should be founded on evidence. In the case of belief in an 'afterlife' (an oxymoron), there is no evidence. Nor does it make any sense. The claims of Christianity are based on misunderstandings of Jesus's life and the Jewish superstitions about the Kingdom of Heaven he espoused.
This justifies the belief that it does not exist and Mr Reilly's atheism.
Gavin Cargill chides Hugh Reilly for his confident atheism (Letter, 24 December) but forgets that confidence in a belief does not justify it. His own confidence in Christianity may be misplaced and, an atheist myself, I think it is.
Beliefs should be founded on evidence. In the case of belief in an 'afterlife' (an oxymoron), there is no evidence. Nor does it make any sense. The claims of Christianity are based on misunderstandings of Jesus's life and the Jewish superstitions about the Kingdom of Heaven he espoused.
This justifies the belief that it does not exist and Mr Reilly's atheism.
To The Edinburgh Evening News (20 Dec 2014) not published
Why do you keep telling us the make of car involved in an accident (e.g. 'Man struck by car near store dies', 19 December)? What relevance is that to the incident? Would it make a difference if the car had been of a different make?
Why do you keep telling us the make of car involved in an accident (e.g. 'Man struck by car near store dies', 19 December)? What relevance is that to the incident? Would it make a difference if the car had been of a different make?
To The Scotsman (20 Dec 2014) not published
Dr A McCormick explains that energy generated from renewable electricity (now 32% of all generation per year) is only for electricity and that this constitutes only 5 per cent of the average Scottish household's energy consumption (Letter, 20 December).
This rather belittles the importance of electricity, without which hardly anything else works. Electricity may be a minor energy use (16.6% of the total according to Ofgem), but it is vital.
Nor do his data agree with those of Ofgem. The latter estimates that the average annual energy consumption of gas and electricity for a typical UK household is 19,800 kWh, or 54.25 kWh/day (not Dr McCormick's 125). Of that only 9 kWh/day is for electricity.
One can therefore assume that about 1.5 kWh/day comes from renewable generation, but only taken over a year. Most of the time, renewable generation will contribute nothing.
As for 'renewable base generation', there can be no such thing. Baseload has to be constant and reliable, something that renewables cannot provide.
Dr A McCormick explains that energy generated from renewable electricity (now 32% of all generation per year) is only for electricity and that this constitutes only 5 per cent of the average Scottish household's energy consumption (Letter, 20 December).
This rather belittles the importance of electricity, without which hardly anything else works. Electricity may be a minor energy use (16.6% of the total according to Ofgem), but it is vital.
Nor do his data agree with those of Ofgem. The latter estimates that the average annual energy consumption of gas and electricity for a typical UK household is 19,800 kWh, or 54.25 kWh/day (not Dr McCormick's 125). Of that only 9 kWh/day is for electricity.
One can therefore assume that about 1.5 kWh/day comes from renewable generation, but only taken over a year. Most of the time, renewable generation will contribute nothing.
As for 'renewable base generation', there can be no such thing. Baseload has to be constant and reliable, something that renewables cannot provide.
To The Edinburgh Evening News (17 Dec 2014) published 18 December 2014
I would be surprised if anyone claimed that accidents at nuclear power stations would only happen 'once every thousand years' (Martin Hannan, 16 December), but much depends on the type of accident (many are trivial).
Mr Hannan cites Windscale, which was not a power station and Three Mile Island which was. But in neither case was anyone even injured. Nor has anyone's health yet been affected at Fukushima by radiation (the devastation was mainly due to the tsunami).
Some 50 people, mainly firefighters, died at Chenobyl, where a badly-designed reactor was mishandled by incompetent operators. There was also mismanagement at Fukushima.
The UK's well-designed reactors have served us well for over 50 years, with no major accidents or injury. To stave off global warming we desperately need more electricity from emission-free nuclear power.
I would be surprised if anyone claimed that accidents at nuclear power stations would only happen 'once every thousand years' (Martin Hannan, 16 December), but much depends on the type of accident (many are trivial).
Mr Hannan cites Windscale, which was not a power station and Three Mile Island which was. But in neither case was anyone even injured. Nor has anyone's health yet been affected at Fukushima by radiation (the devastation was mainly due to the tsunami).
Some 50 people, mainly firefighters, died at Chenobyl, where a badly-designed reactor was mishandled by incompetent operators. There was also mismanagement at Fukushima.
The UK's well-designed reactors have served us well for over 50 years, with no major accidents or injury. To stave off global warming we desperately need more electricity from emission-free nuclear power.
To The Scotsman (16 December 2014) not published
Martin Blackshaw (Letter, 16 December) needs to learn some cosmology. The Big Bang, from which our universe originated, did not destroy anything. Our universe originated from a tiny anomaly in an eternal multiverse about 13.7 billion years ago, expanding into nothing (it's still expanding).
This belief is not an atheistic one; many cosmologists may be religious, perhaps believing that some god was responsible. In fact, I am not sure that all atheists understand modern cosmology.
Mr Blackshaw claims that science and history provide evidence for the existence of a creator. As an atheist and science writer, I would like to know about this evidence, which is unknown to me.
Martin Blackshaw (Letter, 16 December) needs to learn some cosmology. The Big Bang, from which our universe originated, did not destroy anything. Our universe originated from a tiny anomaly in an eternal multiverse about 13.7 billion years ago, expanding into nothing (it's still expanding).
This belief is not an atheistic one; many cosmologists may be religious, perhaps believing that some god was responsible. In fact, I am not sure that all atheists understand modern cosmology.
Mr Blackshaw claims that science and history provide evidence for the existence of a creator. As an atheist and science writer, I would like to know about this evidence, which is unknown to me.
To The Edinburgh Evening News (15 December 2014) published 17 December 2014
Evidently riled by the claim that renewable energy is unreliable, the Nuclear Free Local Authorities, a group of 50 councils that have foolishly been led to believe that we can do without nuclear power, has decided to brand the latter as 'unreliable' because of unplanned shutdowns ('Torness one of 15 plants hit by faults', 15 December).
In fact, most of the shutdowns would not be due to 'faults', but due to some safety issue like seaweed clogging cooling water intakes. It is strange logic to regard automatic shutdowns as a 'fault' and a symptom of unreliability in one of the safest industries in the UK supplying much of the essential base-load electricity. If the lights go out, it will not be due to a failure at a nuclear power station but because of the lack of renewable generation. The NFLA should have more sense.
Evidently riled by the claim that renewable energy is unreliable, the Nuclear Free Local Authorities, a group of 50 councils that have foolishly been led to believe that we can do without nuclear power, has decided to brand the latter as 'unreliable' because of unplanned shutdowns ('Torness one of 15 plants hit by faults', 15 December).
In fact, most of the shutdowns would not be due to 'faults', but due to some safety issue like seaweed clogging cooling water intakes. It is strange logic to regard automatic shutdowns as a 'fault' and a symptom of unreliability in one of the safest industries in the UK supplying much of the essential base-load electricity. If the lights go out, it will not be due to a failure at a nuclear power station but because of the lack of renewable generation. The NFLA should have more sense.
To The Sunday Times (15 December 2014) not published
Vaughan Hammond (Letter, 14 December) makes the same mistake as Monique Sanders (Letter, 30 November). The number of people who voted, one way or another, should not be compared with the the number eligible to vote (unless 100% voted), because the views of those who did not vote are not known but have to be assumed to be proportional to the views of those who did vote.
The only valid comparison is with the total number who voted, as a representation of the whole electorate. If the SNP is claiming that the NO win was 'narrow, they are wrong and Mr Hammond's figures are not necessary to show it.
Vaughan Hammond (Letter, 14 December) makes the same mistake as Monique Sanders (Letter, 30 November). The number of people who voted, one way or another, should not be compared with the the number eligible to vote (unless 100% voted), because the views of those who did not vote are not known but have to be assumed to be proportional to the views of those who did vote.
The only valid comparison is with the total number who voted, as a representation of the whole electorate. If the SNP is claiming that the NO win was 'narrow, they are wrong and Mr Hammond's figures are not necessary to show it.
To The Scotsman (14 December 2014) published 15 December 2014
Andy Maciver claimed that the Smith Commission's proposals, which involved Scotland raising 40 per cent of what it spends (some say it's 50%) do not amount to either home rule or federalism ('Forget Smith and head for a federal future', 13 December).
In fact, no component of a federal state anywhere in the world raises more than 40 per cent of its income; most raise far less. The highest proportion (40%) is raised by the Canadian provinces.
So what exactly is a 'federal' sub-state if is not one that raises 40 per cent of its income?
Andy Maciver claimed that the Smith Commission's proposals, which involved Scotland raising 40 per cent of what it spends (some say it's 50%) do not amount to either home rule or federalism ('Forget Smith and head for a federal future', 13 December).
In fact, no component of a federal state anywhere in the world raises more than 40 per cent of its income; most raise far less. The highest proportion (40%) is raised by the Canadian provinces.
So what exactly is a 'federal' sub-state if is not one that raises 40 per cent of its income?
To The Times (14 December 2014) Published? Probably not.
Oliver Kamm claimed that 'No language has ever been spelt strictly phonetically' ('Have no fear: English can survive spelling reforms', 13 December). He seems to have overlooked Esperanto, in which 'the words on the page approximate the sounds that are uttered'. Moreover, unlike all other evolved languages, it has no grammatical exceptions.
Because it is impractical to rationalise English spelling, reformers are wasting their time, which could be used more fruitfully learning Esperanto.
Oliver Kamm claimed that 'No language has ever been spelt strictly phonetically' ('Have no fear: English can survive spelling reforms', 13 December). He seems to have overlooked Esperanto, in which 'the words on the page approximate the sounds that are uttered'. Moreover, unlike all other evolved languages, it has no grammatical exceptions.
Because it is impractical to rationalise English spelling, reformers are wasting their time, which could be used more fruitfully learning Esperanto.
To The Scotsman (12 December 2014) not published
Martin Blackshaw thinks that atheists 'have a troubled conscience', denying their Creator (Letter, 12 December).
As a former Christian, it seems to me that it is Christians who have troubled consciences: they worry about sin and whether they are obeying God's will and whether or not they will reach heaven. Continually looking to some imagined afterlife and praying to an imaginary god is a severe distraction to living this life, the only one we have.
Atheists suffer no such distraction and work for the better of mankind without imagined guidance or revelation, thinking for themselves.
How the universe came about is another matter. Atheists would be content to accept the view of modern cosmology. But what have the bombs dropped on Japan in 1945 got to do with that? Does Mr Blackshaw think that those who used such weapons were not Christians? Most likely they were.
Martin Blackshaw thinks that atheists 'have a troubled conscience', denying their Creator (Letter, 12 December).
As a former Christian, it seems to me that it is Christians who have troubled consciences: they worry about sin and whether they are obeying God's will and whether or not they will reach heaven. Continually looking to some imagined afterlife and praying to an imaginary god is a severe distraction to living this life, the only one we have.
Atheists suffer no such distraction and work for the better of mankind without imagined guidance or revelation, thinking for themselves.
How the universe came about is another matter. Atheists would be content to accept the view of modern cosmology. But what have the bombs dropped on Japan in 1945 got to do with that? Does Mr Blackshaw think that those who used such weapons were not Christians? Most likely they were.
To The Edinburgh Evening News (11 December 2014) published 13 December 2014
Alison Johnstone wants us to invest in wave-generated electricity and to eschew fracking ('Let's invest in what we have', 10 December).
Unfortunately, because waves are themselves wind-generated, wave-power is as weather-dependent as wind-power: i.e. unreliable and in need of reliable (thermal) back-up, so adding to carbon emissions and making the back-up electricity inefficient and expensive (it would also clutter up our seas and coasts--another environmental disaster).
So let us not rely in diffuse renewable energy to keep the lights on. The 'industry of the future' is nuclear.
As for fracking, it could provide a gas supply to avoid costly and unreliable imports and reliance on dwindling North Sea gas. Indeed, greenhouse gas emissions could be greatly reduced if we burned gas instead of coal for generating electricity.
Alison Johnstone wants us to invest in wave-generated electricity and to eschew fracking ('Let's invest in what we have', 10 December).
Unfortunately, because waves are themselves wind-generated, wave-power is as weather-dependent as wind-power: i.e. unreliable and in need of reliable (thermal) back-up, so adding to carbon emissions and making the back-up electricity inefficient and expensive (it would also clutter up our seas and coasts--another environmental disaster).
So let us not rely in diffuse renewable energy to keep the lights on. The 'industry of the future' is nuclear.
As for fracking, it could provide a gas supply to avoid costly and unreliable imports and reliance on dwindling North Sea gas. Indeed, greenhouse gas emissions could be greatly reduced if we burned gas instead of coal for generating electricity.
To The Sunday Times (08 December 2014) not published
Eleanor Mills wants schools to tell the story of Christ's birth via nativity plays because it is 'at the heart [of]...western civilisation' ('Mary and Joseph must reclaim centre stage', News Review, 7 December).
I wonder if she knows that the story is a fiction, invented to give Jesus a background and origin commensurate with his bestowed divinity (it only appears in two of the Gospels and even they don't agree with each other)? So why would schools want to perpetuate a myth?
By all means tell children the story in Religious Education classes, explaining its purpose and falsehood. But let us not celebrate it as if it were a foundational truth. The fact that has been believed and celebrated in the past does not make it today's necessity.
Eleanor Mills wants schools to tell the story of Christ's birth via nativity plays because it is 'at the heart [of]...western civilisation' ('Mary and Joseph must reclaim centre stage', News Review, 7 December).
I wonder if she knows that the story is a fiction, invented to give Jesus a background and origin commensurate with his bestowed divinity (it only appears in two of the Gospels and even they don't agree with each other)? So why would schools want to perpetuate a myth?
By all means tell children the story in Religious Education classes, explaining its purpose and falsehood. But let us not celebrate it as if it were a foundational truth. The fact that has been believed and celebrated in the past does not make it today's necessity.
To The Sunday Times (02 December 2014) not published
Monique Sanders (Letter, 30 November) makes the mistake of believing that she knows the views of people who do not vote.
It cannot be assumed that the 15.4 per cent who did not vote in the Scottish referendum were opposed to independence. Consequently, her premise is false and her calculation incorrect.
Monique Sanders (Letter, 30 November) makes the mistake of believing that she knows the views of people who do not vote.
It cannot be assumed that the 15.4 per cent who did not vote in the Scottish referendum were opposed to independence. Consequently, her premise is false and her calculation incorrect.
To The Scotsman (02 December 2014) not published
Historians and biblical scholars have long known that the Birth Narrative in Matthew and Luke (it doesn't appear in either Mark or John), was invented to give Jesus a provenance commensurate with his deification. To do so they borrowed from other contemporary religions, where stories like that of the nativity could be found.
Consequently, considering the high proportion of people who now have no religion, it is high time that schools dropped nativity plays and broadened their outlook ('Fears for nativity plays at schools substitute footballers for baby Jesus', 2 December).
I was surprised that the chair of The Humanist Society of Scotland thinks nativity plays still relevant and that they show where 'a religion comes from'. They do not show that in this case and are grossly misleading.
Historians and biblical scholars have long known that the Birth Narrative in Matthew and Luke (it doesn't appear in either Mark or John), was invented to give Jesus a provenance commensurate with his deification. To do so they borrowed from other contemporary religions, where stories like that of the nativity could be found.
Consequently, considering the high proportion of people who now have no religion, it is high time that schools dropped nativity plays and broadened their outlook ('Fears for nativity plays at schools substitute footballers for baby Jesus', 2 December).
I was surprised that the chair of The Humanist Society of Scotland thinks nativity plays still relevant and that they show where 'a religion comes from'. They do not show that in this case and are grossly misleading.