Letters 2024 - underlining indicates deletion by editor; square brackets indicate insertion.
To The Scotsman (2 Dec 24)
1 December was the beginning of Advent, a season observed in most Christian denominations as a time of waiting and preparation for both the celebration of Jesus' birth at Christmas and the return of Christ at the Second Coming.
In fact Jesus' birth date is unknown, at least not recorded. The Christian Church arbitrarily placed it on 25 December to replace a pagan celebration of the return of the Sun after the winter solstice. The idea that Jesus will return is a fanciful superstition, as are all religious beliefs.
1 December was the beginning of Advent, a season observed in most Christian denominations as a time of waiting and preparation for both the celebration of Jesus' birth at Christmas and the return of Christ at the Second Coming.
In fact Jesus' birth date is unknown, at least not recorded. The Christian Church arbitrarily placed it on 25 December to replace a pagan celebration of the return of the Sun after the winter solstice. The idea that Jesus will return is a fanciful superstition, as are all religious beliefs.
To The Scotsman (27 Nov 24) published 29 Nov 24
Ian Johnston's story of the future ('A world full of 'quiddlers' on the highway to Fire Age hell', 27 November) is deeply worrying but not new. For quite a long time now we have known that humans are ruining the planet that gave them life. We are steadily fouling our own nest.
I don't see a bright side to this. Stopping greenhouse emissions seems impossible. We are too addicted to our wasteful lifestyle to save ourselves and all other life on Earth. Humanity will continue to damage the environment to the extent of making it uninhabitable. Earth will survive but I'm not so sure about humanity. It's all very depressing.
We know what needs to be done but no one has a clue how to achieve it. Changing to an electric car or recycling waste are useless cosmetic changes.
I don't believe that there are many intelligent races in the universe (I think we are alone) but perhaps this is how they exterminate themselves. Exploiting all their planet's resources without thought of the consequences seems natural--until it's too late.
Ian Johnston's story of the future ('A world full of 'quiddlers' on the highway to Fire Age hell', 27 November) is deeply worrying but not new. For quite a long time now we have known that humans are ruining the planet that gave them life. We are steadily fouling our own nest.
I don't see a bright side to this. Stopping greenhouse emissions seems impossible. We are too addicted to our wasteful lifestyle to save ourselves and all other life on Earth. Humanity will continue to damage the environment to the extent of making it uninhabitable. Earth will survive but I'm not so sure about humanity. It's all very depressing.
We know what needs to be done but no one has a clue how to achieve it. Changing to an electric car or recycling waste are useless cosmetic changes.
I don't believe that there are many intelligent races in the universe (I think we are alone) but perhaps this is how they exterminate themselves. Exploiting all their planet's resources without thought of the consequences seems natural--until it's too late.
To The Scotsman (21 Nov 24) published 22 Nov 24
In his letter yesterday (20 November), Neil Barber commented on the objections Stornaway 'religious traditionalists' make to Tesco opening on a Sunday, or what they call the 'Sabbath'.
The word 'Sabbath' means rest, or to Jews a day of rest (Saturday). But Tesco caused offence by opening on a Sunday. Clearly these 'traditionalists' are confused, mistaking Sunday for the Sabbath. They should lighten up: traditionally the first day of the week is a day of celebration as the day on which Jesus is supposed to have emerged victorious from a tomb, although not his (see John 20). They should also heed Jesus' own words: he asked whether it is lawful to do good or evil on the Sabbath (Mk 3:4). In a modern context, that question becomes 'is Sunday trading good or evil?' Carry on shopping--in the name of Jesus.
In his letter yesterday (20 November), Neil Barber commented on the objections Stornaway 'religious traditionalists' make to Tesco opening on a Sunday, or what they call the 'Sabbath'.
The word 'Sabbath' means rest, or to Jews a day of rest (Saturday). But Tesco caused offence by opening on a Sunday. Clearly these 'traditionalists' are confused, mistaking Sunday for the Sabbath. They should lighten up: traditionally the first day of the week is a day of celebration as the day on which Jesus is supposed to have emerged victorious from a tomb, although not his (see John 20). They should also heed Jesus' own words: he asked whether it is lawful to do good or evil on the Sabbath (Mk 3:4). In a modern context, that question becomes 'is Sunday trading good or evil?' Carry on shopping--in the name of Jesus.
To The Scotsman (20 Nov 24) not published
Despite my warnings, you continue to refer to 'cold temperatures' ('First 'winter' snow fall lands with more forecast on the way', 19 November).
That phrase ('cold temperatures') is a category error as a 'temperature' is not a physical object and so can't itself have a temperature. What you mean, and should have stated, is that temperatures are low. That is to say that, from our terrestrial point of view, they are lower than average in this country ('low' to us is comparative but compared with polar temperatures it would be 'high').
Despite my warnings, you continue to refer to 'cold temperatures' ('First 'winter' snow fall lands with more forecast on the way', 19 November).
That phrase ('cold temperatures') is a category error as a 'temperature' is not a physical object and so can't itself have a temperature. What you mean, and should have stated, is that temperatures are low. That is to say that, from our terrestrial point of view, they are lower than average in this country ('low' to us is comparative but compared with polar temperatures it would be 'high').
To The Scotsman (15 Nov 24) published 16 Nov 24
David Alexander's call for more housing is all very well but it fails to mention the design or even the quality of such housing ('United action is vital to build homes we need', 14 November).
Very few volume house builders employ architects. As a result the appearance of their houses usually shows no sensitivity to modern design, rather dismal attempts to reproduce the past. I've always wondered why people want the most modern designs for their cars but not for their houses. That's inconsistent; it's as if cars are for the future but houses are for the past.
Planning authorities don't help, often rejecting modern design because it looks out-of-place. In fact planning law can hinder a modern development as it takes no account of architectural quality and planners don't always have architectural qualifications.
I think the law should be changed: requiring an architect to be involved in all planning applications.
It should be noted that 'architect' is a protected term; meaning that no one can call themselves an 'architect' unless registered with the Architects' Registration Board. To be registered someone has to hold a recognised architectural qualification.
David Alexander's call for more housing is all very well but it fails to mention the design or even the quality of such housing ('United action is vital to build homes we need', 14 November).
Very few volume house builders employ architects. As a result the appearance of their houses usually shows no sensitivity to modern design, rather dismal attempts to reproduce the past. I've always wondered why people want the most modern designs for their cars but not for their houses. That's inconsistent; it's as if cars are for the future but houses are for the past.
Planning authorities don't help, often rejecting modern design because it looks out-of-place. In fact planning law can hinder a modern development as it takes no account of architectural quality and planners don't always have architectural qualifications.
I think the law should be changed: requiring an architect to be involved in all planning applications.
It should be noted that 'architect' is a protected term; meaning that no one can call themselves an 'architect' unless registered with the Architects' Registration Board. To be registered someone has to hold a recognised architectural qualification.
To The Sunday Times (11 Nov 24) not published
Admiral Sir Tony Radakin, in his article on 10 November, got the Kohima Epitaph wrong. It reads 'When You Go Home, Tell Them Of Us And Say, For Your Tomorrow, We gave Our Today' (he had 'who gave their tomorrows for our today'). A surprising mistake by the Chief of the Defence Staff.
Admiral Sir Tony Radakin, in his article on 10 November, got the Kohima Epitaph wrong. It reads 'When You Go Home, Tell Them Of Us And Say, For Your Tomorrow, We gave Our Today' (he had 'who gave their tomorrows for our today'). A surprising mistake by the Chief of the Defence Staff.
To The Scotsman (9 Nov 24) not published
Prince William's 'Earthshot' is just greenwash. Apparently it aims to repair and regenerate the our planet. In particular it aims to protect and restore nature, clean our air, revive our oceans, build a waste-free world and fix our climate. Some hope!
Its goal is that by 2030, the world must reduce CO2 emissions by over 40 per cent and protect 30 per cent of nature, fresh water, and oceans. There isn't a hope in hell of achieving these goals and Prince William must know it.
To date, £15m has been awarded to 15 of the world's most cutting-edge environmental solutions: the City of Milan has used its funding to upgrade existing Food Waste Hubs and open new ones, broadening its network to include food markets and school canteens; Mukuru Clean Stoves has been able to triple the size of the team and launch a new malaria research project; Notpla has invested some of their prize money into factory upgrades that allow them to create new products such as a new rigid plastic-alternative material; Costa Rica is using the funding to design a new ‘payment for marine ecosystem services’ model, taking what has worked for forest protection and applying it to the marine areas that make up 92 per cent of its national territory; Takachar has invested in scaling up its team and speeding up its prototyping process, and is now beginning to commercialise its newest product, whatever that is; Enapter has been able to take significant scale up steps for its green hydrogen solution, setting up a new chemical laboratory in Germany to meet increased demand. Enapter has also completed construction of its AEM Nexus, the world’s first megawatt class AEM electrolyser, allowing it to cater to customers requiring green hydrogen in larger scale; Kheyti has invested the prize money into its technology, including a project to further reduce the cost of the Kheyti greenhouse and improve efficiency; 44.01 are investing in a range of tests and experiments to bring the costs of their carbon mineralisation process down further as they prepare for a new pilot project in Oman.
Impressed? You shouldn't be. All this is tinkering while the planet burns. None of it is going to reduce CO2 emissions. Consequently all of it is displacement activity.
Prince William's 'Earthshot' is just greenwash. Apparently it aims to repair and regenerate the our planet. In particular it aims to protect and restore nature, clean our air, revive our oceans, build a waste-free world and fix our climate. Some hope!
Its goal is that by 2030, the world must reduce CO2 emissions by over 40 per cent and protect 30 per cent of nature, fresh water, and oceans. There isn't a hope in hell of achieving these goals and Prince William must know it.
To date, £15m has been awarded to 15 of the world's most cutting-edge environmental solutions: the City of Milan has used its funding to upgrade existing Food Waste Hubs and open new ones, broadening its network to include food markets and school canteens; Mukuru Clean Stoves has been able to triple the size of the team and launch a new malaria research project; Notpla has invested some of their prize money into factory upgrades that allow them to create new products such as a new rigid plastic-alternative material; Costa Rica is using the funding to design a new ‘payment for marine ecosystem services’ model, taking what has worked for forest protection and applying it to the marine areas that make up 92 per cent of its national territory; Takachar has invested in scaling up its team and speeding up its prototyping process, and is now beginning to commercialise its newest product, whatever that is; Enapter has been able to take significant scale up steps for its green hydrogen solution, setting up a new chemical laboratory in Germany to meet increased demand. Enapter has also completed construction of its AEM Nexus, the world’s first megawatt class AEM electrolyser, allowing it to cater to customers requiring green hydrogen in larger scale; Kheyti has invested the prize money into its technology, including a project to further reduce the cost of the Kheyti greenhouse and improve efficiency; 44.01 are investing in a range of tests and experiments to bring the costs of their carbon mineralisation process down further as they prepare for a new pilot project in Oman.
Impressed? You shouldn't be. All this is tinkering while the planet burns. None of it is going to reduce CO2 emissions. Consequently all of it is displacement activity.
To The Scotsman (31 Oct 24) not published
Hugh Pennington attributes the saying 'making predictions is difficult, particularly about the future' to Sam Goldwyn (Letter, 30 October).
However, Quote Investigator (QI) attributes the first use of this saying to the Danish politician Karl Kristian Steincke in the fourth volume of his autobiography (1948). Steincke reported that the saying was spoken during a debate in the Danish parliament in the session 1937-38 although the speaker was not identified.
This citation was mentioned in the prominent reference The Yale Book of Quotations, which included more information about Danish citations for the saying in an addendum.
The first appearance in English found by QI is in the Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A (1956).
Hugh Pennington attributes the saying 'making predictions is difficult, particularly about the future' to Sam Goldwyn (Letter, 30 October).
However, Quote Investigator (QI) attributes the first use of this saying to the Danish politician Karl Kristian Steincke in the fourth volume of his autobiography (1948). Steincke reported that the saying was spoken during a debate in the Danish parliament in the session 1937-38 although the speaker was not identified.
This citation was mentioned in the prominent reference The Yale Book of Quotations, which included more information about Danish citations for the saying in an addendum.
The first appearance in English found by QI is in the Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A (1956).
To The Scotsman (29 Oct 24) published 30 Oct 24
John Forster claims that 'Renewable energy is the only way forward now'' (Opinion, 29 October). That's clearly untrue. There are many ways to generate electricity for the National Grid. Furthermore renewable methods are inadequate: they cannot reliably 'keep the lights on'. Base load in particular requires a supply that is reliable and constant. For that purpose nuclear power is a natural fit.
John Forster claims that 'Renewable energy is the only way forward now'' (Opinion, 29 October). That's clearly untrue. There are many ways to generate electricity for the National Grid. Furthermore renewable methods are inadequate: they cannot reliably 'keep the lights on'. Base load in particular requires a supply that is reliable and constant. For that purpose nuclear power is a natural fit.
To The Scotsman (26 Oct 24) not published
Sara Ward, in her story about Chris Hoy's prostate cancer (p7 of S'man, 25 October), referred to 'Lady Sarra Hoy'. That's an address error. Not having a title of her own, Sir Chris's wife may only be addressed as 'Lady Hoy'. You ought to have known that.
Sara Ward, in her story about Chris Hoy's prostate cancer (p7 of S'man, 25 October), referred to 'Lady Sarra Hoy'. That's an address error. Not having a title of her own, Sir Chris's wife may only be addressed as 'Lady Hoy'. You ought to have known that.
To The Scotsman (25 Oct 24) not published
Many times I have pointed out your confusion between 'historic', which means 'famous or potentially so', and 'historical', which means 'of or concerning history'. Mistakenly you treat them as interchangeable. You should know better.
Examples occur almost daily, e.g. 'historic abuse' in your story 'Police report ex-school staff over abuse allegations' (23 October) and 'historic sexual offences' in 'Rapist began abusing young girls when he was 12' (24 October). In both cases you were wrong.
It is notable that, instead of 'historical', Police Scotland use the term 'non-recent'. They never use the word 'historic'.
Many times I have pointed out your confusion between 'historic', which means 'famous or potentially so', and 'historical', which means 'of or concerning history'. Mistakenly you treat them as interchangeable. You should know better.
Examples occur almost daily, e.g. 'historic abuse' in your story 'Police report ex-school staff over abuse allegations' (23 October) and 'historic sexual offences' in 'Rapist began abusing young girls when he was 12' (24 October). In both cases you were wrong.
It is notable that, instead of 'historical', Police Scotland use the term 'non-recent'. They never use the word 'historic'.
To The Times (20 Oct 24) published?
Do you really think that comet C/2023 was 'passing over Stonehenge' (caption to pic on p16 yesterday)? It wasn't 'passing over' any place on Earth; it was merely seen from various places, including Stonehenge. Nor was it 'Gone in a flash'; comets don't appear to move even though they travel at very speed. Your ignorance is astonishing.
Do you really think that comet C/2023 was 'passing over Stonehenge' (caption to pic on p16 yesterday)? It wasn't 'passing over' any place on Earth; it was merely seen from various places, including Stonehenge. Nor was it 'Gone in a flash'; comets don't appear to move even though they travel at very speed. Your ignorance is astonishing.
To The Scotsman (18 Oct 24) published 19 Oct 24
You report a claim that electric wallpaper produces 'less mould and not drying the air as much as traditional central heating.' (Energy, 17 October).
That's a somewhat conflicted statement. Central heating does not dry air but it can make mould less likely. In most occupied houses, the relative humidity will be between 30 and 50 per cent. It should certainly be kept below 60 per cent. If it is too high and there are cold surfaces, mould will occur even with central heating. Humidity will be high if wet activities like washing and showering are frequent and there is little or no mechanical ventilation.
Electric wallpaper, which can warm the occupants but not the air, will not eliminate mould. Only control of humidity and good insulation will do that.
You report a claim that electric wallpaper produces 'less mould and not drying the air as much as traditional central heating.' (Energy, 17 October).
That's a somewhat conflicted statement. Central heating does not dry air but it can make mould less likely. In most occupied houses, the relative humidity will be between 30 and 50 per cent. It should certainly be kept below 60 per cent. If it is too high and there are cold surfaces, mould will occur even with central heating. Humidity will be high if wet activities like washing and showering are frequent and there is little or no mechanical ventilation.
Electric wallpaper, which can warm the occupants but not the air, will not eliminate mould. Only control of humidity and good insulation will do that.
To The Scotsman (12 Oct 24) published 16 Oct 24
I find it hard to understand why someone like Peter Hopkins (Letter, 11 October) rejects the conclusion that global warming is mainly man-made.
Scientists agree that global warming is mainly anthropogenic. Specifically, the evidence shows that certain heat-trapping gases, such as carbon dioxide, are warming the world. Carbon dioxide (CO2) is the heat-trapping gas in our atmosphere responsible for most of the warming measured over the past several decades. It’s released during cement manufacturing and when coal, gas, and oil are burned—something humans started doing during the Industrial Revolution.
The concentration of CO2 in the Earth’s atmosphere has increased dramatically over the last 150 years, from a pre-industrial era concentration of approximately 280 parts per million (ppm) to more than 410 ppm currently. Measurements from ancient ice cores show that CO2 is now at its highest levels in over 800,000 years.
Does Mr Hopkins think that such an increase can have no effect on the atmosphere?
As for 'the next ice age', we have been in an ice age (defined as having ice at the poles) for about 34 million years. Any tendency for the ice sheets to increase now will be thwarted by man-made global warming.
I find it hard to understand why someone like Peter Hopkins (Letter, 11 October) rejects the conclusion that global warming is mainly man-made.
Scientists agree that global warming is mainly anthropogenic. Specifically, the evidence shows that certain heat-trapping gases, such as carbon dioxide, are warming the world. Carbon dioxide (CO2) is the heat-trapping gas in our atmosphere responsible for most of the warming measured over the past several decades. It’s released during cement manufacturing and when coal, gas, and oil are burned—something humans started doing during the Industrial Revolution.
The concentration of CO2 in the Earth’s atmosphere has increased dramatically over the last 150 years, from a pre-industrial era concentration of approximately 280 parts per million (ppm) to more than 410 ppm currently. Measurements from ancient ice cores show that CO2 is now at its highest levels in over 800,000 years.
Does Mr Hopkins think that such an increase can have no effect on the atmosphere?
As for 'the next ice age', we have been in an ice age (defined as having ice at the poles) for about 34 million years. Any tendency for the ice sheets to increase now will be thwarted by man-made global warming.
To The Scotsman (9 Oct 24) published 11 Oct 24
It is surprising that, in discussing council tax reform ('Whatever happened to council tax reform', main leader, [Editorial] 8 October), you don't mention land value tax (LVT), once advocated by the Green Party (they seem to have dropped it).
The funding of local services in Scotland is messy and confused. It mainly comes for four sources: Scottish Government grant; service income; non-domestic rates and Council Tax. Consequently changes to the Council Tax are a minor matter when other sources do not change.
In other European countries, most levy a property tax though some levy a local income tax in part or whole. The property tax is mainly LVT.
I suppose Councils need to have their own funding; otherwise they would just be departments of the Scottish Government. It would be neat if they could meet all their own costs without a government subsidy, but perhaps that would bear too heavily on residents. Perhaps the best option is a combination of LVT plus an income tax.
Which party is brave enough to adopt that?
It is surprising that, in discussing council tax reform ('Whatever happened to council tax reform', main leader, [Editorial] 8 October), you don't mention land value tax (LVT), once advocated by the Green Party (they seem to have dropped it).
The funding of local services in Scotland is messy and confused. It mainly comes for four sources: Scottish Government grant; service income; non-domestic rates and Council Tax. Consequently changes to the Council Tax are a minor matter when other sources do not change.
In other European countries, most levy a property tax though some levy a local income tax in part or whole. The property tax is mainly LVT.
I suppose Councils need to have their own funding; otherwise they would just be departments of the Scottish Government. It would be neat if they could meet all their own costs without a government subsidy, but perhaps that would bear too heavily on residents. Perhaps the best option is a combination of LVT plus an income tax.
Which party is brave enough to adopt that?
To The Times (25 Sep 24)
The caption to pictures on p27 today includes the phrase 'warning in advance'! Warnings can only be given in advance.
The caption to pictures on p27 today includes the phrase 'warning in advance'! Warnings can only be given in advance.
To The Scotsman (24 Sep 24) published 25 Sep 24
Apparently, although The Scotsman has not reported it, the Chancellor [Rachel Reeves has] promised to pursue those who are avoiding paying their fair share of tax.
It is shocking that she doesn't know that 'tax avoidance' is legal. It is defined as the action in which an individual or business exploits the existing tax system legally such as putting money into an ISA. Lumping 'avoidance' with 'evasion' as if they are the same thing is careless and misleading. I'm sure the Treasury knows the difference so one wonders why this has not been explained to Rachel Reeves..
Apparently, although The Scotsman has not reported it, the Chancellor [Rachel Reeves has] promised to pursue those who are avoiding paying their fair share of tax.
It is shocking that she doesn't know that 'tax avoidance' is legal. It is defined as the action in which an individual or business exploits the existing tax system legally such as putting money into an ISA. Lumping 'avoidance' with 'evasion' as if they are the same thing is careless and misleading. I'm sure the Treasury knows the difference so one wonders why this has not been explained to Rachel Reeves..
To The Scotsman (16 Sep 24) not published
You report the Pope as claiming that 'God is God for all', Muslims, Buddhists and Christians ('Pope ends Asia trip with message of interfaith harmony', 14 September).
Does the Pope not know Exodus 20:3, where the Jewish god tells the Israelites not have have any other god before him? Evidently Yahweh (Jehovah) knew of the existence of other gods, or at least that is what the scribe who wrote that verse believed. He would be aware at least of the existence of the Levantine god Baal and perhaps other gods.
What evidence is there that Muslims and Christians worship the same god (Buddhists do not believe in a supreme deity)? Neither the Muslim nor Christian gods even have a name; 'Allah' just means 'the god' and the Christian god, whom most Christians cannot name, the god of Jesus, was 'Yahweh', a name that just means 'I am who I am' (not a name at all).
It's difficult to see how to achieve 'interfaith harmony' when different religions worship different gods.
The Pope's ignorance is surprising and unhelpful. He should know better..
You report the Pope as claiming that 'God is God for all', Muslims, Buddhists and Christians ('Pope ends Asia trip with message of interfaith harmony', 14 September).
Does the Pope not know Exodus 20:3, where the Jewish god tells the Israelites not have have any other god before him? Evidently Yahweh (Jehovah) knew of the existence of other gods, or at least that is what the scribe who wrote that verse believed. He would be aware at least of the existence of the Levantine god Baal and perhaps other gods.
What evidence is there that Muslims and Christians worship the same god (Buddhists do not believe in a supreme deity)? Neither the Muslim nor Christian gods even have a name; 'Allah' just means 'the god' and the Christian god, whom most Christians cannot name, the god of Jesus, was 'Yahweh', a name that just means 'I am who I am' (not a name at all).
It's difficult to see how to achieve 'interfaith harmony' when different religions worship different gods.
The Pope's ignorance is surprising and unhelpful. He should know better..
To The Scotsman (16 Sep 24) not published
Alexander Brown refers to Westminster as 'the mother of parliaments' (Comment in Scotland on Sunday, 15 September). This is a gross error as in no way is Westminster the mother of parliaments; it was not even the first parliament. 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; Parliament is the child of the state, being born again at each general election. It is the UK that is the 'mother', not Westminster.
Alexander Brown refers to Westminster as 'the mother of parliaments' (Comment in Scotland on Sunday, 15 September). This is a gross error as in no way is Westminster the mother of parliaments; it was not even the first parliament. 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; Parliament 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 (15 Sep 24) published 16 Sep 24
Mary Thomas's claim that the nuclear power industry is subsidised (Letters, 14 September) is false. At least it's not subsidised by UK taxpayers, if that is what she means. All the UK's nuclear power stations are owned and run by EDF Energy, a British integrated energy company, wholly owned by the French state-owned EDF (Électricité de France). Of course one could argue that the latter, being owned by the French Government, is subsidised by French taxpayers. But is everything owner by governments 'subsidised'?
Mary Thomas's claim that the nuclear power industry is subsidised (Letters, 14 September) is false. At least it's not subsidised by UK taxpayers, if that is what she means. All the UK's nuclear power stations are owned and run by EDF Energy, a British integrated energy company, wholly owned by the French state-owned EDF (Électricité de France). Of course one could argue that the latter, being owned by the French Government, is subsidised by French taxpayers. But is everything owner by governments 'subsidised'?
To The Scotsman (9 Sep 24) published 11 Sep 24
Instead of cutting the winter fuel payment, the Government should tax it. Many pensioners with private pensions pay income tax. Mostly they won't need the payment. Even pensioners who qualify for it but live with a pensioner who gets a private pension won't need it. So why not let the tax system sort it?
Instead of cutting the winter fuel payment, the Government should tax it. Many pensioners with private pensions pay income tax. Mostly they won't need the payment. Even pensioners who qualify for it but live with a pensioner who gets a private pension won't need it. So why not let the tax system sort it?
To The Scotsman (1 Sep 24) not published
The funding of local services in Scotland is messy and confused ('Tax hikes up to 11% in 22 area to make up for Yousaf's freeze', Scotland on Sunday, 1 September).
It mainly comes for four sources: Scottish Government grant; service income; non-domestic rates and Council Tax. Consequently changes to the Council Tax are a minor matter when other sources do not change.
In other European countries, most levy a property tax though some levy a local income tax in part or whole. The property tax is mainly a land value tax (LVT) once advocated here by the Green Party.
I suppose Councils need to have their own funding; other they would just be departments of the Scottish Government. It would be neat if they could meet all their own costs without a government subsidy, but perhaps that would bear too heavily on residents. Perhaps the best option is a combination of LVT plus an income tax.
Which party is brave enough to adopt that?.
The funding of local services in Scotland is messy and confused ('Tax hikes up to 11% in 22 area to make up for Yousaf's freeze', Scotland on Sunday, 1 September).
It mainly comes for four sources: Scottish Government grant; service income; non-domestic rates and Council Tax. Consequently changes to the Council Tax are a minor matter when other sources do not change.
In other European countries, most levy a property tax though some levy a local income tax in part or whole. The property tax is mainly a land value tax (LVT) once advocated here by the Green Party.
I suppose Councils need to have their own funding; other they would just be departments of the Scottish Government. It would be neat if they could meet all their own costs without a government subsidy, but perhaps that would bear too heavily on residents. Perhaps the best option is a combination of LVT plus an income tax.
Which party is brave enough to adopt that?.
To The Scotsman (28 Aug 24) published 31 Aug 24
Do people who release lighter-than-air balloons ever consider where they end up ('Balloons and bubbles for Southport victims' funeral', 24 August)? Do they think they go to Heaven?
In fact, after bursting they fall to ground level, polluting the environment as a danger to wildlife both on land and at sea. Such releases should be banned and those responsible charged.
To The Scotsman (26 Aug 24) not published
Your report that the knife attacker in Germany targeted Christians 'to avenge Muslims in Palestine and everywhere' (IS claims responsibility for fatal knife attack', SoS 25 August).
I can only conclude that the attacker was confused, unable to distinguish between Christian and Jews. The so-called Islamic State needs to better educate its followers. I don't endorse violence but it's important that attackers know their enemies and can correctly identify them. Otherwise chaos reigns.
Do people who release lighter-than-air balloons ever consider where they end up ('Balloons and bubbles for Southport victims' funeral', 24 August)? Do they think they go to Heaven?
In fact, after bursting they fall to ground level, polluting the environment as a danger to wildlife both on land and at sea. Such releases should be banned and those responsible charged.
To The Scotsman (26 Aug 24) not published
Your report that the knife attacker in Germany targeted Christians 'to avenge Muslims in Palestine and everywhere' (IS claims responsibility for fatal knife attack', SoS 25 August).
I can only conclude that the attacker was confused, unable to distinguish between Christian and Jews. The so-called Islamic State needs to better educate its followers. I don't endorse violence but it's important that attackers know their enemies and can correctly identify them. Otherwise chaos reigns.
To The Sunday Times (26 Aug 24)
You report that HMRC will investigate any gifts where it suspects that tax has been underpaid or avoided (Money, 25 August). However 'tax avoidance' is legal; it's only 'tax evasion' that is illegal. Tax evasion occurs when someone acts against the law. Tax avoidance involves compliance with the letter but not the spirit of the law. The hallmark of tax avoidance is that the taxpayer reduces his liability to tax.
You report that HMRC will investigate any gifts where it suspects that tax has been underpaid or avoided (Money, 25 August). However 'tax avoidance' is legal; it's only 'tax evasion' that is illegal. Tax evasion occurs when someone acts against the law. Tax avoidance involves compliance with the letter but not the spirit of the law. The hallmark of tax avoidance is that the taxpayer reduces his liability to tax.
To The Scotsman (7 Aug 24) not published
George Rennie (Letters, 6 August) is surprised that there 'has been little reaction' to the low Scottish birth rate revealed by the National Records of Scotland. However, The Scotsman has published at least three letters from me on the subject, not that they will have any effect. Has he not read them?
Not just Scotland, but Europe's low birth rate, about 1.49 births per woman, will eventually lead to a decline in the population. The European population is projected to peak at 453.3 million in 2026 and then gradually decline to 447.9 million in 2050 and to 419.5 million in 2100. As I pointed out in my letter of 2 August, the world population itself is projected to decline after peaking at 10.4 billion in 2080.
This demographic shift will lead to the problems Mr Rennie mentions: too many old people and too few young people to provide the services required. Governments seem unprepared to deal with it because their perspective is too short.
George Rennie (Letters, 6 August) is surprised that there 'has been little reaction' to the low Scottish birth rate revealed by the National Records of Scotland. However, The Scotsman has published at least three letters from me on the subject, not that they will have any effect. Has he not read them?
Not just Scotland, but Europe's low birth rate, about 1.49 births per woman, will eventually lead to a decline in the population. The European population is projected to peak at 453.3 million in 2026 and then gradually decline to 447.9 million in 2050 and to 419.5 million in 2100. As I pointed out in my letter of 2 August, the world population itself is projected to decline after peaking at 10.4 billion in 2080.
This demographic shift will lead to the problems Mr Rennie mentions: too many old people and too few young people to provide the services required. Governments seem unprepared to deal with it because their perspective is too short.
To The Scotsman (30 Jul 24) published 2 Aug 24
Clark Cross (Letter, 30 July) asks why our taxes should rise 'to pay for other people's children'. He asked the same question in his letter of 17 July. I answered that in my letter of 19 July but he seems to pay no attention. I explained that, if they don't pay, we will run out of British people and this country will be populated only by incomers, probably from underdeveloped countries (it's because our birth rate is way below the rate needed to keep the population stable). Does he want that?
Now he claims that the world population, at 8.1 billion, is 'escalating out of control'. It is true that it will climb further but the UN has now revised its estimate, to conclude that, by 2080 it will peak at 10.4 bn and then start to decline, the first global decline since the Black Death in the Middle Ages. This projection is based on the fact that, two-thirds of the world population live in countries where the the total fertility rate birth (a measure of births per woman per lifetime) has dropped below 2.1, the number needed to keep the population constant.
Mr Cross has an upside down view of the world. We are not heading for too many people but too few. Jesus Fernandez-Villaverde of the University of Pennsylvania says that 'The demographic winter is coming'.
Clark Cross (Letter, 30 July) asks why our taxes should rise 'to pay for other people's children'. He asked the same question in his letter of 17 July. I answered that in my letter of 19 July but he seems to pay no attention. I explained that, if they don't pay, we will run out of British people and this country will be populated only by incomers, probably from underdeveloped countries (it's because our birth rate is way below the rate needed to keep the population stable). Does he want that?
Now he claims that the world population, at 8.1 billion, is 'escalating out of control'. It is true that it will climb further but the UN has now revised its estimate, to conclude that, by 2080 it will peak at 10.4 bn and then start to decline, the first global decline since the Black Death in the Middle Ages. This projection is based on the fact that, two-thirds of the world population live in countries where the the total fertility rate birth (a measure of births per woman per lifetime) has dropped below 2.1, the number needed to keep the population constant.
Mr Cross has an upside down view of the world. We are not heading for too many people but too few. Jesus Fernandez-Villaverde of the University of Pennsylvania says that 'The demographic winter is coming'.
To The Scotsman (25 Jul 24) published 26 Jul 24
Are my letters invisible? Paul Lewis (Letters, 24 July) thinks the 2-child benefit cap sensible, noting that environmentalists advocate limiting families to two children 'to help save the planet' (two children per family is not a danger to the planet, see below; the present danger is global warming).
Tim Flinn (Letters, 25 July), believing that overpopulation is the danger, advocates parents having only two children.
However, in my letter of 19 July, I pointed out that already the average UK birth rate is only 1.58 per woman while the average replacement rate [needed to maintain the present population] is 2.08. This is because not every family has two children. Only 41 per sent of families have two children, while 14 per cent have three or more and 43 per cent have no children living with them. The population is being maintained, even increased, by immigration and people living longer. Over the next 15 years, the UK population is projected to grow by 6.6 million people (a 9.9% increase), reaching an estimated 73.7 million by mid-2036. This growth includes 541,000 more births than deaths and net international migration of 6.1 million people. By mid-2026, the population is expected to reach 70 million.
Calls for limits on family size are misguided. On average parents already limit their family size, probably for financial reasons. No matter what individual families do, population growth is inevitable.
Are my letters invisible? Paul Lewis (Letters, 24 July) thinks the 2-child benefit cap sensible, noting that environmentalists advocate limiting families to two children 'to help save the planet' (two children per family is not a danger to the planet, see below; the present danger is global warming).
Tim Flinn (Letters, 25 July), believing that overpopulation is the danger, advocates parents having only two children.
However, in my letter of 19 July, I pointed out that already the average UK birth rate is only 1.58 per woman while the average replacement rate [needed to maintain the present population] is 2.08. This is because not every family has two children. Only 41 per sent of families have two children, while 14 per cent have three or more and 43 per cent have no children living with them. The population is being maintained, even increased, by immigration and people living longer. Over the next 15 years, the UK population is projected to grow by 6.6 million people (a 9.9% increase), reaching an estimated 73.7 million by mid-2036. This growth includes 541,000 more births than deaths and net international migration of 6.1 million people. By mid-2026, the population is expected to reach 70 million.
Calls for limits on family size are misguided. On average parents already limit their family size, probably for financial reasons. No matter what individual families do, population growth is inevitable.
To The Sunday Times (22 Jul 24)
The two-child limit ('Ditch the cap - two-child rule is social cleansing, says Labour MP', 21 July) should be abolished because we don't produce enough children (only 1.58/woman when the replacement rate is 2.08). Otherwise natural British people will become extinct and the UK will be inhabited only by incomers. The Government should offer inducements to produce more children.
The two-child limit ('Ditch the cap - two-child rule is social cleansing, says Labour MP', 21 July) should be abolished because we don't produce enough children (only 1.58/woman when the replacement rate is 2.08). Otherwise natural British people will become extinct and the UK will be inhabited only by incomers. The Government should offer inducements to produce more children.
To The Scotsman (21 Jul 24) published 22 Jul 24
Rob Pearson (Letter, 20 July) wants Lord's reform in various way. All well and good except that there would be a better way. That is to follow the pattern of the Irish Senate, where 60 senators represent various parties reflecting the strength of the parties in the Dail. It is not directly elected but consists of a mixture of members chosen by various methods. Eleven are nominated by the Taoiseach, 6 from universities and 43 elected from five special panels of nominees (vocational panels). It's powers are modelled loosely on those of the House of Lords and it plays an advisory and revising role rather than to be an equal of the popularly elected Dáil.
While notionally every Act of the Parliament must receive assent of both chambers, in practice the Senate can only delay rather than veto decisions of the Dáil. The fact that 11 senators are appointed by the Taoiseach usually ensures that the Government, which must have the support of the Dáil, enjoys at least a plurality in the Senate. The constitution imposes specific limitations on the powers of the Senate. It's a model the UK should follow.
Rob Pearson (Letter, 20 July) wants Lord's reform in various way. All well and good except that there would be a better way. That is to follow the pattern of the Irish Senate, where 60 senators represent various parties reflecting the strength of the parties in the Dail. It is not directly elected but consists of a mixture of members chosen by various methods. Eleven are nominated by the Taoiseach, 6 from universities and 43 elected from five special panels of nominees (vocational panels). It's powers are modelled loosely on those of the House of Lords and it plays an advisory and revising role rather than to be an equal of the popularly elected Dáil.
While notionally every Act of the Parliament must receive assent of both chambers, in practice the Senate can only delay rather than veto decisions of the Dáil. The fact that 11 senators are appointed by the Taoiseach usually ensures that the Government, which must have the support of the Dáil, enjoys at least a plurality in the Senate. The constitution imposes specific limitations on the powers of the Senate. It's a model the UK should follow.
To The Scotsman (18 Jul 24) published 19 Jul 24
Considering that the UK birth rate has dropped to only 1.58 children per woman, it seems unwise to restrict child tax credits to only two children (Letter from Clark Cross, 17 July). He asked why responsible taxpayers should have to pay for other people's children. The answer is that, if they don't, we will run out of British people and this country will be populated only by incomers, probably from underdeveloped countries.
The average replacement rate is 2.08 but to rebuild the indigenous population it needs to be well over that: say 3. To achieve that some families should have well over 3, say 5, and they should be encouraged to do so by Government inducements.
Considering that the UK birth rate has dropped to only 1.58 children per woman, it seems unwise to restrict child tax credits to only two children (Letter from Clark Cross, 17 July). He asked why responsible taxpayers should have to pay for other people's children. The answer is that, if they don't, we will run out of British people and this country will be populated only by incomers, probably from underdeveloped countries.
The average replacement rate is 2.08 but to rebuild the indigenous population it needs to be well over that: say 3. To achieve that some families should have well over 3, say 5, and they should be encouraged to do so by Government inducements.
To The Scotsman (15 Jul 24) published 17 Jul 24
The United States has foolishly adopted a constitution that allows individuals to bear firearms. It's not clear why it did this as there was no reason for it. Militias were allowed to be armed and that should have been sufficient to keep order. So they have intentionally brought about the chaotic situation that now prevails with every citizen being able to carry a gun. Such a situation is not tolerated in the UK or in many other countries. The US needs to adopt restrictions on who can carry a weapon and what type of weapon, but the Government seems reluctant to do that. They only have themselves to blame for the atrocities that occur.
The United States has foolishly adopted a constitution that allows individuals to bear firearms. It's not clear why it did this as there was no reason for it. Militias were allowed to be armed and that should have been sufficient to keep order. So they have intentionally brought about the chaotic situation that now prevails with every citizen being able to carry a gun. Such a situation is not tolerated in the UK or in many other countries. The US needs to adopt restrictions on who can carry a weapon and what type of weapon, but the Government seems reluctant to do that. They only have themselves to blame for the atrocities that occur.
To The Scotsman (10 Jul 24) not published
George Gunn ('You've never had it so dreich', Scottish Life, 10 July) claimed that 'warmer air holds more moisture'.
This is the 'windbag myth': the idea that water vapour is held by other gases in the atmosphere. However, if there no other gases, such as on a water planet, water vapour would be the only gas in the atmosphere. Water vapour is not 'held' by any other gases; it 'holds its own' and is an independent constituent of our atmosphere. The amount of water vapour is only dependent on the temperature: as the temperature rises, increased evaporation leads to an increase in water vapour. That result is demonstrated now as global warming puts more water vapour into the atmosphere, resulting in more rain and flooding.
George Gunn ('You've never had it so dreich', Scottish Life, 10 July) claimed that 'warmer air holds more moisture'.
This is the 'windbag myth': the idea that water vapour is held by other gases in the atmosphere. However, if there no other gases, such as on a water planet, water vapour would be the only gas in the atmosphere. Water vapour is not 'held' by any other gases; it 'holds its own' and is an independent constituent of our atmosphere. The amount of water vapour is only dependent on the temperature: as the temperature rises, increased evaporation leads to an increase in water vapour. That result is demonstrated now as global warming puts more water vapour into the atmosphere, resulting in more rain and flooding.
To The Scotsman (8 Jul 24) published 10 Jul 24
Under any decent PR electoral system (say STV), there would now be 219 Labour MPs, 154 Conservatives, 92 Reform, 79 LibDems, 44 Greens, 15 SNP and 44 others in the Commons. However, under STV people might vote differently (they can indicate their preferences). Because 326 MPs would be need to form a majority, those results would require Labour to go into coalition with one or more other parties; say the LibDems and Greens (342). In Ireland, using the STV system, the government is a coalition of three parties: Fianna Fail, Fine Gael and the Green Party.
One might argue that our 'winner takes all' system makes for stable government, but there's no evidence that coalitions are unstable. What our system does is hand full control to one party regardless of their popular support: in this case just 33.8 per cent of voters. Is that fair?
Under any decent PR electoral system (say STV), there would now be 219 Labour MPs, 154 Conservatives, 92 Reform, 79 LibDems, 44 Greens, 15 SNP and 44 others in the Commons. However, under STV people might vote differently (they can indicate their preferences). Because 326 MPs would be need to form a majority, those results would require Labour to go into coalition with one or more other parties; say the LibDems and Greens (342). In Ireland, using the STV system, the government is a coalition of three parties: Fianna Fail, Fine Gael and the Green Party.
One might argue that our 'winner takes all' system makes for stable government, but there's no evidence that coalitions are unstable. What our system does is hand full control to one party regardless of their popular support: in this case just 33.8 per cent of voters. Is that fair?
To The Scotsman (5 Jul 24) published 6 Jul 24
What's this about four nations in the UK? We are not a confederation; the UK is a unified nation, albeit with three devolved administrations. The former independent nations of Scotland and England were united as Great Britain (GB) in 1707 and Ireland was united with GB in 1800. Since independence for most of Ireland in 1922, Northern Ireland (Ulster) became a British province and Wales lost its independence in 1707, becoming a British principality. 'Four nations' is nonsense; there's only one nation: The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Of course 'United' in that title doesn't refer to Scotland and England but to Great Britain and Ireland (an anachronism since there is no longer a Kingdom of Ireland).
What's this about four nations in the UK? We are not a confederation; the UK is a unified nation, albeit with three devolved administrations. The former independent nations of Scotland and England were united as Great Britain (GB) in 1707 and Ireland was united with GB in 1800. Since independence for most of Ireland in 1922, Northern Ireland (Ulster) became a British province and Wales lost its independence in 1707, becoming a British principality. 'Four nations' is nonsense; there's only one nation: The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Of course 'United' in that title doesn't refer to Scotland and England but to Great Britain and Ireland (an anachronism since there is no longer a Kingdom of Ireland).
To The Scotsman (3 Jul 24) Not published
It's surprising and depressing that a leading politician doesn't know the difference between legal 'tax avoidance' and illegal 'tax evasion' (Jackie Baillie in her column on p21 of The Scotsman, 3 July). She claimed that Labour would pay for greater investment by 'cracking down on tax avoidance'. It would be even more concerning if she copied this policy from Labour's manifesto. How come an otherwise well-informed politician makes such a mistake? Is it carelessness or ignorance?.
It's surprising and depressing that a leading politician doesn't know the difference between legal 'tax avoidance' and illegal 'tax evasion' (Jackie Baillie in her column on p21 of The Scotsman, 3 July). She claimed that Labour would pay for greater investment by 'cracking down on tax avoidance'. It would be even more concerning if she copied this policy from Labour's manifesto. How come an otherwise well-informed politician makes such a mistake? Is it carelessness or ignorance?.
To The Scotsman (22 Jun 24) published 25 Jun 24
If planning permission for oil and gas extraction needs to take account of 'downstream emissions' ('The 'fundamental judgement' will have a 'worldwide impact', 21 June), it's only fair that it also takes into account the benefit society derives from the use of the many products that are produced from such hydrocarbons.
These are essential feed stock for industries producing asphalt, lubricants, chemical reagents for plastics, solvents, textiles, refrigerants, paint, synthetic rubber, fertilisers, pesticides, pharmaceuticals and many other products we need and use every day, like medical devices, household tools and clothing.
Don't let us throw out the baby with the bathwater.
If planning permission for oil and gas extraction needs to take account of 'downstream emissions' ('The 'fundamental judgement' will have a 'worldwide impact', 21 June), it's only fair that it also takes into account the benefit society derives from the use of the many products that are produced from such hydrocarbons.
These are essential feed stock for industries producing asphalt, lubricants, chemical reagents for plastics, solvents, textiles, refrigerants, paint, synthetic rubber, fertilisers, pesticides, pharmaceuticals and many other products we need and use every day, like medical devices, household tools and clothing.
Don't let us throw out the baby with the bathwater.
To The Scotsman (19 Jun 24)
Derek Allen, the compiler of the Cryptic Crossword published on 19 June believes that 'sea air' (clue 26 across) is 'ozone'. This is popular myth.
Ozone (O3) is a poisonous gas which, in the stratosphere absorbs most of the Sun's ultra violet radiation.
The smell of the sea is due to a complex mix of chemicals originating from decay, death and bacterial breakdown combined with a touch of saltiness, algae and marine organisms. The principal chemical compounds of 'sea air' are dimethyl sulfide and methanethiol. So breathe easy at the seaside.
Derek Allen, the compiler of the Cryptic Crossword published on 19 June believes that 'sea air' (clue 26 across) is 'ozone'. This is popular myth.
Ozone (O3) is a poisonous gas which, in the stratosphere absorbs most of the Sun's ultra violet radiation.
The smell of the sea is due to a complex mix of chemicals originating from decay, death and bacterial breakdown combined with a touch of saltiness, algae and marine organisms. The principal chemical compounds of 'sea air' are dimethyl sulfide and methanethiol. So breathe easy at the seaside.
To The Scotsman (17 Jun 24) published 19 Jun 24
Tony Blair says that Scottish independence is further away than ever (your report,[Scotsman] 17 June). However, it has always been out of sight. To the SNP, Scotland is a British colony that can stay or leave the Commonwealth as it wishes. However that is a fundamentally mistaken and deluded view.
Scotland is an integral component of the UK, a founding member of Great Britain. It cannot unilaterally leave the Union; it could only separate from the rest of the UK with the consent of all the people of the UK, say in a referendum, that might allow renegotiation of the 1707 Treaty of Union (fat chance of that). Indeed, such a referendum was suggested by the House of Lords.
David Cameron made a mistake in agreeing to a referendum; clearly he did not understand the legal position. He also erred in allowing the matter to be determined on a simple majority when such an important constitutional matter needed a two-thirds majority.
Let's have no more of this constitutional nonsense. Most people in Scotland do not want to break up the UK.
Tony Blair says that Scottish independence is further away than ever (your report,[Scotsman] 17 June). However, it has always been out of sight. To the SNP, Scotland is a British colony that can stay or leave the Commonwealth as it wishes. However that is a fundamentally mistaken and deluded view.
Scotland is an integral component of the UK, a founding member of Great Britain. It cannot unilaterally leave the Union; it could only separate from the rest of the UK with the consent of all the people of the UK, say in a referendum, that might allow renegotiation of the 1707 Treaty of Union (fat chance of that). Indeed, such a referendum was suggested by the House of Lords.
David Cameron made a mistake in agreeing to a referendum; clearly he did not understand the legal position. He also erred in allowing the matter to be determined on a simple majority when such an important constitutional matter needed a two-thirds majority.
Let's have no more of this constitutional nonsense. Most people in Scotland do not want to break up the UK.
To The Scotsman (14 Jun 24) published 15 Jun 24
I was astonished to read your report (14 June) that Labour would be 'clamping down on tax avoidance', [your report, 14 June] so I checked with Labour's manifesto. You are correct, the party plans 'investment in HMRC to reduce tax avoidance'.
However 'tax avoidance' is legal; one is allowed to so arrange one's affairs so as to minimise tax liability within the law. What is illegal is 'tax evasion': the non-payment or under payment of tax.
I presume that, by mistake or ignorance, the wrong word has been used in the manifesto. It should be corrected.
I was astonished to read your report (14 June) that Labour would be 'clamping down on tax avoidance', [your report, 14 June] so I checked with Labour's manifesto. You are correct, the party plans 'investment in HMRC to reduce tax avoidance'.
However 'tax avoidance' is legal; one is allowed to so arrange one's affairs so as to minimise tax liability within the law. What is illegal is 'tax evasion': the non-payment or under payment of tax.
I presume that, by mistake or ignorance, the wrong word has been used in the manifesto. It should be corrected.
To The Scotsman (5 Jun 24) published 7 Jun 24
Drilling for oil and gas [Regarding The Scotsman report] 'Only a third of SNP supporters want more oil and gas drilling' (5 June) drilling for oil and gas is not especially damaging to the environment; it's merely another industrial activity.
Whether or not the environment subsequently suffers depends on what is done with the oil and gas produced. Both oil and gas (hydrocarbons) are essential feed stock for industries producing asphalt, lubricants, chemical reagents for plastics, solvents, textiles, refrigerants, paint, synthetic rubber, fertilisers, pesticides, pharmaceuticals and many other products we need and use every day, like medical devices, household tools and clothing.
It's only burning hydrocarbons that damages the environment, producing the greenhouse gases that result in global warming. So let us not stop extracting them; just let's stop burning them
Drilling for oil and gas [Regarding The Scotsman report] 'Only a third of SNP supporters want more oil and gas drilling' (5 June) drilling for oil and gas is not especially damaging to the environment; it's merely another industrial activity.
Whether or not the environment subsequently suffers depends on what is done with the oil and gas produced. Both oil and gas (hydrocarbons) are essential feed stock for industries producing asphalt, lubricants, chemical reagents for plastics, solvents, textiles, refrigerants, paint, synthetic rubber, fertilisers, pesticides, pharmaceuticals and many other products we need and use every day, like medical devices, household tools and clothing.
It's only burning hydrocarbons that damages the environment, producing the greenhouse gases that result in global warming. So let us not stop extracting them; just let's stop burning them
To The Sunday Times (3 Jun 24) not publishd
It is not true that the crash of an RAF Chinook on the Mull of Kintyre 30 years ago is 'officially...unexplained...' ('Widow of Chinook crash victim calls for a new inquiry into "MoD cover-up"', 2 June). The MoD claims that it was due to the pilots' negligence in not climbing to a safe altitude. Nor is it true that the pilots were exonerated.
It is not true that the crash of an RAF Chinook on the Mull of Kintyre 30 years ago is 'officially...unexplained...' ('Widow of Chinook crash victim calls for a new inquiry into "MoD cover-up"', 2 June). The MoD claims that it was due to the pilots' negligence in not climbing to a safe altitude. Nor is it true that the pilots were exonerated.
To The Scotsman (1 Jun 24) not published
Sunday 2nd of June was the 30th anniversary of the tragic crash of an RAF Chinook helicopter on the Mull of Kintyre. It was carrying 29 people, the 25 passengers being security personal from Northern Ireland on their way to a conference at Fort George. All 29 died instantly.
The crash occurred in a fog bank, a common feature of the Mull in summer. Consequently, the pilots could not see the ground. RAF rules in such circumstances require an aircraft to climb to a safe altitude well clear of the highest ground in the area. The MoD criticised the pilots for not following this rule.
It appears that the pilots decided to continue at low level despite poor visibility. Unfortunately, they made a navigation error which put them over land instead of the sea.
The catastrophic result was inevitable.
Sunday 2nd of June was the 30th anniversary of the tragic crash of an RAF Chinook helicopter on the Mull of Kintyre. It was carrying 29 people, the 25 passengers being security personal from Northern Ireland on their way to a conference at Fort George. All 29 died instantly.
The crash occurred in a fog bank, a common feature of the Mull in summer. Consequently, the pilots could not see the ground. RAF rules in such circumstances require an aircraft to climb to a safe altitude well clear of the highest ground in the area. The MoD criticised the pilots for not following this rule.
It appears that the pilots decided to continue at low level despite poor visibility. Unfortunately, they made a navigation error which put them over land instead of the sea.
The catastrophic result was inevitable.
To The Scotsman (30 May 24) not published
Sunday 2nd of June will be the 30th anniversary of the tragic crash of an RAF Chinook helicopter on the Mull of Kintyre. It was carrying 29 people, the 25 passengers being security personal from Northern Ireland on their way to a conference at Fort George. All 29 died instantly.
The crash occurred in a fog bank, a common feature of the Mull in summer. Consequently, the pilots could not see the ground. RAF rules in such circumstances require an aircraft to climb to a safe altitude well clear of the highest ground in the area. The MoD criticised the pilots for not following this rule.
It appears that the pilots decided to continue at low level. However they made a navigation error which put them over land instead of the sea.
The catastrophic result was inevitable.
Sunday 2nd of June will be the 30th anniversary of the tragic crash of an RAF Chinook helicopter on the Mull of Kintyre. It was carrying 29 people, the 25 passengers being security personal from Northern Ireland on their way to a conference at Fort George. All 29 died instantly.
The crash occurred in a fog bank, a common feature of the Mull in summer. Consequently, the pilots could not see the ground. RAF rules in such circumstances require an aircraft to climb to a safe altitude well clear of the highest ground in the area. The MoD criticised the pilots for not following this rule.
It appears that the pilots decided to continue at low level. However they made a navigation error which put them over land instead of the sea.
The catastrophic result was inevitable.
To The Sunday Times (27 May 24)
Perhaps Anne Robinson will tell us how her estate will avoid paying Inheritance Tax (40%) on her generous family gifts (Comment, 26 May). She may not 'want the taxman to have it' but HMRC will demand their cut.
Perhaps Anne Robinson will tell us how her estate will avoid paying Inheritance Tax (40%) on her generous family gifts (Comment, 26 May). She may not 'want the taxman to have it' but HMRC will demand their cut.
To The Scotsman (23 May 24) published 25 May 24
Nina Welsh claims to be an agnostic because she is equivocal about her faith ('Why I've returned to church despite not believing in God', 23 May).
However, an agnostic is not someone who is unsure what to believe; it is someone who is sure that nothing is known or can be known of the existence or nature of God. It's a common mistake to use the term to relate to uncertainty when in fact it relates to certainty. I'm not sure how to describe someone who is uncertain about everything. A 'ditherer'?
Nina Welsh claims to be an agnostic because she is equivocal about her faith ('Why I've returned to church despite not believing in God', 23 May).
However, an agnostic is not someone who is unsure what to believe; it is someone who is sure that nothing is known or can be known of the existence or nature of God. It's a common mistake to use the term to relate to uncertainty when in fact it relates to certainty. I'm not sure how to describe someone who is uncertain about everything. A 'ditherer'?
To The Scotsman (22 May 24) not published
Why is it that people are inclined not to blame pilots for aircraft accidents ('Chinook crash families claim cover-up', 21 May)? The pilots of an aircraft, like the captain of a ship, are always responsible for its performance unless there is a mechanical failure beyond their control. In this case no fault was found with the helicopter.
When an aircraft under control flies into the ground, usually rising ground, it's described as CFIT (Controlled Flight Into Terrain) and is always caused by pilot error. That was the case here. In poor visibility, the crew made a navigation error which put them over land when they expected to be over sea. Moreover, they failed to follow safety rules which required them to climb to a safe altitude.
Why is it that people are inclined not to blame pilots for aircraft accidents ('Chinook crash families claim cover-up', 21 May)? The pilots of an aircraft, like the captain of a ship, are always responsible for its performance unless there is a mechanical failure beyond their control. In this case no fault was found with the helicopter.
When an aircraft under control flies into the ground, usually rising ground, it's described as CFIT (Controlled Flight Into Terrain) and is always caused by pilot error. That was the case here. In poor visibility, the crew made a navigation error which put them over land when they expected to be over sea. Moreover, they failed to follow safety rules which required them to climb to a safe altitude.
To The Scotsman (18 May 24) not published
When a serviceable aircraft is flown into the ground, usually rising ground, it is described as CFIT (Controlled Flight Into Terrain). It usually happens in poor visibility and the cause is always pilot error. Either the pilots did not know where they were or thought they were safe somewhere else.
This was the case with RAF Chinook ZD576 when it crashed into the Mull of Kintyre on 2 June 1994 ('Anger over lack of official event to mark 1994 Chinook crash', 17 May).
The crew made a navigation error which put them over land when they thought they were over the sea. Attempts to exonerate the pilots are misplaced and appear to be entirely emotional. This arises from the mistaken belief that the experiernced pilots could not have made a fundamental mistake and that there must have been something wrong with the aircraft. In fact no fault with the aircraft has ever been found.
My book Chinook Crash, the only one to cover this incident in full, will be republished shortly by Pen&Sword.
When a serviceable aircraft is flown into the ground, usually rising ground, it is described as CFIT (Controlled Flight Into Terrain). It usually happens in poor visibility and the cause is always pilot error. Either the pilots did not know where they were or thought they were safe somewhere else.
This was the case with RAF Chinook ZD576 when it crashed into the Mull of Kintyre on 2 June 1994 ('Anger over lack of official event to mark 1994 Chinook crash', 17 May).
The crew made a navigation error which put them over land when they thought they were over the sea. Attempts to exonerate the pilots are misplaced and appear to be entirely emotional. This arises from the mistaken belief that the experiernced pilots could not have made a fundamental mistake and that there must have been something wrong with the aircraft. In fact no fault with the aircraft has ever been found.
My book Chinook Crash, the only one to cover this incident in full, will be republished shortly by Pen&Sword.
To The Scotsman (16 May 24) not published
Tim Flinn (Letters, 15 May) would prefer MPs (I think he means MSPs) were chosen by sortition (by lots), apparently because he resents the way ther present PR system gives power to unelected members. However, I don't think lots are used for any assembly anywhere.
The PR method used for Holyrood is faulty, but could be change to one that gives every member an equal right to their seat. I refer to the Single Transferable Vote (STV) system that was created in Britain and is used in Northern Ireland, Eire, Malta and all local elections in Scotland. This does not give each seat one representative, but more than one. It gives voters a choice of party besides personalities.
Tim Flinn (Letters, 15 May) would prefer MPs (I think he means MSPs) were chosen by sortition (by lots), apparently because he resents the way ther present PR system gives power to unelected members. However, I don't think lots are used for any assembly anywhere.
The PR method used for Holyrood is faulty, but could be change to one that gives every member an equal right to their seat. I refer to the Single Transferable Vote (STV) system that was created in Britain and is used in Northern Ireland, Eire, Malta and all local elections in Scotland. This does not give each seat one representative, but more than one. It gives voters a choice of party besides personalities.
To The Scotsman (7 May 24) not published
You mentioned the 17th anniversary of the disappearance of Madeleine McCann (4 May). It's tragic that she was abducted and possibly killed, but surely this was a case of child neglect, a form of child abuse. The parents left three young children alone in an apartment while they went to a meal with friends. In Scotland this is a criminal offence. Is it not in Portugal? Could the parents not have been charged with child neglect?
It should be a warning to all those responsible for young people under the age of 18. Never leave them unattended.
You mentioned the 17th anniversary of the disappearance of Madeleine McCann (4 May). It's tragic that she was abducted and possibly killed, but surely this was a case of child neglect, a form of child abuse. The parents left three young children alone in an apartment while they went to a meal with friends. In Scotland this is a criminal offence. Is it not in Portugal? Could the parents not have been charged with child neglect?
It should be a warning to all those responsible for young people under the age of 18. Never leave them unattended.
To The Scotsman (5 May 24) published 6 May 24
Mary Thomas (Letters, 4 May) accuses Labour's Jackie Baillie of hypocrisy for calling for a Holyrood election as a consequence of the SNP changing its leader and so First Minister (Wales changed its First Minister without an election).
Apart from the fact that Scottish Labour is not responsible for Welsh Labour's decisions, it's become the norm for people to call for an election every time a ruling party changes it's leader (there were such calls when Rishi Sunak became Prime Minister).
However, we do not have a presidential democracy. We elect parties and accept that the ruling party's leader will lead the government. It's a mistake to believe that we elect a party leader; only party members can do that. I'm fact it's a party's MPs who should choose their leader. If a party changes it's leader that's no cause for an election.
While the Scottish Parliament, unlike The Commons, does elect the First Minister, that's a formality just to endorse the choice of the ruling party.
Mary Thomas (Letters, 4 May) accuses Labour's Jackie Baillie of hypocrisy for calling for a Holyrood election as a consequence of the SNP changing its leader and so First Minister (Wales changed its First Minister without an election).
Apart from the fact that Scottish Labour is not responsible for Welsh Labour's decisions, it's become the norm for people to call for an election every time a ruling party changes it's leader (there were such calls when Rishi Sunak became Prime Minister).
However, we do not have a presidential democracy. We elect parties and accept that the ruling party's leader will lead the government. It's a mistake to believe that we elect a party leader; only party members can do that. I'm fact it's a party's MPs who should choose their leader. If a party changes it's leader that's no cause for an election.
While the Scottish Parliament, unlike The Commons, does elect the First Minister, that's a formality just to endorse the choice of the ruling party.
To The Sunday Times (30 Apr 24) not published
Ron Liddle may be being provocative as usual ('It's life, Jim ... oh, actually it's not' 28 April), but I think he's right: we are alone in the universe. Our evolution looks to be exceptional and lucky.
Ron Liddle may be being provocative as usual ('It's life, Jim ... oh, actually it's not' 28 April), but I think he's right: we are alone in the universe. Our evolution looks to be exceptional and lucky.
To The Sunday Times (30 Apr 24) not published
In discussing probate problems (Money, 28 April), you at least mention that 'The system is different in Scotland...' but don't mention how different and that it's called 'confirmation'. Nor do you say if there are similar problems with it. This is surprising in the Scottish ed of your newspaper.
In discussing probate problems (Money, 28 April), you at least mention that 'The system is different in Scotland...' but don't mention how different and that it's called 'confirmation'. Nor do you say if there are similar problems with it. This is surprising in the Scottish ed of your newspaper.
To The Scotsman (26 Apr 24) not published
You claim that setting a quota, effective police enforcement and the denial of claims by anyone arrested would, inter alia, stand a much better chance of stopping the boats and saving lives (Leader, 24 April).
However, in 2018 former Conservative Home Secretary Ken Clarke said that it is impossible to control illegal migration without an identity card system. Former Labour Home Secretary Alan Johnson agreed. There have been periodic calls for the return of identity cards since they were last scrapped by the Coalition Government in 2011. Even this month, Lord Blunkett endorsed their return.
The UK, Ireland and Denmark are the only European countries without ID cards. ID is optional in 9 EU countries and mandatory in another 16. Reports suggest that our lack of ID cards is a major encouragement to migrants.
I can't see the present government bringing ID cards back but a Labour government might, and should do so if only to deter immigrants.
You claim that setting a quota, effective police enforcement and the denial of claims by anyone arrested would, inter alia, stand a much better chance of stopping the boats and saving lives (Leader, 24 April).
However, in 2018 former Conservative Home Secretary Ken Clarke said that it is impossible to control illegal migration without an identity card system. Former Labour Home Secretary Alan Johnson agreed. There have been periodic calls for the return of identity cards since they were last scrapped by the Coalition Government in 2011. Even this month, Lord Blunkett endorsed their return.
The UK, Ireland and Denmark are the only European countries without ID cards. ID is optional in 9 EU countries and mandatory in another 16. Reports suggest that our lack of ID cards is a major encouragement to migrants.
I can't see the present government bringing ID cards back but a Labour government might, and should do so if only to deter immigrants.
To The Scotsman (24 Apr 24) not published
Last year Branislav Sudjic suggests reverting to the proven/not proven verdict as it is 'less stressful' for complainers. A not-guilty verdict implies that the complainer is lying. That's a good point.
Three years ago I asked if Scotland wanted to be just a clone of England or does it want to keep its justice system independent and distinct. As some have pointed out, no one except the accused knows whether or not they are guilty. Sometimes not even the accused.
Consequently the old Scottish system of proven/not proven was philosophically correct. To get a conviction, the prosecution has to prove its case. Lawyers seem to lean towards returning to it. That at least would show that Scotland's legal system is not just a copy of England and can be more rational in its verdicts.
The public should get used to what the verdicts actually mean. So let's keep 'not proven', add 'proven' and dump the guilty/not guilty verdicts.
Last year Branislav Sudjic suggests reverting to the proven/not proven verdict as it is 'less stressful' for complainers. A not-guilty verdict implies that the complainer is lying. That's a good point.
Three years ago I asked if Scotland wanted to be just a clone of England or does it want to keep its justice system independent and distinct. As some have pointed out, no one except the accused knows whether or not they are guilty. Sometimes not even the accused.
Consequently the old Scottish system of proven/not proven was philosophically correct. To get a conviction, the prosecution has to prove its case. Lawyers seem to lean towards returning to it. That at least would show that Scotland's legal system is not just a copy of England and can be more rational in its verdicts.
The public should get used to what the verdicts actually mean. So let's keep 'not proven', add 'proven' and dump the guilty/not guilty verdicts.
To The Sunday Times (22 Apr 24) not published
Ludovic Zamenhof, the creator of Esperanto, was a Jew living in a Polish community where Poles and Russians were always in conflict involving the Jews. His advice to fellow Jews was 'Be a Jew in the house but a man in the street'. IOW, keep your religion private and don't display it publicly. Good advice.
Ludovic Zamenhof, the creator of Esperanto, was a Jew living in a Polish community where Poles and Russians were always in conflict involving the Jews. His advice to fellow Jews was 'Be a Jew in the house but a man in the street'. IOW, keep your religion private and don't display it publicly. Good advice.
To The Scotsman (20 Apr 24) not published
You report that 'The Hermit', whose imaginary image has been created in Hailes Quarry Park ('Things are looking up', 19 April) 'lived there under a bridge in the 19th century'.
There is no bridge associated with Hailes Quarry Park. The hermit in question was just a vagrant who, reportedly, lived in a subway under the Union Canal at least 500 m away from the Park the other side of the Union Canal and a railway line. He had nothing to do with Hailes Quarry Park.
At the time the subway, known locally as 'The Tunnel', was dry but since then a leaking spring has made the subway wet and not a place anyone would want to live.
You report that 'The Hermit', whose imaginary image has been created in Hailes Quarry Park ('Things are looking up', 19 April) 'lived there under a bridge in the 19th century'.
There is no bridge associated with Hailes Quarry Park. The hermit in question was just a vagrant who, reportedly, lived in a subway under the Union Canal at least 500 m away from the Park the other side of the Union Canal and a railway line. He had nothing to do with Hailes Quarry Park.
At the time the subway, known locally as 'The Tunnel', was dry but since then a leaking spring has made the subway wet and not a place anyone would want to live.
To The Scotsman (18 Apr 24) published 19 Apr 24
A few days ago I had new timber fencing panels installed. Guess where they come from--China! I understand that nowadays China supplies most of the timber products we buy. Isn't that crazy? Is it just because China undercuts local suppliers, even with polluting transport costs included? Can't be as these panels cost about twice that of local ones of a simpler design. How many of the products we see in B&Q [big name DIY stores] come from China? Are our home industries being destroyed by Chinese imports?
A few days ago I had new timber fencing panels installed. Guess where they come from--China! I understand that nowadays China supplies most of the timber products we buy. Isn't that crazy? Is it just because China undercuts local suppliers, even with polluting transport costs included? Can't be as these panels cost about twice that of local ones of a simpler design. How many of the products we see in B&Q [big name DIY stores] come from China? Are our home industries being destroyed by Chinese imports?
To The Times (14 Apr 24) not published?
Rhys Blakely ('So many alien worlds, yet all we hear is silence', 13 April) asks why we haven't head from aliens. One obvious answer is that aliens don't exist and that we are alone in this vast universe. It's hubris to think that because we exist, there must be other civilisations.
But if we are alone then that needs explaining. What is it about this planet that has allowed intelligence to evolve? The answer is provided by Prof David Waltham's book Lucky Planet (Basic Books, 2014). It's subtitle is 'Why Earth is Exceptional-and What That Means for Life in the Universe'.
Life on Earth has evolved despite many setback and obstacles. Uniquely it overcame those and by chance allowed intelligent primates to develop. Such an unlikely series of lucky breaks is bound to be as rare as suitable planets.
Rhys Blakely ('So many alien worlds, yet all we hear is silence', 13 April) asks why we haven't head from aliens. One obvious answer is that aliens don't exist and that we are alone in this vast universe. It's hubris to think that because we exist, there must be other civilisations.
But if we are alone then that needs explaining. What is it about this planet that has allowed intelligence to evolve? The answer is provided by Prof David Waltham's book Lucky Planet (Basic Books, 2014). It's subtitle is 'Why Earth is Exceptional-and What That Means for Life in the Universe'.
Life on Earth has evolved despite many setback and obstacles. Uniquely it overcame those and by chance allowed intelligent primates to develop. Such an unlikely series of lucky breaks is bound to be as rare as suitable planets.
To The Scotsman (13 Apr 24) published 15 Apr 24
I suppose it's good publicity but asking NASA to help find Nessie (Loch Ness Centre calls on NASA in new monster hunt',[Scotsman] 12 April) will make no difference. There is no monster in Loch Ness and the sooner everyone realises this the better. I despair at the incorrigible hunters who persist with this myth. After decades of finding nothing, what makes them think that one more search will solve the mystery? Everything has been tried and its hard to see how NASA could help. It would be a waste of their time. The search is a waste of everyone's time.
There have not been '1156 sighting of the beast' but there have surely been that many reports of something that the observers thought was Nessie. A report is just that until close examination of the circumstances can identify what was seen. Always it turns out that, except for hoaxes, reporters have mistaken some ordinary object or phenomenon for Nessie. I have examined thousands of them. The commonest stimulus is a wave created by traffic on a calm surface.
I suppose it's good publicity but asking NASA to help find Nessie (Loch Ness Centre calls on NASA in new monster hunt',[Scotsman] 12 April) will make no difference. There is no monster in Loch Ness and the sooner everyone realises this the better. I despair at the incorrigible hunters who persist with this myth. After decades of finding nothing, what makes them think that one more search will solve the mystery? Everything has been tried and its hard to see how NASA could help. It would be a waste of their time. The search is a waste of everyone's time.
There have not been '1156 sighting of the beast' but there have surely been that many reports of something that the observers thought was Nessie. A report is just that until close examination of the circumstances can identify what was seen. Always it turns out that, except for hoaxes, reporters have mistaken some ordinary object or phenomenon for Nessie. I have examined thousands of them. The commonest stimulus is a wave created by traffic on a calm surface.
To The Scotsman (10 Apr 24) published 11 Apr 24
Clark Cross (Letters, 10 Aprll) suggests that 'two is plenty'. That would be nearly enough to maintain the UK population if every woman had two children but that is not the case; the average number of children here is 1.9 while the replacement number is 2.1. Not just the UK, in developed countries the number of children per woman is below replacement.
Inevitably local populations will decline, only being held up by immigration.
I am guilty of having only two children but it would have been more responsible to have more than one [two]. This can only be addressed by introducing a financial incentive. Which government would bite that bullet?
Clark Cross (Letters, 10 Aprll) suggests that 'two is plenty'. That would be nearly enough to maintain the UK population if every woman had two children but that is not the case; the average number of children here is 1.9 while the replacement number is 2.1. Not just the UK, in developed countries the number of children per woman is below replacement.
Inevitably local populations will decline, only being held up by immigration.
I am guilty of having only two children but it would have been more responsible to have more than one [two]. This can only be addressed by introducing a financial incentive. Which government would bite that bullet?
To Radio Times (7 Apr 24)
Justin Welby claimed that 'Jesus who was dead is alive' (Easter Message, RT, 30 March- 5 April). He may believe that, but the evidence is vanishingly slim. Reports that Jesus was appeared to his disciples and others in Jerusalem owe more to delusion and run counter to Jewish beliefs. The one report of the disciples seeing a real person (John 21), was added after John's death in Ephesus to try to explain why John died before Jesus returned (it failed). However it is evident that the disciples were not sure that they met their master and that he did not speak as Jesus did. They had mistaken an old shepherd who was concerned about his sheep.
Obviously, as Welby points out, if Jesus was not resurrected, then the Christian faith is in vain (1 Corinthians 15:17).
Justin Welby claimed that 'Jesus who was dead is alive' (Easter Message, RT, 30 March- 5 April). He may believe that, but the evidence is vanishingly slim. Reports that Jesus was appeared to his disciples and others in Jerusalem owe more to delusion and run counter to Jewish beliefs. The one report of the disciples seeing a real person (John 21), was added after John's death in Ephesus to try to explain why John died before Jesus returned (it failed). However it is evident that the disciples were not sure that they met their master and that he did not speak as Jesus did. They had mistaken an old shepherd who was concerned about his sheep.
Obviously, as Welby points out, if Jesus was not resurrected, then the Christian faith is in vain (1 Corinthians 15:17).
To The Scotsman (3 Apr 24) published 5 Apr 24
Tim Flinn (Letters, 2 April) suggests limiting assisted dying to those who have already lived their 'threescore years and ten', a phrase that comes from Psalm 90:10. But the verse continues to state that 'And if by reason of strength they be forescore years, Yet is their strength labour and sorrow'.
Today, 80 years is not as unusual as it may have been in the time of the Psalmist, something to be welcomed. Regardless, it is difficult to see why age should have anything to do with the need to end one's life. That need might arise at any time.
Tim Flinn (Letters, 2 April) suggests limiting assisted dying to those who have already lived their 'threescore years and ten', a phrase that comes from Psalm 90:10. But the verse continues to state that 'And if by reason of strength they be forescore years, Yet is their strength labour and sorrow'.
Today, 80 years is not as unusual as it may have been in the time of the Psalmist, something to be welcomed. Regardless, it is difficult to see why age should have anything to do with the need to end one's life. That need might arise at any time.
To The Scotsman (28 Mar 24) published 30 Mar 24
Eric J Scott (Letters, 28 March) claims that there is 'overwhelming evidence' that Jesus 'rose from the dead'.
This 'Evidence' [for the Resurrection] amounts to no more than superstitious stories and imagination. The one almost believable account is of 'Jesus' appearing to his disciples at a lakeside (John 21). However, some disciples were not sure it was Jesus and did not recognise him. In fact that whole chapter was written after John's death to try to explain why John died before Jesus returned. Evidently the figure they met was a shepherd who was concerned about his sheep.
Jesus died accidentally during or shortly after his crucifixion due to a Roman guard's spear thrust. That's why his body was removed overnight and taken away. He was probably already dead by then and was never seen again.
Eric J Scott (Letters, 28 March) claims that there is 'overwhelming evidence' that Jesus 'rose from the dead'.
This 'Evidence' [for the Resurrection] amounts to no more than superstitious stories and imagination. The one almost believable account is of 'Jesus' appearing to his disciples at a lakeside (John 21). However, some disciples were not sure it was Jesus and did not recognise him. In fact that whole chapter was written after John's death to try to explain why John died before Jesus returned. Evidently the figure they met was a shepherd who was concerned about his sheep.
Jesus died accidentally during or shortly after his crucifixion due to a Roman guard's spear thrust. That's why his body was removed overnight and taken away. He was probably already dead by then and was never seen again.
To The Scotsman (14 Mar 24) published 20 Mar 24
Hugh Pennington (Letters, 14 March) misquotes H L Menken. The latter said that 'For every problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong' (no mention of 'complex' ones). One could respond that Menken was not omniscient and that his claim is questionable. As a scientist, Prof Pennington should know that, for some problems, there are solutions that are 'simple, neat and correct'. He is responsible for finding some.
I did not claim that the planet could be cooled by deploying 'mirrors in space', although that's possible. Solar radiation is already reflected by deserts, ice-sheets and clouds. Even the oceans reflect some radiation and all these contribute to Earth's average albedo, which is 0.3 (30 per cent of solar radiation is reflected).
I am a supporter of cooling Earth by increasing its albedo, if only the albedo of clouds. This geoengineering can be achieved by a method known as 'marine cloud brightening'. It was first suggested by Prof John Latham in 1990 (see Wikipedia on the matter).
I don't think that we will stop global warming by any other method. Greenhouse gas emissions are not noticeably reducing and the atmosphere's CO2 level continues to rise.
Hugh Pennington (Letters, 14 March) misquotes H L Menken. The latter said that 'For every problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong' (no mention of 'complex' ones). One could respond that Menken was not omniscient and that his claim is questionable. As a scientist, Prof Pennington should know that, for some problems, there are solutions that are 'simple, neat and correct'. He is responsible for finding some.
I did not claim that the planet could be cooled by deploying 'mirrors in space', although that's possible. Solar radiation is already reflected by deserts, ice-sheets and clouds. Even the oceans reflect some radiation and all these contribute to Earth's average albedo, which is 0.3 (30 per cent of solar radiation is reflected).
I am a supporter of cooling Earth by increasing its albedo, if only the albedo of clouds. This geoengineering can be achieved by a method known as 'marine cloud brightening'. It was first suggested by Prof John Latham in 1990 (see Wikipedia on the matter).
I don't think that we will stop global warming by any other method. Greenhouse gas emissions are not noticeably reducing and the atmosphere's CO2 level continues to rise.
To The Scotsman (12 Mar 24) published 13 Mar 24
'Pollutants' are not the cause of climate change (David Corocoran, Letters, 12 March); the latter is caused mainly by carbon dioxide (CO2) and methane, neither of which are 'pollutants'. CO2 can be captured at source but not from vehicles. Moreover CO2 has no practical use and is not a valuable resource. Capture and sequestration is difficult and expensive. As of May last year, the level of CO2 in the atmosphere was 421 parts/million (ppm) and rising. It needs to be back where it was before the industrial revolution: 280 ppm.
Current attempts to reduce CO2 emissions are largely ineffective. The only practical way to bring the Earth's temperature down is by some form of geoengineering to deflect some of the Sun's radiation back into space. I can't see anyone doing that until we are desperate in a sweltering world with a wild climate and mass migrations as people try to escape the tropics.
'Pollutants' are not the cause of climate change (David Corocoran, Letters, 12 March); the latter is caused mainly by carbon dioxide (CO2) and methane, neither of which are 'pollutants'. CO2 can be captured at source but not from vehicles. Moreover CO2 has no practical use and is not a valuable resource. Capture and sequestration is difficult and expensive. As of May last year, the level of CO2 in the atmosphere was 421 parts/million (ppm) and rising. It needs to be back where it was before the industrial revolution: 280 ppm.
Current attempts to reduce CO2 emissions are largely ineffective. The only practical way to bring the Earth's temperature down is by some form of geoengineering to deflect some of the Sun's radiation back into space. I can't see anyone doing that until we are desperate in a sweltering world with a wild climate and mass migrations as people try to escape the tropics.
To The Scotsman (9 Mar 24) not published
Before the Budget there was much speculation about changes to the complicated Inheritance Tax, even that it would be abolished.
Since then: silence. So the tax remains at 40 per cent, the tax-free allowance remains at £325,000 and the annual exemption remains at a measly £3000? No rise in these limits to keep pace with inflation.
Apparently it's paid by only 4 per cent of estates, but the sale of a house can easily incur the tax.
Before the Budget there was much speculation about changes to the complicated Inheritance Tax, even that it would be abolished.
Since then: silence. So the tax remains at 40 per cent, the tax-free allowance remains at £325,000 and the annual exemption remains at a measly £3000? No rise in these limits to keep pace with inflation.
Apparently it's paid by only 4 per cent of estates, but the sale of a house can easily incur the tax.
To The Scotsman (28 Feb 24) published 29 Feb 24
John McLellan thinks that proportional representation (PR) gives extremists a platform ('Redneck Islamophobia is a gift to opponents of the Conservatives', 27 February). He exemplifies the EU elections and even the Scottish Parliament.
One could argue, depending on one's definition of 'extremism' that even extremists have a right to express themselves and be represented. What matters is what influence they have.
PR attempts to provide all political parties with fair representation in a parliament. But they are not all the same. Israel uses the party list system which, unfortunately, results in too many parties fighting for power and, as at present, an unwieldy coalition. Eire and Northern Ireland use the acclaimed single transferable vote (STV) system (has that elected extremists?). The Scottish Parliament has a mixed first-past-the-post system and party list, a poor attempt at compromise. Would Green Party candidates even get elected in an STV election where they must stand as individuals?
The first-past-the-post system, intended for only two candidates, is outdated and unfair where there are more than two candidates.
John McLellan thinks that proportional representation (PR) gives extremists a platform ('Redneck Islamophobia is a gift to opponents of the Conservatives', 27 February). He exemplifies the EU elections and even the Scottish Parliament.
One could argue, depending on one's definition of 'extremism' that even extremists have a right to express themselves and be represented. What matters is what influence they have.
PR attempts to provide all political parties with fair representation in a parliament. But they are not all the same. Israel uses the party list system which, unfortunately, results in too many parties fighting for power and, as at present, an unwieldy coalition. Eire and Northern Ireland use the acclaimed single transferable vote (STV) system (has that elected extremists?). The Scottish Parliament has a mixed first-past-the-post system and party list, a poor attempt at compromise. Would Green Party candidates even get elected in an STV election where they must stand as individuals?
The first-past-the-post system, intended for only two candidates, is outdated and unfair where there are more than two candidates.
To Radio Times (26 Feb 24)
Caroline Frost wrote about the Crash of an RAF Chinook and the two TV programmes about it (RT 17-23 February) without apparently being aware that I wrote about the incident in 2004 (Chinook Crash, Pen&Sword). I explained how the accident occurred and who was responsible. The book will be republished this year.
Caroline Frost wrote about the Crash of an RAF Chinook and the two TV programmes about it (RT 17-23 February) without apparently being aware that I wrote about the incident in 2004 (Chinook Crash, Pen&Sword). I explained how the accident occurred and who was responsible. The book will be republished this year.
To The Scotsman (14 Feb 24) published 15 Feb 24
The fact that '66 per cent of the vote' was not for Michael Matheson (Bruce Proctor, Letters 14 February) is irrelevant. One does not count those who do not vote as there's no way to know their preferences if they have one. The only vote that counts is where votes are cast and counted.
The fact that '66 per cent of the vote' was not for Michael Matheson (Bruce Proctor, Letters 14 February) is irrelevant. One does not count those who do not vote as there's no way to know their preferences if they have one. The only vote that counts is where votes are cast and counted.
To The Scotsman (9 Feb 24) published 10 Feb 24
[Scotsman reader] Malcolm Parkin wondered if 'our planet's shifting axis around the Sun could be a contributor' to climate change (Letters, 8 February). The axis of the Earth's rotation moves only very slowly. It cannot affect climate in the short term.
However planets' movements are not completely regular due to gravitational effects. The Earth's almost elliptical orbit changes over thousands of years in a way that affects our climate, particularly glaciation. In fact, if it were not for man-made global warming, Earth would be heading into a colder period with increased glaciation.
[Scotsman reader] Malcolm Parkin wondered if 'our planet's shifting axis around the Sun could be a contributor' to climate change (Letters, 8 February). The axis of the Earth's rotation moves only very slowly. It cannot affect climate in the short term.
However planets' movements are not completely regular due to gravitational effects. The Earth's almost elliptical orbit changes over thousands of years in a way that affects our climate, particularly glaciation. In fact, if it were not for man-made global warming, Earth would be heading into a colder period with increased glaciation.
To The Scotsman (4 Feb 24) not published
Apart from controlling animals' feed ('Aberdeen Angus farmer seals global business deal', 3 February), agriculture could reduce emissions by stopping ploughing.
I don't know how much ploughing goes on but it is not now recommended practice.
Studies show that no-drill farming, like no-dig horticulture, is becoming more popular. That's because there are economic benefits. A farm needs fewer tractors using less fuel and the soil quality improves as earthworms and other organisms are left alone to improve the soil, to the benefit of crops. A study by Oxford University showed that no-till wheat is stronger and healthier with far fewer weeds that in traditionally ploughed ground. Another benefit is that unploughed soil retains more water so reducing flooding.
No-drill farming also benefits the climate. Agriculture accounts for 26 per cent of all greenhouse gas emissions. Ploughing exposes carbon buried in the soil to oxygen in the air allowing microbes to convert it to CO2. Fertiliser spread on fields produces nitrous oxide and cattle generate methane from microbes in their guts. Apart from ploughing, it includes tractors burning fossil fuel and the use of fertilisers and methane emitted by cattle.
Farmers should stop ploughing their fields for the benefit of us all.
Apart from controlling animals' feed ('Aberdeen Angus farmer seals global business deal', 3 February), agriculture could reduce emissions by stopping ploughing.
I don't know how much ploughing goes on but it is not now recommended practice.
Studies show that no-drill farming, like no-dig horticulture, is becoming more popular. That's because there are economic benefits. A farm needs fewer tractors using less fuel and the soil quality improves as earthworms and other organisms are left alone to improve the soil, to the benefit of crops. A study by Oxford University showed that no-till wheat is stronger and healthier with far fewer weeds that in traditionally ploughed ground. Another benefit is that unploughed soil retains more water so reducing flooding.
No-drill farming also benefits the climate. Agriculture accounts for 26 per cent of all greenhouse gas emissions. Ploughing exposes carbon buried in the soil to oxygen in the air allowing microbes to convert it to CO2. Fertiliser spread on fields produces nitrous oxide and cattle generate methane from microbes in their guts. Apart from ploughing, it includes tractors burning fossil fuel and the use of fertilisers and methane emitted by cattle.
Farmers should stop ploughing their fields for the benefit of us all.
To The Belfast Telegraph (31 Jan 24)
Trevor Birney hopes that 'one day the truth [of the accident] will come out'. It's been out since 2004: in my book Chinook Crash (Pen&Sword).
Trevor Birney hopes that 'one day the truth [of the accident] will come out'. It's been out since 2004: in my book Chinook Crash (Pen&Sword).
To The Scotsman (26 Jan 24) not published
On 25 January you showed a picture of ploughing during a ploughing match in Jedburgh. I don't know how much ploughing goes on but it is not now recommended practice.
Studies show that no-drill farming, like no-dig horticulture, is becoming more popular. That's because there are economic benefits. A farm needs fewer tractors using less fuel and the soil quality improves as earthworms and other organisms are left alone to improve the soil, to the benefit of crops. A study by Oxford University showed that no-till wheat is stronger and healthier with far fewer weeds that in traditionally ploughed ground. Another benefit is that unploughed soil retains more water so reducing flooding.
No-drill farming also benefits the climate. Agriculture accounts for 26 per cent of all greenhouse gas emissions. Ploughing exposes carbon buried in the soil to oxygen in the air allowing microbes to convert it to CO2. Fertiliser spread on fields produces nitrous oxide and cattle generate methane from microbes in their guts. Apart from ploughing, it includes tractors burning fossil fuel and the use of fertilisers and methane emitted by cattle.
Farmers should stop ploughing their fields for the benefit of us all.
On 25 January you showed a picture of ploughing during a ploughing match in Jedburgh. I don't know how much ploughing goes on but it is not now recommended practice.
Studies show that no-drill farming, like no-dig horticulture, is becoming more popular. That's because there are economic benefits. A farm needs fewer tractors using less fuel and the soil quality improves as earthworms and other organisms are left alone to improve the soil, to the benefit of crops. A study by Oxford University showed that no-till wheat is stronger and healthier with far fewer weeds that in traditionally ploughed ground. Another benefit is that unploughed soil retains more water so reducing flooding.
No-drill farming also benefits the climate. Agriculture accounts for 26 per cent of all greenhouse gas emissions. Ploughing exposes carbon buried in the soil to oxygen in the air allowing microbes to convert it to CO2. Fertiliser spread on fields produces nitrous oxide and cattle generate methane from microbes in their guts. Apart from ploughing, it includes tractors burning fossil fuel and the use of fertilisers and methane emitted by cattle.
Farmers should stop ploughing their fields for the benefit of us all.
To Country Life (24 Jan 24)
John Lewis-Stempel claimed that a 'blue moon' is a common phenomenon: when there is a 13th full moon in a year (about every two-and-a-half years) ('The danced by the light of the moon', 17 January 2024). Others have claim that it is when two full moons occur in a month.
As any dictionary will tell you, a blue moon is a rare event, some thinking it's an event than never occurs. The idea that it's just the occurrence of two full moons is fanciful and wrong.
The phrase 'once in a blue moon', arose from the fact occasionally the Moon, also the Sun, can look blue. This is when dust or smoke particles in the atmosphere filter out longer wavelengths and leave only the shorter (blue) ones. This phenomenon, caused by forest fires in Canada, was observed from Scotland and the North of England in September 1950. .
John Lewis-Stempel claimed that a 'blue moon' is a common phenomenon: when there is a 13th full moon in a year (about every two-and-a-half years) ('The danced by the light of the moon', 17 January 2024). Others have claim that it is when two full moons occur in a month.
As any dictionary will tell you, a blue moon is a rare event, some thinking it's an event than never occurs. The idea that it's just the occurrence of two full moons is fanciful and wrong.
The phrase 'once in a blue moon', arose from the fact occasionally the Moon, also the Sun, can look blue. This is when dust or smoke particles in the atmosphere filter out longer wavelengths and leave only the shorter (blue) ones. This phenomenon, caused by forest fires in Canada, was observed from Scotland and the North of England in September 1950. .
To The Sunday Times (22 Jan 24) not published
There is an alternative to burial or cremation (Holly Mead in 'Money' on 21 January). Donate your body to medical research. Body donations for anatomical examination are vital for the education of future healthcare professionals, in scientific research and improving medical procedures. Your body could be used to teach medical students how the body is structured and functions, the development of surgical techniques or procedures or other scientific studies.
My wife and I have both agreed to this means of disposal. We would have no use for our dead bodies but they could be useful to science.
There is an alternative to burial or cremation (Holly Mead in 'Money' on 21 January). Donate your body to medical research. Body donations for anatomical examination are vital for the education of future healthcare professionals, in scientific research and improving medical procedures. Your body could be used to teach medical students how the body is structured and functions, the development of surgical techniques or procedures or other scientific studies.
My wife and I have both agreed to this means of disposal. We would have no use for our dead bodies but they could be useful to science.
To Scotland on Sunday (22 Jan 24) not published
Regarding local taxation ('Overhaul this "ludicrous" tax, urge experts', 21 January) what happened to the Green Party's proposal of a Land Value Tax (LVT): a levy on the value of land without regard to buildings, personal property and other improvements on it? Economists since Adam Smith and David Ricardo have advocated this tax because it does not hurt economic activity and encourages development without subsidies.
A low-rate LVT is currently implemented in Denmark, Estonia, Lithuania, Russia, Singapore and Taiwan. It has also been applied to lesser extents in parts of Australia, Germany, Mexico and in the USA (eg. Pensylvania).
Why isn't the Green Party, now in Government in Scotland, pushing the Scottish Government to use it to replace the infamous council tax?
Regarding local taxation ('Overhaul this "ludicrous" tax, urge experts', 21 January) what happened to the Green Party's proposal of a Land Value Tax (LVT): a levy on the value of land without regard to buildings, personal property and other improvements on it? Economists since Adam Smith and David Ricardo have advocated this tax because it does not hurt economic activity and encourages development without subsidies.
A low-rate LVT is currently implemented in Denmark, Estonia, Lithuania, Russia, Singapore and Taiwan. It has also been applied to lesser extents in parts of Australia, Germany, Mexico and in the USA (eg. Pensylvania).
Why isn't the Green Party, now in Government in Scotland, pushing the Scottish Government to use it to replace the infamous council tax?
To The Scotsman (18 Jan 24) published 19 Jan 24
In 2014 at the age of 77 I was treated for Benign Prostate Enlargement by 'Green Light Laser'. That was a relief but unfortunately prostates continue growing and now urination problems have returned. Last June I was put on NHS Lothian's Urology Outpatient Waiting List and don't know how long I will have to wait.
The King is lucky to receive immediate treatment but why should he not join the waiting list like everyone else? What's special about his prostate?
In 2014 at the age of 77 I was treated for Benign Prostate Enlargement by 'Green Light Laser'. That was a relief but unfortunately prostates continue growing and now urination problems have returned. Last June I was put on NHS Lothian's Urology Outpatient Waiting List and don't know how long I will have to wait.
The King is lucky to receive immediate treatment but why should he not join the waiting list like everyone else? What's special about his prostate?
To The Scotsman (17 Jan 24) published 18 Jan 24
A McCormick appears to think that the Inquisition opposed Galileo for his adoption of the heliocentrism of Copernicus because it believed in a 'flat earth' (Letters, 16 January).
In fact the Church believed in the geocentrism of Aristotle and Ptolemy. As far as I can tell, the Christian Church has never held a belief in a flat Earth.
A McCormick appears to think that the Inquisition opposed Galileo for his adoption of the heliocentrism of Copernicus because it believed in a 'flat earth' (Letters, 16 January).
In fact the Church believed in the geocentrism of Aristotle and Ptolemy. As far as I can tell, the Christian Church has never held a belief in a flat Earth.
To The Sunday Times (15 Jan 24) published 21 Jan 24
Brian Davidson (Letters, 14 January) should note that not all PR systems are the same. The problem in Israel is that it uses the infamous party list system which produces a multitude of parties in the parliament. Scotland uses a messy two-vote system that is not true PR. Eire and Northern Ireland use the true proportional singe transferable vote (STV) system and manage very well. The UK should adopt it.
Brian Davidson (Letters, 14 January) should note that not all PR systems are the same. The problem in Israel is that it uses the infamous party list system which produces a multitude of parties in the parliament. Scotland uses a messy two-vote system that is not true PR. Eire and Northern Ireland use the true proportional singe transferable vote (STV) system and manage very well. The UK should adopt it.
To The Scotsman (11 Jan 24) not published
Richard Dixon notes that we are heading for a climate disaster ('Temperature threshold set to be breached', Scottish Life,10 January). No matter how many COPs are held, they achieve little and don't take global warning seriously. Most countries depend on the burning of fossil fuels. Even in the UK we still burn gas and coal to generate electricity. Meanwhile the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere steadily rises. No one seems to know how to stop the burning without causing the collapse of civilisation. But if we don't get off this treadmill civilisation will collapse anyway. Tweaking the use of energy by going green is 'fiddling while Rome burns'. It can have little effect.
As an intelligent species, perhaps the only one in the universe, we seem to be blind to unintended consequences. Perhaps AI would make a better job, but only by eliminating us first. There are too many of us and we cause pollution wherever we go. We are turning out to be a disaster for the planet. The dominant species that doesn't really know what its doing.
Richard Dixon notes that we are heading for a climate disaster ('Temperature threshold set to be breached', Scottish Life,10 January). No matter how many COPs are held, they achieve little and don't take global warning seriously. Most countries depend on the burning of fossil fuels. Even in the UK we still burn gas and coal to generate electricity. Meanwhile the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere steadily rises. No one seems to know how to stop the burning without causing the collapse of civilisation. But if we don't get off this treadmill civilisation will collapse anyway. Tweaking the use of energy by going green is 'fiddling while Rome burns'. It can have little effect.
As an intelligent species, perhaps the only one in the universe, we seem to be blind to unintended consequences. Perhaps AI would make a better job, but only by eliminating us first. There are too many of us and we cause pollution wherever we go. We are turning out to be a disaster for the planet. The dominant species that doesn't really know what its doing.
To The Scotsman (9 Jan 24) published 10 Jan 24
Neil White (Letters, 8 January) claims that Kirk closures and falling attendances is 'the greatest tragedy of our time'! Really? That's hyperbole on overload. There are several natural disasters that might rank as the greatest tragedy, some where millions have been killed. Even in Britain, our greatest tragedy seems to have been the 1212 fire on London Bridge where it is thought up to 3000 people died. In recent times how about the Grenfell Tower tragedy?
The decline of religion and Christianity in this country is not a tragedy; it's a blessing as it releases people from superstition and allows rational thought to flourish.
Neil White (Letters, 8 January) claims that Kirk closures and falling attendances is 'the greatest tragedy of our time'! Really? That's hyperbole on overload. There are several natural disasters that might rank as the greatest tragedy, some where millions have been killed. Even in Britain, our greatest tragedy seems to have been the 1212 fire on London Bridge where it is thought up to 3000 people died. In recent times how about the Grenfell Tower tragedy?
The decline of religion and Christianity in this country is not a tragedy; it's a blessing as it releases people from superstition and allows rational thought to flourish.
To The Scotsman (6 Jan 24) published 9 Jan 24
Actually, Peter Hopkins (Letters, 6 December) is correct. Average sea level has been rising since 1910 at a steady rate of about 2cm/10 years (geologicaltimechart.com). So it looks as if it's not rising now any more than it was a century ago (this is not due to ice-melt: post-glacial sea level rise ceased about 8000 years ago). Nevertheless, the rise has recently been accelerated by increased melting in Greenland and Antarctica. This has the potential to double the total sea level rise projected by 2100 when compared to projections that assume a constant rate of sea level rise. This conclusion is not based on any computer modelling, but on real data.
It is true that sea levels are not consistent worldwide. For example, in many locations along the US coastline, the rate of local sea level rise is greater than the global average due to to land processes like erosion, oil and groundwater pumping and subsidence.
Actually, Peter Hopkins (Letters, 6 December) is correct. Average sea level has been rising since 1910 at a steady rate of about 2cm/10 years (geologicaltimechart.com). So it looks as if it's not rising now any more than it was a century ago (this is not due to ice-melt: post-glacial sea level rise ceased about 8000 years ago). Nevertheless, the rise has recently been accelerated by increased melting in Greenland and Antarctica. This has the potential to double the total sea level rise projected by 2100 when compared to projections that assume a constant rate of sea level rise. This conclusion is not based on any computer modelling, but on real data.
It is true that sea levels are not consistent worldwide. For example, in many locations along the US coastline, the rate of local sea level rise is greater than the global average due to to land processes like erosion, oil and groundwater pumping and subsidence.
To The Scotsman (30 Dec 23) published 5 Jan 24
What possessed Peter Hopkins (Letters, 29 December) to claim that sea levels are not increasing? Certainly not the relevant authorities (Met Office; IPCC; National Geographic; NASA; etc.) who all agree that sea level rose about 20 cm between 1901 and 2018. Furthermore the rise is accelerating. By the end of this century, the rise is expected to be between 50 and 100 cm. This rise is unprecedented in the last 3000 years and is due to global warming.
What possessed Peter Hopkins (Letters, 29 December) to claim that sea levels are not increasing? Certainly not the relevant authorities (Met Office; IPCC; National Geographic; NASA; etc.) who all agree that sea level rose about 20 cm between 1901 and 2018. Furthermore the rise is accelerating. By the end of this century, the rise is expected to be between 50 and 100 cm. This rise is unprecedented in the last 3000 years and is due to global warming.