Dominic Lawson: Presidential Candidate

[Martin Regan]

P McKeown wrote:

I would just like to say that only the politically unaware would think to deny that Dominic Lawson, like his father (quite the worst Chancellor of the Exchequer in my lifetime, quite a pit to plumb to reach such depths), is a notorious climate change denier.

That such a figure should be thought fit for a public figurehead role for the ECF would cause me seriously to think of forgoing membership until such time as he left that office.

What a statement of witless opinion, dressed up as intelligence.

Perhaps you would care to outline your scientific credentials, and the papers you have published on climate change, that gives you even a scintilla of credibility to make the assertion that those who publicly doubt the evidence about climate are somehow "notorious" rather than just opinionated witterers like you.

At the same time you might outline your background in economic theory to back up your assertion about his father's lack of success as Chancellor.

Not everything in the Guardian is true you know. Ditto The Daily Mail.

[Paul McKeown]

Unlike clowns like yourself and Lawson, I don't need to publish any credentials. I rest my case on the expertise of the Royal Society and all other academic societies around the world. Now publish your credentials, so that we can measure properly your extreme arrogance in contradicting those better learned than yourself.

[Paul McKeown]

Come on then...

[Paul McKeown]

A Ph. D. or D. Phil. will do as a start. Then the world of science can eagerly await your ground-breaking paper in which you explain what is wrong with the law that energy is conserved. A Nobel Prize awaits you...

[Paul McKeown]

I note, Mr. Martin Regan, the vehemence with which you have addressed anyone in the least in doubt that Lawson should be the next President. So I am pleased that you haven't neglected your trademark tirade against me; I might have felt left out!

[David Pardoe]

We have Dominic as the only nominated candidate because presumably many other possible candidates have been put off by the recent shananagans, and the ritual batterings handed out to past candidates..
As for the idea that climate change is top of the political agenda...I dont see it as anything other than an exercise in paying lip service to a very critical issue, that could well spell doom in the coming decades.
But, by far the more pressing global issue of this time is undoubtedly world population....we are in great danger of simply over running the planet and consuming all its resources if measures arent taken to kerb the present levels.
Certainly, over the next century, I believe world population needs to drop by at least 25%...and a rather higher decline would be highly beneficial to all the worlds inhabitants, and help conserve resources. The watchword for the future has got to be `sustainability`..

Returning to our game...and elections...
Having a board with wide ranging views is not a bad thing...key is having competant officers who can at least perform there individual roles.
Having a President, or other officers elected by the present board has some merits, but, since these people dont necessarily know if they will remain in post themselves, its not a major positive....and might indeed be percieved as a negative, because they may be seen as mutually protective, which might not be in the ECFs best interests.
Key is to change the electoral process to allow the `membership` a greater say..
For instance, if Jack Rudd could simply have put his name forward with no backers, and allowed the `membership` to cast votes `online`, he might well have received some support. Same goes for other potential candidates, who might not wish to go through the torture of the present electoral process.
I still think we need a larger Board, that better represents the regions...but I do realise that many potentially good candidates really dont feel they can commit the time to some of the posts...

[Paul McKeown]

Royal Society Statement on Climate Change

[Martin Regan]

Unlike clowns like yourself and Lawson,

I believe Mr Lawson was the editor of a national newspaper and of a world-famous magazine, I built up a modest business which employed close to 400 people, was a journalist for such newspapers as the Financial Times and Wall Street Journal and am regarded now as somewhat of an expert in Modern British Art. None of which qualifies either Lawson or indeed me to spout off about climate change.

And you?

"I deny, I denied that he was a denier."
"I am not and have never been a climate change denier."

Think where you lead us..

[David Pardoe]

Maybe when the ice caps have all melted, as we`re all standing waste deep in mud and other polutants, reality will dawn.
Unfortunately some folk only believe there are problems when they find themselves immersed in deep sh.....

[Paul McKeown]

Oh, so you have no credentials apart from writing drivel. You have no expertise with which to gainsay tens of thousands of qualified experts with hundreds of thousands of hours relevant work, resting on basic physical science. So basically you are saying that you and Lawson are a pair of know nothing motor-mouths, with prejudice as the base of your argument, rather than fact, knowledge, experience or academic qualification. And that you like Lawson, because, in your ignorance, his published prejudices match your own.

[Martin Regan]

D Pardoe

Maybe when the ice caps have all melted, as we`re all standing waste deep in mud and other polutants, reality will dawn.

David,

If it does indeed happen, I shall lay the blame firmly at your door for the copious amounts of hot air you have exhaled on this very forum.

[Martin Regan]

P Mckeown

Oh, so you have no credentials apart from writing drivel. You have no expertise with which to gainsay tens of thousands of qualified experts with hundreds of thousands of hours relevant work, resting on basic physical science. So basically you are saying that you and Lawson

Paul,

You make the usual mistake of the witless in being so eager to hear the sound of your own voice that you can scarce take the time to hear the response.

On balance if you asked me - and you have no right to do so - I would say that what I had read so far has led me to believe that there is a serious climate problem. But I would not be so arrogant on the foundation of reading the precis of a handful of reports to denounce those who disagree with me with the venom with which you denounced Mr Lawson.

You should hang your head in shame.

[David Pardoe]

Martin,
I`m no expert either on climate change....and I`m certainly not going to take sides in the current wave of jocularity...

You`re brief stint as President of the ECF will be seen as a bold attempt at reform...and you deserve much praise for having the bottle and drive to put together a credible group to take things forward. That you couldnt quite batter down the `old guard` and rebuild jeruselem...as Englands green and pleasant land.... we`ll see what Mr Lawson can do..
Maybe we should all put down the mud and lets see if Mr Lawson can indeed perform hudini like feats and lift the current ECF doldrums.
As for me exuding too much hot air...you may be right....are we all just shouting into the dark beyond.

[Carl Hibbard]

Now I am bored so it's perhaps time to bring this thread to a closing point.