The ash cloud, the oil spill and the election

Interesting news items do kind of seem to be like the old metaphorical bus at the moment; quite a few have arrived at once.  Certain news pieces didn't arrive as such, they were more scheduled, and have simply coincided, prompting less of a feeling of "fate" as might be expected as things just unfold gradually; but the effect of the non-scheduled items is remarkable enough in itself.
I'm sure they need no introduction; the ash cloud, the oil spill and of course the election.  I'm trying to have something quick, almost snappy, to say about each.

The ash cloud
No doubt the airline industry feel somewhat hard done to.  First 9/11 and the almost decade aftermath and fallout for the finances of carriers, now something to remind them how inherently unpredictable running such a business can be.  What was quite stark about this (for me, at least) is how money does seem to talk in today's world.  The airline industry was already in poor shape financially, and in no mood to be absorbing the shock from such an external factor.   Have you ever heard such grave safety concerns receive so little of the benefit of the doubt?  We're so hooked on flying in the West; it's scary.

The oil spill
The major point which has stood out on this topic, so far anyway (aside from how little coverage the 11 deaths received in the early reports, i put that down to family contact time) is just what lengths we're going to feed our oil demand these days, and how it takes something like this to make it big news.  The area where this accident occurred is, apparently, considered a relatively safe area (compared to other undersea sites at least) to drill for oil.  So, we're prepared to go pretty far.  Our opportunity to use our once in an eon gift to get us on a sustainable energy footing and solve countless other issues, is leaking away in front of our eyes like all that oil is leaking into the sea.

The election
The green agenda is so vital to our future.  If we want our votes for the green party to count, then first we need a proportional voting system.  This has never been so close as it is now.  Even if we don't get it directly after tomorrow's election, a hung parliament could lead back to another election.  If it does, hopefully the chance will be seized then.

Anyways, that's me spent for the day.  I'm off to vote liberal early in the morning.

Is my life going to feature sweet music after all?

It's been a long time coming, this musical life of mine. This week, i really have started to feel that there's a musical richness to my daily endeavours. For instance, Monday this week; i posted, to Portsmouth New England U.S. of A, the very first "album" i've ever been involved in. Sure, there was that "white label" demo which i thought i was doing whilst Pob and Mike were playing cricket on the Mega drive (or something) back in 98', but this feels more like we've worked for it as a band this time. It was all for this:

http://www.rpmchallenge.com/

A strong concept really; record an album in a month, no slacking, no excuses. So, that was Monday. Tuesday; i was at a gig with my good friend Abbas (who's blog you can find here) who is a part time music writer. The Band were called "Girls" and they're from Frisco, and are colourful characters to say the least. You can see the review here, with picture credits for yours truly. Whoop, i know.

Then, this evening, i got a picture txt (rather curiously, as there didn't appear to be a picture in it!) from my cousin Gill, who runs a business called "Dial a diva". I did one gig for this, and didn't get any repeat business yet (i'm putting it on the "it's a southern business thing" rather than "i'm lousy at it") and despite the gig being in oxford, i see that as an offer to be paid for music, which i declined. By not replying. I've moved on darling, i've moved on?!

BTW, the "Three Piece Sweet" album can be heard and downloaded here.

History isn't absolving Tony just yet...

I was saddened by Tony Blair's fall from grace, because I believed in his politics.  I still believe that he did a lot of good whilst British prime minister, and it is a tragedy that the epitaph of a once great leader looks to be overshadowed by the one serious blot on his record and good name.  I am currently watching "Hard Talk", the BBC's investigative journalism "show".  In the hot seat today is Hans Blix; the head of the UN's weapons inspection programme during the run up to the Iraq invasion.  Now, clearly the BBC has an axe to grind after their public spat with the administration over Iraq.  However, I am not cynical about the BBCs journalism in this regard today.  Besides, Hard Talk covers numerous topics, many of which are not in any real contention with the UK government.  By and large, they promote journalism which seeks the truth and to scrutinise and expose bias.  Hard Talk does it well, but is mostly on around 4AM, so I'm very grateful that i have media centre!
Hans comes across as a strong intellect and an experienced diplomat.  He offers up some very important pieces of information, against the backdrop of the Iraq war enquiry which is ongoing at present.  They are:

1)  Iraq were put in a position where nothing less than saying "ok, here is the WMD, come and watch us destroy them" would prevent increasing US aggression.
2)  Hans had begun to have serious doubts about the evidence presented by the CIA, just as the US were applying more pressure for Iraq to comply with it's requests in early 2003.  They were secretive about sources, and it turns out that those sources wouldn't have stood up to scrutiny.
3)  He felt that Iraq was vulnerable to local hostility (for example, from Iran) if it appeared too weak.  So, it had a motive not to be too quick to say "yes, that's right, we have absolutely nothing to defend ourselves with."  So, it had a strong interest in not making the weapons inspector's looking too effective, making it a skilled balancing act between co-operation and muddying the water a little.

There was only ever one outcome for Iraq.  If Hussain had WMD, then the Americans "assumed" that he would not be co-operative, so they could invade because of non-cooperation.  If he didn't, then proving that you don't have something is almost impossible to prove in these circumstances.
What is saddest about the whole thing, is that the UN imposed strict sanctions against Iraq throughout the 90's and the noughties, locking it's people into a miserable struggle for life's basics.  Then, despite Iraq seemingly taking it's medicine, they change tac as soon as they feel they have a reason for the US public to to sympathetic to a much more aggressive policy.

My own personal view in light of this is that, whilst there are no doubt lots of countries who need "reigning in" around the world, none has shown a more aggressive, unaccountable, far-reaching, deceptive foreign policy consistently over the last 60 odd years than the US.  No wonder everyone is so scared of them.  Obama will do what he can i'm sure, but he has much more than democratically elected officials to battle against.  I'd much rather have Blair's epitaph than that of Mr. GW Bush, any day.

Economist piece ahead of Copenhagen

I'm not sure how many people read my blog entries, but if you do then thanks for stopping by.

This weeks Economist magazine has a cover and a leader about climate change ahead of the Copenhagen summit. Largely mooted to be a waste of time, i hope that's not just the prevailing cynicism sweeping the nation on the coat tails of the "credit crunch". I guess it's difficult not to be cynical with the enquiry into the Iraq war continuing to prove that Iraq was largely about George W Bush trying to get George HW Bush's attention on the news every day. We should be thankful that every Ivy league brat doesn't have such a platform to play out their adolescent "Dad loves me the least" drama with toys of such magnitude.

At least Copenhagen gets people talking about it. The BBC are also reshowing Dr. Ian Stuart's "Climate Wars" series, as well as all sorts of other documentaries about GW.

http://www.economist.com/displayStory.cfm?story_id=15017322

I'll certainly be attempting to educate myself further on the topic. I've already set-up media centre to catch a lot of them.

Climate change scepticism invades my work-place

Debate about climate change flared up right in front of my desk about 9 this morning. There were several "critical" issues to solve first thing, so i'm sure the focus on this didn't exactly gain management approval, and I have to say that i more than played my part in making it such a (get ready for it...) "hot topic". Ok, perhaps it wasn't so heated until i stuck my "oar in"; but it was spooky how everything seemed to coincide. I had watched "an inconvenient truth" again last night, having read on guardian unlimited about the "leaked e-mail" scandal.
The scientific consensus, from a great many sources, appears to have moved on from picking through published analysis to establish if there is sufficient doubt to support further deliberation. I know Wikipedia isn't always the most reliable source, but this looks reasonably responsibly sourced:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change

Of course, a piece of dramatic and clearly non-partisan documentary like "an inconvenient truth" has attracted, by the sheer number of people it has affected, some convincing critisism (for instance http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/environment/index.html had me feeling naive for a while).
Ultimately though, it's splitting hairs to me. I hope more people will come off the fence. If you really do strongly believe that global warming is a scam, then perhaps it's your duty to organise and help prepare the world for the continued observed temperature changes since you know what's really causing them and we're so powerless to stop them?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8377128.stm

Doesn't it strike a sceptic as a coincidence that the world is warming up so severely just as we've been industrialising and burning all this once in an age resource? Really, what are the chances? Perhaps if you wait long enough, you'll win the lottery, then live on an island somewhere and enjoy the increasing temperatures.

The "not so missing" link...

Hail Darwin. Though, according to Bill Bryson's "A short history of nearly everything", the world wouldn't have been waiting very long for his theory had he not published it, the first to claim it for posterity he was. And so, deservedly in my humble opinion and doubtless also in that of countless more, for the adversity he faced if nothing else, should he be remembered forever. More than just his theory, he had the conviction and resolve to think freely and to express what he believed, and what he could prove, albeit not convincingly enough for most in his time. Like Einstein, his memory continues to be rewarded with a growing body of evidence supporting his bold perception of, and insight into, the world around us. Even in his own lifetime he was nearly pipped to the post. Others had even published on it before, but in works of Geology and hadn't roused sufficient interest of a serious enough kind to have it taken seriously by those who were trusted to arbitrate on such matters. Nowadays, he who challenges the status quo with compelling supporting evidence and meticulous argument is far more likely to be recognised and supported purely on those merits, thanks to people like Einstein and Darwin.
Today I show my appreciation to Darwin, and contemporary champions of evolution such as the noble Dawkins, for helping me understand clearly our beautiful world, and what a privilege every moment upon it is. We are though, as much as we may wish it otherwise, charged with it's destiny.

I will leave you with the Guardian. Aptly named today :)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2009/oct/01/fossil-ardi-human-race

The morality paradox of religion

I can be considered as someone who isn't particularly sympathetic toward religion. Considering some of the cutting tirades I might have espoused on occasion, a not wholly unfair assessment. For anyone who sees this as an assault on a moderate "live and let live" philosophy, I feel some qualification might be necessary.
I've been turning over in my slightly troubled mind of late what I believe to be the crux of my problem with some, I hasten to add not all, religions.
A popular defence of religion as numbers of followers decline is that it promotes morality. After all, is it not the bible which taught us the ten commandments? True enough that without morality, there would be little to attract one to religion. Religion to me is essentially a repackaging of morality, presented along with examples, however fantastic, to demonstrate principles of morality. There are of course numerous examples within Christianity and I feel I should give at least one; so let's go for the "good samaritan" and it's "love thy neighbour" message.
The reverse to me though, is not true. That is to say that without religion there is no morality. One can have a sense of right and wrong without necessarily believing that there is, for example, life after death, or a "god".
So the danger for me comes when morality and religion are presented to us as a package. If one rejects those elements of religion which appear unsubstantiated, then there is a danger that one might reject morality along with it. When this happens, those who "believe" might interpret this rejection as evidence that morality needs religion. This is not to say of course that religion has everything wrong. A great many moral teachings of Christianity could be substantiated with relevant, contemporary examples, and often are by modern churches. When this approach is used with young people they then have the option of choosing a practical moral framework without needing to swallow fairy tales along with it.
I would personally go further and say that religion can, on occasion, be charged with exploiting a natural, or learned, sense of right and wrong within a potential subject to gain acceptance of ideas which are not quite so easily demonstrated. We're that to be true, is that not deceptive? Isn't there a commandment about that?....


Anyway, it's 0440 AM and now that i've gotten that out of my system, i should try and get some sleep for work in the morning!