In February 2014, I wrote the following:
The residents in Cornwall in the UK are certainly struggling as wave after wave of Atlantic weather systems drop yet more rain on their saturated lands. Flooding has caused many to flee their homes amidst calls that the politicians are standing idly by.
One can understand their frustration but is their ire towards the politicians warranted? As things stand what do they want the politicians to do? Act like Canute and insist that the water retreats? Hand out money belonging to other taxpayers, like confetti, as compensation? Compensation for what? Making the conscious decision to live in a known flood area? We all have sympathy for their plight and the emergency services are doing sterling work but is there no real chance of negating the overwhelming power of nature?
Probably not but does that mean we shouldn't try? The cost of annual river dredging is prohibitive; so too the infrastructure needed for effective draining but it doesn't come near to the human cost of despair and suffering. What can be done? I have spoken of this before but with winter weather patterns becoming ever more severe is it time to take another look at climate control? can we stop the build up of rain bearing clouds above the UK?
Is it possible to station a reflector and lens in geostationary orbit in space to harness the immeasurable power of the sun and burn off areas of low pressure and moderate wind speeds whilst they are still building out in the Atlantic? What about beaming microwave radiation directly at clouds or the new super-powerful laser gun being developed? Allow the farmers their ration between the hours of midnight and say four in the morning but having paid the initial costs it might represent a more economically viable means of protecting the people. It has side benefits as well. The UK could become world leaders in the technology leading to economic benefits and also the Nation would become happier, basking in the increased sunshine levels.
Here we are again, this time in Lancashire. Since I wrote this piece, I have heard of no plans to attempt such measures as I've suggested. Surely the Government must act now!
Saturday 26 December 2015
Thursday 17 December 2015
Bar Council exam. Paper 1
Bar Council exams
Paper 1
In a hypothetical case the judge sums up as follows. Read his directions to the jury and then answer the subsequent questions.
'Members of the jury, this is a simple case of alleged rape concerning an extremely, almost obscenely wealthy defendant. We have heard that on such and such a date, he was in a hotel room in the company of two young girls. Because it was a warm day all those present were undressed and the defendant was in a state of arousal. This has not been contested, men are often in a state of arousal, but what happened then is. The defendant claims that in adjusting his position on the sofa, he inadvertently slipped and in so doing accidentally penetrated one of the girls despite her pleas for him to desist. I am minded to refer the papers of the case to the CPS because it strikes me that the girl's legs akimbo, might have facilitated this unwanted trip to paradise and brought on the defendant's unrelenting ecstasy, amounting to no less than an infringement of his human right to celibacy.
Leaving that aside for one moment, the defendant, a man of previously good character, his previous convictions for fraud and domestic abuse having been successfully appealed, is known for his charitable work with young children. The court has also received the written testimony of various politicians, artists, deejays etcetera as to his good character. On the other hand the witnesses for the crown are just girls.
Therefore members of the jury, bearing in mind all the circumstances, I have no difficulty in directing you to formally acquit the defendant on all charges.'
Question 1. Has the judge been 'got at'? Has he been bribed?
Question 2. Has the judge or his family been threatened with punitive punishment if the defendant doesn't walk?
Question 3. Are judges fit persons to hear cases involving 'real' life?
Paper 1
In a hypothetical case the judge sums up as follows. Read his directions to the jury and then answer the subsequent questions.
'Members of the jury, this is a simple case of alleged rape concerning an extremely, almost obscenely wealthy defendant. We have heard that on such and such a date, he was in a hotel room in the company of two young girls. Because it was a warm day all those present were undressed and the defendant was in a state of arousal. This has not been contested, men are often in a state of arousal, but what happened then is. The defendant claims that in adjusting his position on the sofa, he inadvertently slipped and in so doing accidentally penetrated one of the girls despite her pleas for him to desist. I am minded to refer the papers of the case to the CPS because it strikes me that the girl's legs akimbo, might have facilitated this unwanted trip to paradise and brought on the defendant's unrelenting ecstasy, amounting to no less than an infringement of his human right to celibacy.
Leaving that aside for one moment, the defendant, a man of previously good character, his previous convictions for fraud and domestic abuse having been successfully appealed, is known for his charitable work with young children. The court has also received the written testimony of various politicians, artists, deejays etcetera as to his good character. On the other hand the witnesses for the crown are just girls.
Therefore members of the jury, bearing in mind all the circumstances, I have no difficulty in directing you to formally acquit the defendant on all charges.'
Question 1. Has the judge been 'got at'? Has he been bribed?
Question 2. Has the judge or his family been threatened with punitive punishment if the defendant doesn't walk?
Question 3. Are judges fit persons to hear cases involving 'real' life?
Labels:
Judges,
Kevill Davies,
Legal profession
Thursday 10 December 2015
Trump that
In May 2013, I posed the question I want all Muslims to answer. They are the questions one asks when you look for Trump's motive for his demanding a TEMPORARY ban on Muslims entering the USA pending a review of the situation in the Middle East. He has been reviled throughout the world, including his own Republican Party, but has he got a point? It's no good the Muslims blaming 9/11 and all the other atrocities on the US and Allies for fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan. The Arabs definitely hold grudges and they are still spitting blood over the crusades. That has nothing whatsoever to do with ISIL's ambition to create a Caliphate stretching from Iran in the East to Morocco and Spain in the West.
My blog can be seen at:
http://www.kevilldavies.com/2013/05/why-do-you-believe-in-god.html
The trouble with the US is their own dogmatic adherence to an equally false faith and their constitutional right to hold their views. One can't expect Muslims to adapt their behaviour when Americans continue to believe in Creationism and other ridiculous cults.
My blog can be seen at:
http://www.kevilldavies.com/2013/05/why-do-you-believe-in-god.html
The trouble with the US is their own dogmatic adherence to an equally false faith and their constitutional right to hold their views. One can't expect Muslims to adapt their behaviour when Americans continue to believe in Creationism and other ridiculous cults.
Labels:
Creationism,
Donald Trump,
Islam,
Kevill Davies
Monday 7 December 2015
Junior doctors
Junior doctors have recently threatened to go on strike because they feel under pressure from the Government's plan to provide full medical care throughout the week rather than from Monday to Friday. The Government give the result of a survey, which shows survival rates in hospitals at weekends is sharply down from the rest of the week, as the reason for their action. Nevertheless, the British Medical Association, BMA, the doctor's trade union, feel that it puts additional strain on their doctor's role, aiding the sick. After all, it's damned inconsiderate of the public to fall ill at the weekend. Puttting aside the fact that the doctors are reasonably paid and can expect very good pension rights when they retire, are there other groups, paid by the tax-payer, who rise to the challenge of their work without whingeing? This weekend, late on Saturday night, the police were on hand to deal with a knifeman at an East London tube station. Somewhere, in a far off God forsaken desert, another man or woman who takes the public money, will be closeted in a scorpion and snake infested hell-hole on the lookout for enemies of the Country unaware of whether or not it is a Monday or Saturday.
If any junior doctor feels he is worth more, he should simply walk; otherwise put up and shut up.
If any junior doctor feels he is worth more, he should simply walk; otherwise put up and shut up.
Labels:
BMA,
Junior doctors,
Kevill Davies
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)