Saturday, September 15, 2007

[co2 followed temperature] look at the whole picture

As I really don't wish to do the deniers' reading for them, let's zero in on just one of the main planks of their platform - CO2 does not trigger temperature increases, it's the other way about, therefore human agency does not contribute to climate change.
"It is correct that CO2 did not trigger the warmings, but it definitely contributed to them - and according to climate theory and model experiments, greenhouse gas forcing was the dominant factor in the magnitude of the ultimate change."

Look at this pdf for a fuller explanation and this site for a summary. The graph above reflects this data.

In other words, CO2 does not initiate the warmings, but acts as an amplifier once they are underway. From model estimates, CO2 (along with other greenhouse gases CH4 and N2O) causes about half of the full glacial-to-interglacial warming.

As the pdf said:

"The sequence of events during this termination is fully consistent with CO2 participating in the latter."

As well as that, it would be further exacerbated by "out-gassing from warming ocean waters, carbon from warming soils, and methane from melting permafrost."

In other words, with human contribution to CO2 and methane levels [even through animal husbandry] and the connection between these and temperature, then "human agency" on this basis alone cannot be ruled out as a major factor, let alone all other human activities vis a vis drinking water, over-cropping, erosion and so on.

To raise this objection was "fair debate". To call someone a "climate porner" is moronic. To say that no evidence is provided is less than scholastic.

And does the opinion of these people count for nothing?

[blogfocus saturday] disagreeing with the britblogger

The idea and it's not a very good one, is to take Britbloggers this evening [North Americans will be on Wednesday and Rest of the World the following Saturday] and to disagree with them in this olive-coloured post.

Yes … well I said it wasn't a very good idea. Anyway, see how you go:

1. CityUnslicker, who incidentally is leaving his humble abode [in the pic above], is a fine operator in finance and a top blogger to boot and he took me to task for talking down the banks. Now he posts this:

On the other hand, as the deposits are withdrawn and the Bank continues to struggle to raise finance in the stalled credit markets, the situation gets worse. With no money to lend for new mortgages and loans the whole system seizes up. If I was a pensioner with all my savings in Northern Rock then I would be there today getting my money out.

2. I don't think Juliet has completely got the idea of pigeons - they're for looking at and feeding, Julie:

Hmm...another racing pigeon has arrived...yesterday. British bird, different rings, not so grand...they are hanging out together. Maybe I should invest in a pigeon loft. What's wrong with their radar systems? They had better watch out -there will soon be enough of them to make a pie. :-)

3. Steve Green, at Daily Referendum, is annoyed at the sniping at David Cameron, of which I am one of the main exponents, wanting the Tories to have some sort of chance at the next election:

One of the main criticisms aimed a David Cameron is that he does not appeal to the common man. Well let's dissolve this myth once and for all: I'm the common man, I'm a life long Labour supporter from Barnsley S.Yorks. I'm working class and was raised by a single parent. I'm in my thirties, I'm married with three kids and I'm an home owner. I earn around about the average wage - a little more with overtime. But I don't see a toff when David Cameron speaks at the dispatch box, I see a man with a professional air and a vehement desire to see this country back on the right track.

4. Tony Sharp agrees with Steve about the sort of terrible thing I'm saying:

These critics are mainly people who are very focused on one or two specific issues they care passionately about. That is great. People should be energised by issues. But they seem incapable of seeing the big picture and realising that an opposition party leader has to have a starting position on a wide range of issues that are interconnected and realistic and from where change can be implemented.

5. The LibDem Norfolk Blogger, Nich Starling, has it in for people who abuse NHS staff. I have to take issue with Nich - I'd fine or incarcerate them:

The Norman Lamb, the Lib Dems health spokesman, has suggested that abusive drunks should be charged for their NHS treatment. Yes, I would go even further and given the NHS the right to charge for treatment and even remove treatment from those people who are violent, racist or verbally abusive to NHS staff who are performing their duties. Nurses, cleaners, porters and doctors deserve more protection.

6. Now the idea of this Focus was for me to disagree with the bloggers but I've scoured this post by the Phoenix-like Morningstar and I'll be damned if I can find anythng to disagree with:

For every statesman like statement you make showing how valuable it is to be in the EU, I can find one to push every little Englander button an Englishman has. I’ll just start by showing how much it costs to be in the EU through taxes and how little that buys us, then I’ll move on to every ridiculous law that has been passed down by people we didn’t elect, then I’ll head on to the EU accounts that haven’t been signed off for years because of the endemic fraud and how much that costs this country a year.

7. Now I have to take issue with Heraklites over ontology:

However, all the above points are somewhat incidental to the issue typically at stake when the Thatcher quote is discussed. Reactions to it are more often concerned with a different matter altogether: that of whether ontological or moral priority should be given to the individual over the social group. In other words, the argument is really about the conflict between political individualism and communitarianism.

And my metaphysical issue with Heraklites? That this superb blogger has not posted since September 3rd and therefore he isn't.

8. L'Ombre de l"Olivier is forever on about olives and anyway, why can't I visit his fabulous archives if I want to?

A little tree I found on the Ile de Porquerolles today [see below right]. What I find interesting is that such a little tree - it was no more than 5 foot/1.5 m high - has quite a lot of olives on it. Interestingly many of the "grown up" trees around it were distinctly lacking in olives. As always, you can click on the image to see it larger and you are invited to visit the olive tree blogging archives if you're a new reader.

Waiting for Beaman to post something super-duper so I can include him but until then, see you Wednesday for our North American friends. Cheers.

UPDATE: Check the Battle of Britain post below.

[battle of britain] please click on pic

[record ice melt] northwest passage open

The Northwest Passage, the dreamed-of yet historically impassable maritime shortcut between Europe and Asia ...

Shhh - don't tell anyone this because I'll be accused of being a climate-porner by fellow bloggers:

Arctic ice coverage has receded this week to record lows, the European Space Agency said, raising the prospect of greater maritime traffic through a long-sought waterway known as the Northwest Passage.

No it hasn't. It hasn't receded at all and I'll go into denial if I want to - I'm a blogger, after all. Despite the overwhelming body of bl--dy evidence and the consensus of the major world scientists that it has, they actually know nothing and bloggers know everything. Don't argue or we'll start calling you names.

... has now fully opened up due to record shrinkage of Arctic sea ice.

[those scotch-soaked english] in iceland

I suddenly caught this picture but then, when I read the article, it was a chuckle to read an Icelandic version of England [not Britain or America but England - the poor lass can be excused, being Icelandic] in World War 2, just as I enjoy hearing the Russian version of it. Here is a sample:

There is a little nugget of truth you might not be familiar with: Iceland was invaded by the English on May 10, 1940, and remained occupied till the end of the war.

The story begins one dark and gloomy day in Copenhagen when German troops invaded the colorful and cozy capital with fancy guns and excess numbers. Denmark gave up after two whole hours and submitted to German rule (and they call the French surrender monkeys, outrageous).

As soon as Iceland caught wind of this, Althingi, Iceland’s parliament, met up and declared the King of Denmark unfit to rule us as a colony and thus claimed its independence. As we were on a roll we figured we would declare ourselves a neutral country too, what with the war going on thousands of miles away.

But the Allied Forces had other plans. In the name of neutrality we politely told the English to please go away and that we would not be joining their army “as a belligerent and an ally”. Little did we know that in London, Mr. Churchill himself met up with the War Cabinet to discuss a potential invasion of our little country.

The scotch-soaked icon himself explained how strategically crucial Iceland was and should it fall under the hands of the Germans the way its former rulers did the Allied Forces would lose the North Atlantic territory completely.

So it was agreed that Iceland should be taken over.

I mean one day you’re celebrating your independence going about your business tending to crops and sheep and the next thing you know an army descends upon you and all you have to protect you are a measly gang of 70 policemen.

Outraged Brits should note though that Nannaa admits the Brits not only [generally] kept their word to leave at the end of the war but [some] intermarried with the Icelanders - that would indeed have to be a super-race.

Defend England, anyone?

Another version of the story is here, presumably by Egilsdottir, as the Iceland Review writers have this quaint habit of not putting their names.

Friday, September 14, 2007

[alive and kicking] this is human interaction

You can forget the droning pollies with their hermetically sealed consciences and platitudes which we bloggers rail against. You can forget our clever little pieces about Andrew Jackson and Russia.

If you want to see a living, hurting, sometimes angry, actually alive person, go here and read of her heartache [although there's something a bit ghoulish about doing that] and then this amazing post:

I dropped my books in my colleague's hands, walked right up to the man and demanded that he talk to me.

"You want to have a discussion about abortion?" I said. "You want a conversation? Talk to me. Stop yelling and let me speak."

He ignored me.

So I did something completely out of character—I don't know what possessed me— I climbed up on the planter beside him and shouted over him until he shut up.

I was nervous and furious and I stammered to find the right words, but the students were yelling at him to be quiet.

"You had your chance to preach," one girl said. "Let her talk!"

This is what living is, what not being brain dead is all about.

[mr. cameron] if you love the tories - stand down now

UKDP doesn't usually get it wrong:

Sadly, the best Home Secretary Britain will never have, David Davis, is also out of the equation. The problem with Davis is not that he might defect to Labour, but that he might defect to Cuba.

UKDP's tip:

So my tip for the top is Liam Fox - a genuine Conservative with a soft centre. A reconstructed Conservative with a nice smile. A man who knows what he wants and knows how to get it. And with luck, get it he will.

One thing for sure - Cameron is a total non-starter. If he hangs on, beggars belief and actually scrapes in, I'll be the first in the queue for my serving of humble pie.

I fear though I'm going to starve of that particular delicacy.

[andy johnson] apolitical, vilified visionary

The politically driven impeachment proceedings

In my reading of the American Presidents, I've got up to Andrew Johnson.

Using David C. Whitney, The American Presidents, Guild America, Nelson Doubleday, 2001 as the primary source and supplementing it from the web, it's difficult to understand why Johnson is held in such low esteem by Americans generally, except for these possible reasons:

1. He was forever in Lincoln's shadow and unfavourably compared to him;

2. He was a southern Democrat who spoke strongly against secession and therefore was called a traitor in the south;

3. He argued strongly for a "soft peace" for the south after the war and therefore was seen as a traitor in the north.

Therefore he had this way of alienating his own supporter base.

Clearly he fought for policies which he and Lincoln saw as fair and right and to hell with party affiliations and the party line. His one vote saving from impeachment seems clearly to have been a matter of principle with seven Republicans crossing the floor.

Also, from Whitney:

Despite Johnson's humble tone, he was a fearless, even reckless fighter for what he believed in.

Well OK, his passionate pugnacity can be seen from here and it's now clear why he'd alienate even those he was fighting for. Increasingly, as I read on, it sounds not unlike the way yours truly would have operated. Speaking of the soft peace for the south, he said:

It has been my steadfast object to escape from the sway of momentary passions and to derive a healing policy from the fundamental and unchanging principles of the Constitution.

In other words, to look ahead to the future. Right on, brother! Having defeated secession and slavery, it was necessary to avoid a Versailles 1919 style vindictiveness which would only sprout new Hitlers and to gradually draw the south back into the Union. You couldn't do that by draconian measures rooted in hatred which took away people's dignity.

And when you come to think of it, it's the same greedy story again, isn't it? There were big profits to be made in the south on the back of war and destroyed markets and Lincoln and Johnson were standing in the way, with their namby pamby "soft peace".

Think about what it must have taken, what personal character, to put such a point of view at that time of very heated passions against the sorts of people who wanted to profit from the misery . That made Lincoln a very great President but because of the manner, more so than the message, it got Andy Johnson near-impeached and with a tarnished reputation as a president.

Johnson had his vindication later though - re-elected to the Senate after leaving office and receiving a standing ovation. One could almost apply one of my former lecturer's own words, in turn, to Andrew Johnson:

I admire greatly your determination if not your manner.

I see other similarities too - humble beginnings, always having to have fought for his position, not naturally attracting sympathy and adulation through physical attributes, getting his lucky break by being smiled on from above [Lincoln and in my case a number of dignitaries], a bit of a loner who cared for the cause and not the party affiliation and a man with simple logic and the ability to see further than his nose.

With hindsight, Andrew Johnson was proved right on the "soft peace" after the Carpetbaggers and Scalawags ransacked the south and created lasting enmity for the Yankees. He was also proved right, 57 years later, on the unconstitutionality of the Tenure Act which had always simply been Congress's attempt to wrest powers from the President.

His policies were only ever for the common man - for the betterment of his lot. And America does not cherish his memory? I can't follow that.

This blogger knows his own limitations and why he'll never enjoy the patronage of the many but Andy Johnson - he was a very great visionary president of a then embryonic nation and deserves better than he's received.

Thursday, September 13, 2007

[lesbian chat] here in my own sidebar

Gosh! I wonder what I posted to attract this Google Ad in the sidebar:
Lesbian chat: Friendly Gay Chat Live with Audio and Video. Find Someone Today! chat.userplane.com
Now I have to think if I'd like to chat to a lesbian or not or is it not done to click on one's own Google Ads?

And what did I post to attract this ad?

東京に関連するブログを多数用意! 初心者でも簡単に作成可能。

[history quiz] ten to test you out

10 right - professor, 9, 8 right - too much time on your hands, 7, 6 - excellent result, 5,4 - who needs history anyway, 2,1 - join the club.

1. Only one South American country had a Monarchy. Which was it?

2. In which war did jet aircraft first fight each other?

3. At the beginning of the War of American Independence, what was considered to be the 14th colony?

4. The ancient region of Nubia is in which two modern countries?

5. The eruption of Mt Vesuvius that buried Pompeii also buried another town. Which one?

6. What was Operation Dynamo in World War II?

7. What was the name of the anti-missile missiles used by the US to shoot incoming Scud missiles in the first Gulf War?

8. Who first crossed the English channel by aeroplane?

9. Who succeeded Charles de Gaulle as president of France?

10. The Roman Appian Way went from Rome to where?

Answers here

[macro moves] the game plan at the moment

You've probably seen the quantum shift overnight in this country I live in, in line with the other major moves globally:

# EU consolidating power through the constitution and Merkel speaking of war;

# Definite moves for North American Union [it's not interesting debating this with ostriches any more - for a start, look at the NAFTA Highway and then check out the raft of legislation];

# China hell bent on getting ready by the start date - look at their highway and seaports;

# Iran, Korea and India all scrambling for position;

# Russia flexing its muscles and handing over yesterday to a new kind of power;

# The privately controlled Fed and ECB creating mass indebtedness to themselves these current days;

# Housing crisis through unsustainable salary-cost imbalances;

# Massive credit and mortgage debt to bodies in thrall to the central banks;

# Draconian legislation being forced through in the EU, America and Britain;

# Doubts on ocean bed oil reserves, especially in the middle-east;

# The coming drinking water crisis - look at the Euphrates damming for example;

# The terrorist card being played for all it's worth in the west, along with the climate change card;

# Disintegration of western social systems and the infiltration of Islam;

# The urgency of it all - haven't you seen the way legislation is constantly being put into place but either utter silence, incompetence or lukewarm responses prevailing on human needs things which really do matter?

Much of this is not in dispute by pundits. What is in dispute is what has caused it, where it's going and who's behind it. This blog lays the blame squarely at the feet of The Ancient Money and its accolyte The Finance and has backed up this assertion many times.

This one source [in terms of its nature though the participants vary] has always been the stirrer up of trouble throughout history, from the Crusades through to Vietnam and Kosovo and all wars are directly attributable to its meddling and its financing of anti-human causes.

So what has changed? What's different today?

The blogosphere is here - the ability for us to link to each other and for the truth to get out instantly. However, what happens when it does get out? A number of things are also happening in the sphere:

1. The number of blogs is currently exponentially increasing, most chasing those elusive stats - everyone is a pundit now;

2. A core of "career bloggers", who are in it for the money, expand their contacts to the point they're invited to prestige publications and hey presto - they're MSM, which is bought;

3. The U.S. is already trying to create a two tier system of pay blogging where all the good things are and where the major pundits are ….. and the vast mass of 50 a dayers whose eyes are not on other 50 a dayers but on the big pundits - they get frustrated and drop out or sit muttering in the corner;

4. The blog craze eventually fades and I see signs that it already is doing so - it seems not to have picked up to the same extent after the summer;

5. The Power has therefore "de-toothed" the blogmonster and pesky ne'er-do-wells and malcontents like myself are eventually either mopped up or no one listens to them any more.

[hip hop] more than a way of life

Matt Murrell ain't sure bout this hip-hop quote:

Philosophically Hip Hop is best thought about in the same way as radical western philosophical movements like existentialism and libertarianism that promote freedom of thought and expression.

Oh, I don't know, Matt. Think of the most profound philosophers - Augustine the Hippo, Tiberius Gracchus, Heraklites, Immanuel Kant, Philo of Alexandria, Jean-Paul Sartre, Socrates, Bob Piper, Neil Clark or Polly Toynbee and then compare their major works to the dulcet prose of the hip-hopper below [whose link I've lost - so sue me] and you'll see the rapper wins hands down:

Ode to a Shag

imma buy you a drank ooo then imma take you home with me

i got money in the bank shawty whachu think bout that

find me in the grey cadillac we in the bed like

ooh ooh ohh, ooh ooh we in the bed like

ooh ooh ooh, ooh ooh young joc

[verse 3]

wont you meet me at the bar respect big pimpin

tell me how you feel mama tell me what you sippin

u a certified dime piece deserve louy 1-3

150 a shot 3 for you and 3 for me

im checkin yo body language

Fabulous stuff - simply fabulous.


[my site] how difficult to access

Wednesday evening

There's apparently a problem for some people getting into my site and so I'm running a poll top left concerning how you're finding it getting into my site. It would help if you could respond. Thanks.

Thursday morning

Well, as you can see, I've moved the blogrolls to a linked site from the gold navbar and am currently running through them, trying to get them aligned with the Blogreader. The result might be better.

Thank you for responding to the survey so far and in the comments below. I'm trying to make access faster.

Wednesday, September 12, 2007

[ראש השנה tonight] and don't forget رمضان tomorrow

Blow the Shofar!

Rosh Hashanah
[ראש השנה ]

This evening is the evening of the Jewish New Year - Rosh Hashanah - a happy time and happy new year to Jeremy Jacobs and family and all others of the faith! Responding to his request:

* Are we better off now than last year?

Sadly, overall, I think not - economically, politically, socially and spiritually. However, perhaps we understand more now than at this time last year.

* Did we spend our time and energy wisely?

Some did - I started my blog, as did you and it was time well spent.

* What difference did we make to people's lives?

I hope brought some of the truth into the open and helped people improve in the corporate sphere.

* How is this year going to be different from all other years?

If you mean next year - the positive thing to say is that we might just be able to check the inevitable drift and cause some sort of return to more altruistic values.

Shana Tova Umetukah! Ketiva ve-chatima tovah!

1: Sing aloud unto God our strength: make a joyful noise unto the God of Jacob.

2: Take a psalm, and bring hither the timbrel, the pleasant harp with the psaltery.

3: Blow up the trumpet in the new moon, in the time appointed, on our solemn feast day.

4: For this was a statute for Israel, and a law of the God of Jacob.

Ramadan [رمضان ]

From Thursday, September 13th to Friday, October 12th, 2007, Muslims should refrain from anger, envy, greed, lust, sarcastic retorts, backbiting, and gossip and put more thought into their faith. Seems good advice for all of us.

O' Allah be pleased with my fasts, in this month, as Thou gives credit to those who (sincerely) observe fasts; and (be pleased with) my special night prayers, in this month, as Thou gives credit to those who pray (sincerely) in the night; direct me to be on guard and pay attention to free myself from the lethargy of forgetfulness.

O' the God of the worlds overlook my wrongdoings, and grant amnesty to me, O' He who shows sympathy to the wrongdoers.

Allah be with you all.

Christians

May peace come to adherents of both religions and all hatred and intolerance be washed away in the joy of this special time.

[blogfocus wednesday] whimsical pondering

Kate's extremely helpful Lewisham crime incident map which heads her blog. The idea is that you can pinpoint the latest flare-up in sleepy-hollow at any time. Especially useful for those of us in the U.S., France, Canada, Germany, Australia and Russia.

This evening:

1] Nige, at Bryan Appleyard's, welcomes a bit of common sense:

The nation seems to be coming to its senses at last about the London Olympics. Meanwhile, last night's Dispatches (Channel 4) raised some uncomfortable questions about 'Seb' Coe's finances and the total meaninglessness of the original budget figure. It's not too late to hand the whole thing back to Paris. Or give Beijing a second go.

2] Had to laugh. Timmy was referring to the Renault/Nissan head who was referring to oil running out and hydrogen taking its place:

So, the oil runs out in 2050 and we all use hydrogen. Great! That's climate change solved then. Next problem please!

Then reader Kit innocently asked:

Silly question but why does the Guardian have a business section?

3] Vox ascribes sadistic motives to George instead of realizing Dubya is just controlled:

So, the surge has been predictably "successful" by stabilizing Baghdad, but this is just a temporary measure which will only last as long as the extra troops stay there. Once they are withdrawn, the attacks will begin again in Baghdad.

The commanders know it, the insurgents know it and the administration knows it. A few of the more intelligent members of the media have also figured it out. About the only ones who haven't are the Republican politicians who are walking the plank again for Dear Leader.

4] Paul Linford is correct, correct, correct:

Iain Dale won't be watching the Rugby World Cup - his light-hearted explanation of why brightened up my Saturday morning and is well worth a read - but as a huge fan of the oval ball game I certainly will be tuning in and even writing the occasional blog post on the tournament as it unfolds over the next few weeks.

5] The blogger formerly known as Istanbultory but now known simply as Stan, describes the ritual of the dance:

It's a sad reality but men who troll for sex in public places, gay or "not gay," are, for the most part, upstanding citizens. In this regard, one might think of George Michael , LBJ aide Walter Jenkins, or global media mogul “Mighty” Dyckerson. There is, I have read, a delicate choreography involved in the men’s room “lewd conduct” tango.

The various signals - the foot tapping, the hand waving and the body positioning - are all parts of a ritual of call and answer, an elaborate series of codes that require the proper response if things are to advance (if ya see what I mean).

6] Mousie has this piece on Gordon Brown:

"Under a 136". This is when the police invoke Section 136 of the Mental Health Act 1983 to detain someone who is in a public place and who, because of a mental disorder, is in immediate need of "care or control." The police officer then takes the person to a "place of safety" (i.e. A&E) to be assessed by a senior psychiatrist and an approved social worker so that a decision can be made as to whether the person needs to be admitted for further assessment and/or treatment.

7] Rilly rilly takes some following and I think this one is something to do with gays, the Metro and Fabio:

My husband looked puzzled. ‘ Noël Coward being gay and everything’, I elaborated. ‘Noël Coward was gay?’ he queried. ‘Are you quite sure dear?’ It was almost as if he was teasing me but I knew he would never do that. ‘I’m a woman dear’ I began. ‘We girls can tell gay man a mile off you know’, I said. My husband and Fabio exchanged glances so I could see they were keen to get back to work now.

8] Lewisham Kate is an active lass - she's doing all sorts of petitions and things and one day she'll even publicize them:

Well the deadline for the petition is today it looks like it has crashed and burned ....but Kate is back to the drawing board and planning bigger and better things:

Some of the things that have been suggested are :-

Climb big Ben ....fathers for justice stylee,

March to the town hall in Catford,

Another petition,

Another newspaper....sorry mrs woman from the mercury , not going to happen,

Any ideas welcome, within reason...

See you Saturday evening if we're all still alive.

[rhetoric] free protectionist trade


Hope I won't be in trouble for this but don't you just love the rhetoric?

…Angela Merkel, the German chancellor, and President Nicolas Sarkozy of France said they would urge their European Union partners to develop a joint “foreign economic policy”…

Read: shut the Yanks, Russkies and Chinks out whilst Europe gets free access*.

* Read: France and Germany

…the two leaders said such a policy would buttress the EU’s Lisbon strategy on improving the bloc’s competitiveness…

Read: shut the Yanks, Russkies and Chinks out whilst Europe gets free access*.

* Read: France and Germany

…While reaffirming their belief in open markets as “the guarantor” of prosperity, they expressed concern that the use of non-tariff barriers and restrictions to investments and the political manipulation of exchange rates had reached a “preoccupying scale”…

Read: shut the Yanks, Russkies and Chinks out whilst Europe gets free access*.

* Read: France and Germany

…“This is about reciprocity,” Ms Merkel told a press conference. “We are for open markets but they should be open everywhere.”…

Read: shut the Yanks, Russkies and Chinks out whilst Europe gets free access*.

* Read: France and Germany

Paris wants the EU to be more assertive in ensuring equal access to markets, particularly in regard to public procurement…

Read: shut the Yanks, Russkies and Chinks out whilst Europe gets free access*.

* Read: France and Germany

Don't you just love the world of trade? Pro-protection here. Anti-protection here.

[efficacious speaking] some points

It's a risk putting up this post when it is basically only my own notes for the day on the topic of Efficacious Speaking.

Please remember - it's a point form skeleton only, has no meat on that skeleton and is only intended as a reminder for myself in a speech I have to give today. I have to add the meat from my own experience as I go.

Still, it might be worth looking at so it's below:

PART 1

1. There are different types:

a] report of facts, figures and dates, e.g. history, science reports

Style: Didactic delivery like a parrot;

b] speech to an audience

Style: combination of the report and the play [below];

c] play or dialogue type

Style: playing a role, acting skills required.

2. Looking at 1b in detail, certain things are required to deliver an excellent speech:

a] Knowledge of the topic - you have to have done your preparation. If you haven't had the chance, then there are ways around it:

[i] have a store of general facts and figures from life and connect them to your topic;

[ii] change it into a rhetorical question session e.g. how many of you know about …?

[iii] not always possible but if the rules allow, turn it into a forum where the audience input their knowledge or even turn it into a dialogue with a knowledgeable friend;

[iv] use it for an analogy for something you do know about e.g. this reminds me of …

[v] if all else fails, try to remember what has been said about this topic in the news, film etc. and give a highly personalized view e.g. I'm not at all sure about this because …

b] Passion for the topic which requires:

[i] knowledge in the first place;

[ii] developing a personal point of view and arguing it. All good research uses this, rather than the fact after fact, cut and paste method;

c] Connection with the audience - a speech will always fail without this:

[i] personal warmth - caring for the audience e.g. don't say: "Do you love holidays, I do."

[ii] sense of humour which comes through to the audience by:

- your manner

- carefully placed dry comments, anecdotes, rhetorical questions or even facial expressions;

[iii] not taking yourself too seriously;

[iv] eye contact - the 2 second rule;

[v] playing the room:

- the four corner procedure

- proximity or immediacy to wake people up;

[v] handling sleepers or talkers;

[vi] handling interruptions, always with:

- humour

- tact

- honesty if you don't know something e.g. I'll find out and tell you tomorrow if you like.

PART 2 [not to be given today and these are only some rough notes so far]

The speech itself

There are four major factors militating against a good speech:

1. lack of preparation - preparation gives confidence;

2. unreasoning fear;

3. time;

4. taking your speech too seriously without remembering why the audience is there:

a] to hear something interesting you might not have known before;

b] to enjoy the speaker and feel a bit special for these few minutes;

c] to not be bored by endless facts and figures.