An apology and some other stuff...

Publius

Perhaps Hugo Rifkind could write a piece on the ugliness of nepotism.

dave, surrey

what is it with you and your ilk liddle, you're quick to criticize people for being low brow and trashy and you sneer at them when they try and be a bit more thoughful.. typical well heeled ex BBC leftie I guess.

Liz

Rod, What makes Andy Cato any less qualified to comment than you? Quite honestly, most sane people are sick to death of hearing people waffling on about climate change. No-one really knows what the bloody hell's going on - everything's based on uncertainty. The only thing one can be certain about, is that too many rock stars, and journalists for that matter take themselves way too seriously.

Dixon

Its always sad when when an artiste whose work one likes puts their oar into something political and show themselves up to be complete t-w-hey-tee-ess-es

"If you like little villages by the sea, salty air....etc, etc"
Always thought that an exceptionaly urbane piece of chart-noise from the topical gint in pic above.

However, you just have to wall off knowledge of their politics and dabbling in mumbo-jumbo and get on with their work. Like I do with Madonna. Ive listened to Hard Candy til the cows came home this year. But I wont watch my video of "Drowned World", and I have tried to make any sense out of Kabbalah to no avail. So I just ignore that side of her.

But some artistes are more challenging in this respect than others. I mean, try as I might, I cannot deny that Alien,Bladerunner, Black Hawk Down and Gladiator are excellent movies ( although only the first exhibiting any basal originality )but neither can I respect the director of "Kingdom of Heaven". The awfulness of the movie itself can be overlooked as everyone produces an occasional clunker in their work. Whatever it is. But what I cannot forgive and what really makes me loathe Ridley Scott is that he had his movie vetted before release by a committee of Muslim "opinion leaders".

I think I can probably overlook this Groovans ex-curricular twaddle as I do the same emitted by Madonna. But I will never again respect Ridley Scott as a Human Being.

workie ticket

I've no idean if Mr R is as you described him but I remember the gist of his piece - that climate sceptics terrified him.

The tone of it was borderline hysteria, reminiscent of the best of the swivel eyed fundamentalist God Squaddies.people lie him truly terrify me.

So why apologise? You can still chew the fat over a pint even if he is a 'lice ridden whore' and you can recommend tea tree oil and Hedrin for Christmas.

Rick

And your credentials would be..?

Pricky Gayes

I take it he's nothing to do with the Cato Institute.

jon ryan

Nice one, Dixon.
Well up to standard.

Tiberius

Pygmies all, when it comes to anything as post-modern as climate change.

Rod, how could you write this blog without reference to His representative on Earth, Bono?

Sir Graphus

Hugo Rifkind is 1 of my favourite columnists; a superb turn of phrase, and usually v perceptive. I'm sure it has helped that his daddy is who he is, but he certainly has the talent to have made it without.

The unreasoning fanatics on both sides of the climate debate are pretty frightening. I really wish they'd leave it to scientists.

On the subject of pop stars talking about the environment, I'm with Homer Simpson. It's a shame The Times gave him the space.

David Ossitt

Rod Liddle

“I think I owe my colleague Hugo Rifkind an apology for my comments about his piece on climate change a week or so ago.”

No you bloody well do not.

In his reply to you; the paragraph below shows him to be an utter prat, in it he makes a number of very strange observations and assumptions, he wrongly assumes that we are all unqualified, he implies that those not qualified should not voice an opinion, he casts doubt on whether you or we, have even the right to hold an opinion and in his superior manner can’t see why we would want to.

“I just can't figure out what you are up to. I don't understand why all these unqualified people, yourself included, are faffing on about the science at all. Never mind whether or not you have the right to. I don't even see why you'd want to.”

In his reply to me he wrote the crass pompous comment below, words fail me.

David Ossitt - personally I consider it a bit like having an "opinion" about whether 2+2=4. Ie: (sic) you can have one, but unless you actually know what you are talking about there is no earthly reason for anybody else to pay any attention to it.

Publius

"I really wish they'd leave it to scientists."

-- I seem to recall it was scientists who told us thalidomide was safe. I think my blind faith in them waned a little thereafter.

Moreover, I have yet to hear a scientist explain why I should abandon the evidence of my senses in favour of a model. The evidence of the senses is primary. The model is secondary.

Tiberius

Publius: five years of science at school followed by a failed "O" level in physics did for me with scientists.

With models, though, it's simply a question of what she looks like.

Baroness Pipino

Sir Graphus @ 3.54:

but my dear Sir, I do, do leave to the scientists, the ones who never tire telling me that I will soon, very soon enlarge the number of those dying of Aids, MRSA, the swine flue, the bird flu, the smoke related lung deceases, and stuff like that whilst drowning in rising seas being poisoned by CO2, begging for a glass of drinking water….

How many dead bodies were supposed to line the streets from the second wave of the pandemic of swine flu predicted to hit us about now? Do remind me, Sir Graphus, won’t you.

And another thing: is it the dear Rod’s carnaptious character, or is booze to blame for the wave of subsequent apologies. We should be told.

Maggie

You were right the first time Rod. There shouldn't be any need to apologise for telling the truth. Perhaps you are just being patronising in which case that's entirely understandable. Its sometimes advisable to humour your intellectual inferiors.

Ivan D

****s ****ing *****t - will someone not buy this superannuated bore a pipe, or a cardigan, or, well anything that keeps him away from his silver surfing?

[And for his benefit: hey, daddy-o, it's, like, rilly lame, rilly squares-o to, like, riff on da tunz.]

toby forward

I know this is old fashioned of me, but I think that if you owe someone an apology then you should apologise, not wrap it up in a flippant way like this. I don't really care what the details of the spat were, but I don't think this is a courteous or appropriate way to do it.
Be a grown up. Make a new thread and just say sorry. No jokes. No embroidery. Say sorry.
It would set a good example and make us trust you in future when you write here.

Lupus Lungfish

Wolfmother?- more of a Lizzy man myself.

Lungfish

Ballacks Toby- for old times sake moderator let this one through!

Lungfish

Christ- that was quick

Sir Graphus

Yes, I realise my remark about scientist was open to quite a lot of criticism, and none of you have yet brought up the UEA fellows who were manipulating climate change data. I class the scientists who get media time pretty much as politicians.

The scientists I have in mind are the rather dull types, gravy stains on their ties, who’d go to the gallows before falsifying data, and who’d happily concede their whole career of research had been a waste if someone else’s theory were proved to them. They do exist, somewhere. Perhaps only in the idyll of my mind. I met several at university. Heavens, I almost was one at university (certainly dull enough). The gravy stains bit is certainly true.

They are earnestly trying to figure out what’s going on. I wish someone would let them get on with it.

Dixon

I think some people are missing the point. Celebrities like Cato are as entitled to offer their opinions on anything as much as anyone, including Rod. But the mere fact of being celebrities is held in our culture to impart much greater weight to their opinions even though they may be utterly unrelated to the work that qualifies them as a celebrity.

toby forward

Lungfish, please, try to get it right. I appreciate that you're making an effort, but really, how hard is it? I'll explain again. Ballocks, means 'little balls', as a hillock is a little hill. So, the first vowel must be an 'a' and the second vowel an 'o'.
Now, as I said, I'm not interested in the substance of the offence that Rod is guilty of, just that he should do the right thing and apologise properly - as we were told, 'Now say it as though you mean it'. If he can't do that, he shouldn't bother to do it at all.
Toodle-oo.

EyeSee

Worse, put Tony Blair in charge of Middle Eastern peace processes and work for an investment bank. Nah, way too unlikely. Who would get a world class liar to do any of this.

Oh yes, the same people that brought you global warming. And as someone else said; global warming is definitely man made (that's the idea, not the actuality).

I reckon the world is heating up because Richard Dawkins has angered God. Just a thought.

C Cole

I didn't think much of Hugo's piece on climate change, but I thought his verdict on Caroline Flint - namely, that she looks like "one of the Corrs after a Ukranian poisoning" - was definitive.

Amanda in America

Publius is right and I'd like to add, in response to Sir Graphus:

Scientists operate within the context of a regime, and ours happens to be a liberal democracy (however compromised). Scientists are not sages and elders of the tribe, never mind philosopher-kings, and in a democracy we generally feel that the voters should have a say in how our society is run. What you wish for is a dictatorship of scientists, who call on science to give answers about things of which science has no knowledge (e.g., democracy, happiness, virtue, vice, love, political passion, and the reason why Rowan Atkinson is funny: you know -- all those human things). Science can only answer the questions we put to it, and the answers are the sort of partial answers that science can give. (Everything in human life is partial; that's not a fault of science.) It's the job of democracy to come up with the right questions and to flesh out, or thrash out, the answers. That's why we have artists, business people, inventors, historians, thinkers, and politicians. If scientists have shown lately that they don't know all they have claimed to know about the world's climates, just think how much less they know about political necessity and the common good (areas well outside their expertise qua scientists).

Lupus Lungfish

Dixon- When you declared yourself a nihilist the other day I assumed you had no care whatsoever about the state of the environment in 50 years time. I myself would rather not have future generations spitting on my grave. I'm still asking a simple question though, why is everybody wassailing about C02 when we should be thinking of ways to stop human population growth? Even that old luvvy David Attenborough agrees with me!

Peter a

Rod,
It reduces you to backtrack on the Rifkind thing.You were right,he was wrong.I don't usually give a damn about the lightweight space-filler stuff he habitually knocks out but he really should avoid serious subjects from now on and stick to being kinda silly .

Lupus Lungfish

Oh- by the way, I'm glad I voted UKIP at the last election, otherwise I would have voted for this charmer! Lucky escape.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article6951962.ece

Lupus Lungfish

Now Toby- in real life I'm sure we'de get on just fine- my grammar iz,yt parfect but I went to one of those funny schoolz back in the eighties, it wus called Abbottsholme and the headmaster abollished spelling and grammar. The guy wuz from south Africa and he came back toffer muther cuntry and started a school called Abbottsholme.I can talk about wot a grate time I had there during the ayteeez and Aye reeely did but look up Cecil Reddy , he taught me hoe to spell- fantastic and liberating school though- To this day I must thank my Mum and Dad for sending me at great expense to that schoolz- Mom it twas zoopurb!- And Toby I would love to know what school you went too old chap?- Grammer or Grammar? Pupelic or private? whatever Tobe- you and Jon Ryan start to annoy me after a while!
But freedom and all that- which is wot that skool tort me

Lung Fish

I'm afraid we all HAVE to vote Conservative- there is NO choice

Lupus Lungfish

Fraser- you really have killed the spirit of the thing. We (and I'm talking about spontaneous Rod Liddle bloggers) want to have a fairly speedy real time conversation- please don't kill it. I know you are worried about the reputation of The Spectator, and we understand that- but Rod is right we grew up in the punk era and we have a certain way with the English language- My name is Dsmith and you can check that- nobody can talk freely nowadays Fraser without being a bit sweary. So let Rod be free- you employed him and I must say you should free up a little bit yourself.
Fraser , my uncle shot his wife's lover in the face in Kenya- you know the story- I'm talking about freedom of speech here- really Fraser, much respect to you and all that but free up a little.

Lungfish

I do think I should be able to say ONE thing without censorship.
Jon Ryan- I find you rather annoying

Dixon

"Lupus Lungfish
December 10th, 2009 9:28pm
Dixon- When you declared yourself a nihilist the other day I assumed you had no care whatsoever about the state of the environment in 50 years time. I myself would rather not have future generations spitting on my grave. I'm still asking a simple question though, why is everybody wassailing about C02 when we should be thinking of ways to stop human population growth? Even that old luvvy David Attenborough agrees with me!"

Yes and no, yes and no. That is to say, ultimately, everything will come to an end and the sooner it does the less suffering of life there will be. So mass extinction in 50 years appeals to me greatly. This is why the entire "I whine about the state of the world Im leaving my kids" refrain really gets on my mammaries. If anyone really cares about the burden they bequeath their off-spring by giving them existence they wouldnt have children under any circumstances. Then, as you say, the biggest "crime against the planet" according to the view of these whingers is to have children! So how the hell can they expect the affairs of 6 billion people aliove today to be re-organised to suit their notional un-born descendents, which, if they observed their own principles they wouldnt have anyway? Its an utterly monstrous conceit that takes "dont do as I do, do as I say" to a whole higher dimension.

In fact, if everybody ceased to reproduce, all Humanitys problems would come to an end within a lifetime.

So on two points I agree, yes, I am a nihilist who doesnt give a damn about the future after my death and, secondly, yes I agree an end to Human reproduction would be a good thing.

However, the answers are also "no". In the first case, I know full well nothings going to end in a mere 50 years, so Human woe will continue and I would prefer it to continue under favourable systems of government, rather than ideological oppression by way of Islamism or Environmentalism. So in that sense its no, I do not, not give a damn. And also, no, I dont believe in allowing arrogant conceited aristocrats like Lord Attenborough to dictate how many kids people can have. I regard that whole debate as essentially driven by misanthropy. The likes of Attenborough prefer the company of a pack of heyenas to Human beings any day. They may affect a lofty patrician manner but they are essentially very nasty hate-filled little-minded pus-mongers who hate and contemn everyone around them.

All in all then, its yes, yes, and no, no. Unfortunately, being a nihilist doesnt exempt one from existential dilemmas.
Much as I would like to, I cannot just ignore events. And anyway, even when one doesnt really give a damn one way or another, because the outcome is inevitable whatever we do ( we die ), it is still necessary to act AS THOUGH one cares. Otherwise one simply sinks into inertia, apathy and, eventually, depression. Take Barthes for example. I dont mean cold ones, the Roland variety.

As for thec environment, my ideal would be utterly unfettered industrialisation turning the entire planet into one vast, totally populated mechanised habitat. I see no problem with populations of 10, 20, 50 billion, living in a continuous belt of conurbation, a thousand storeys deep, circling the planet. Of course these masses would need to be fed synthetic food and their carcasses re-cycled at death. The one providing the other. You could call it "Soylent Green".

hiro

Talking of artists out of their depth, I am still waiting for Bob Dylan to take over the editorship of the Sunday Sport. Cheers.

David Barnett

The Spectator has come a long way since I started reading it in 1955. Mostly downhill.

Lungfish

Cheer up Dixon, sup a few bottles of plonk as I did last night. I'm not actually completely insane- just not far off when I have too much to drink.

Dixon

"David Barnett
December 11th, 2009 1:52pm
The Spectator has come a long way since I started reading it in 1955. Mostly downhill."

I've been "reading" ( browsing ) it since 1976. What does that prove?

Black shuck

I suppose that a history degree from Wadham such as Andy's qualifies you to marshal the salient facts and present them in a cogent argument. Course, Rod, a one time mature student at the LSE knows better

Lungfish

Wise words from the Guru

http://www.citywire.co.uk/personal/-/news/markets-companies-and-funds/content.aspx?ID=372574&re=7853&ea=199994

toby forward

Lungfish, there's no easy way to tell you this, and I'm sorry to disappoint you, but in real life we wouldn't get on 'just fine'. Sorry. Try to be brave about it.

Lungfish

I know this is daft but as a taxpayer and somebody who cares about his country- can we not make Anthony Bolton our Prime Minister for the next 10 years or so?- We need a sensible sober bloke to get us through this nightmare debt situation- Lets replace Tony Blair with Tony Bolton please- Please Tony you have more dosh than you can possibly spend- forget about China. Please Tony Bolton- your country needs you!

Dixon

"Lungfish
December 11th, 2009 2:22pm
Cheer up Dixon, sup a few bottles of plonk as I did last night. I'm not actually completely insane- just not far off when I have too much to drink."

But thats the thing, everyone I know who is cheerful ( myself included...usually...barring aches and pains and ear-holes ) share essentially the same outlook: care only about oneself and ones immediate circle.

Fergus Pickering

But Toby Forward, what kind of a school DID you go to? We'd like to know. I reckon a guy who calls himself Toby HAS to be posh. Are you? Me, I'm pretty common, but very well educated. Scottish Grammar. School.

Lungfish

Fergus- I like the cut of your gib!

Lungfish

Fergus- I was VERY lucky to go to that school and University-I don't really know what to say to you- I suppose I.m lucky in life like Rod Liddle but bat least we kind of know it!

denverthen

That's a liddle bit double-edged, even for Rod Liddle.

Great stuff. Keep it up, do.

Btw, personally, I can't wait for the B52s comment on Copengagen (given that the Daily Mail - so it must be true - says that 1400 ladies of the night have offered their services to conference pass holders at a knock down price).

It just sounds so right for a peace and lurve-in:

The Love Shack is a little old place where we can get together
Love Shack baby! Love Shack, that's where it's at!

Huggin' and a kissin', dancin' and a lovin', wearin' next to nothing
Cause it's hot as an oven
The whole shack shimmies! The whole shack shimmies when everybody's
Movin' around and around and around!
Everybody's movin', everybody's groovin' baby!
Folks linin' up outside just to get down

Etc.

toby forward

Fergus. I'm a scion of the working classes, who just happens to care that we should spell word 'ballocks' correctly.
I've never discussed anyone's educational background here - that's Lupus' field. As far as I'm concerned a lot of very thick people went to grammar schools and universities, and a lot of very bright people went to secondary moderns. Much of how that happened is more to do with social class than intelligence. Does that help? I understand that a lot of scotch schools are very good.

Kojak

Rod,

This apology is all nice and polite but for your own sake please please don't extend the same courtesy to Dianne Abbott - it would be more harmful to your credibility than sleeping with Harriet Harman.

rod seacole liddle

Toby - I did say it as if I meant it (and I also apologised privately. Although I suppose it's not private now.) The apology was for going over the top in a personal attack, not for objecting to Hugo's thesis.

And you should now apologise to me because I've just ordered The Christmas Mouse.

toby forward

Well, Rod, I'm afraid I'm short of a few scruples, so I'm very happy to apologise to you for misunderstanding, although this is mainly because I love the merry Christmas sound of the till ringing. Enjoy the book. Thanks for buying it. Ruth Brown did a wonderful job on the illustrations. Shall I send you an advance copy of the new book next year for you to contribute a complimentary blurb?

rod liddle

Toby - I shouldn't get my kids' books free, but I'd happily do a blurb for the cover (assuming its good, which I'm sure it will be).

workie ticket

'I understand that a lot of scotch schools are very good'

Do you mean schools where the production of whisky is taught? Otherwise it's 'scottish'is it not? Thats what I was taught in my boggiest of bog standard comprehensive - where even the bogs were well below standard.

toby forward

workie ticket. I'm afraid you've fallen for the scotch propaganda. It has become fashionable for scotchmen to say that 'scotch' can be applied to food and drink, but 'scots' or 'scottish' must be used for everything else. Not so. Robert Burns, who was a scotchman, called himself that, and used 'scotch' for anything from Scotland, interchangably with 'scots'. The Scotch Argus, for example, is a lovely butterfly. You'll often find that old names of things give the lie to modern fashions for linguistic fascism.
Bad luck. Next time, before you offer an opinion, check your facts.

maddy1

Polar Bears! Now it is Royal Bengal Tigers in the Sunderbans!
The BBC broadcast a report on this area full of lies, disemblance and propaganda. Even the Indian Scientists lie through their teeth in anticipation of free Coca Cola!
Where are our experts?

Lupus Lungfish

Toby - twenty years ago, working on some forestry project or something- we would have been mates- My Mini Clubman would have trounced your Escort back down that mountain road!- front wheel drive you see!

Lungfish

But Toby, I know I'm a boring old twit an all- but have you had ANY kind of life whatsoever?. You and Jon Ryan seem to have had your sense of irony surgically removed at birth!

toby forward

Lupus Lungfish/Lupus. Are you one person? And are you flirting with me?

Lungfish

Toby- ooh really