After reading Chavs, I reread the work of Charles Murray on the underclass. As an undergraduate, I was fascinated by the work of Charles Murray, the controversial American political scientist and libertarian, who documented the rise of the underclass in the United States. In the early 1990s, he was invited by the Institute of Economic Affairs to study Britain’s underclass. Murray, who perceived himself as standing in a long line of classical liberals, was very definite about the causes of the rise of Britain’s underclass – the undermining of the family structure as well as social welfare programmes. You can read his study, as well as several critiques of it, by clicking here. Please be aware that some of Murray’s work (particularly The Bell Curve) needs to be read with discernment.
The Berkeley Earth Project , an independent study of global warming, has found that the earth has become a degree warmer over the past half century. However, the statistical uncertainty surrounding pre-1920 estimates makes it very hard to say much about long-term trends - click here for graph . This is one of my concerns with the global warming debate - we simply don't have trustworthy long-run data which looks at temperature changes over the last millennium (or two). My second concern with the global warming debate is that it is very hard to prove any sort of casual link between global warming and human activity. The scientists may be able to show correlation between global warming and our production of carbon dioxides etc., but correlation is not causation. My third concern with the debate is that those who are sceptical or agnostic are stereotyped as flat-earthers or intellectually-challenged crackpots. This only stifles debate and the progress of science itself.