I have a chapter in a book which has just been published by Oxford University Press. The book is entitled British Financial Crises Since 1825. My chapter looks at the role capital and extended shareholder liability played in assuring British banking stability from 1826 until the 1930s, a theme which is developed at length in my new book Banking in Crisis. My colleague Gareth Campbell also has a chapter in the same book. His chapter looks at the Railway Mania and and the 1847 commercial crisis.
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.