This House Would Frack in Northern Ireland.

frack

 

The 20th Ordinary Meeting of the 165th Session of the Literific took place on the 27th of March in the Senate Room. We then heard an opening address from our guest chair, Dr Jennifer McKinley, who explained the motion.

Dr Allister Ruffell, Dr Stephen Goss, Green Party MEP and Aaron Beasant were proposing the motion. Ruffell argued that no one source of energy will meet all our needs without a cost in money or to the environment. He explained how fracking works and that a good geological understanding was key. Stephen JPeter Goss said fracking wasn’t a question of whether we should or shouldn’t but that we need to because our demands are increasing and that renewable energy is currently not feasible. Beasant asked what alternatives the proposition would provide, that renewable energy was not viable as you can’t gain energy from something so unpredictable.

Dawn Patterson, No Fracking NI, Ross Brown, Green Party MEP and Ellie Kontarravdis, Green Party candidate for Balmoral,  spoke for the opposition. Patterson talked about how people living in fracked areas faced reductions in house values, tourism and farming as well as the effects it would have on the environment and our health. Brown said that research has been done showing leaking methane would have a greater effect on the environment than leaking CO2. He advised the House to reduce emissions and weigh up viability. Kontarravdis said that regulation was nice and beautiful and wonderful and will solve all our problems but that the framework for fracking is not sufficient.

The motion then went to the floor, a vote and the motion was defeated.

This House Believes Science Has Damned Us All.

science

 

The 9th Ordinary meeting of the 165th session of the Literary and Scientific society took place on the 28th of November in the Senate Room.

Matthew Allen, Dr. Stephen Goss and James McAlister proposed the motion. Allen opened the debate with a very interesting account of past philosophers and anthropologists (I think). He ended by reading a lovely poem to the House in its native Swedish. Yes. Goss brought up scientific theories that have been widely accepted but which have since been disproven and asked if it was worthwhile condemning ourselves for this. James McAlister compared our society’s way of life to that of the Amish who follow the bible for guidance and concluded that we will inevitably be damned by our advancements. However, he also said that we should just roll with it and be damned.

Fionnbharr Rodgers, Nick Millington and Dr David Timson opposed the debate. Fionn advised the House to ignore the extremists who create conflict as they are not a fair representation of either side. Mr Millington argued that heaven, the option other than being damned, has been raised in people’s minds but that in reality it may not be so wonderful. Dr Timson, our guest, said that science is good, that it has enhanced our lives in many ways; he argued that if science has damned us then God help the Vatican who sponsor science.

The debate then went to the floor.
Both sides summarised, the proposition in Swedish and we went to a vote. The motion was defeated.