Member Info for Grayling

None of the arguments proposed by either the abiotic (https://www.pnas.org/content/113/9/2442.long) theory proposed by Nelsen or the Robinsonian view that delayed fungal evolution was responsible for the decline in organic carbon sequestration are likely to be 100% correct, nor are they mutually exclusive. While comparative genomics has tended to promote the latter theory it is not without its limitations. One being the considerable uncertainty in the estimates for the age of origin of white rot fungi and another being Robinson's proposal that the Late Paleozoic ecosystems had a very high lignin content, which finds little support from recent geochemical analyses. Finally, the comparative genomics studies do predict patterns of decay that should be observable in the paleobotanical, record but they are not . Oh and by the way if you are really from Nottingham that makes you the Southerner matey.

It is amazing how quickly you resort to crude abuse rather than engaging in any meaningful debate. I blame the parents.

BB if you are relying on Wikipedia for your primary information then you really are beyond help.

I claimed no such expertise at all! I simply pointed out not all scientific opinion supports the theory that coal was laid down because the organisms capable of degrading lignin had not evolved at that time. The chap at Stanford has another view namely “Such geobiological hypotheses sometimes persist based largely on the strength of their novelty, without sufficient predictive testing.” Having tested this hypothesis and found it lacking, they conclude that “the Carboniferous-Permian peak and subsequent decline in coal production most likely reflects a unique combination of tectonics and climate with the particular details of the evolution of plant and fungal community composition bearing no direct relevance.” Try actually reading the paper.

Mus. For a more reasoned view of this see the following paper:
Nelsen, M.P., DiMichele, W.A., Peters, S.E. and C.K. Boyce. 2016. Delayed fungal evolution did not cause the Paleozoic peak in coal production. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA 113: 2442-2447.
Turns out the lignin hypothesis that "Large tree-like plants evolved before fungi evolved the ability to break down the fibrous lignin that helped give the plants structure. With nothing to make them decay, their remains were free to pile up and yield thick coal deposits." is not as strong as it is made out to be and it is actually white rot (a fungus) and not bacteria that are the organism of debate. By the way being referred to as a moron by BB (our resident scientific, financial and political genius) is a badge of honour to be worn with a sense of enormous pride :-)

BB "Complete contrast to the country that defeated Hitler." How do you know this? Were you actually there? I I know you just "reckon" that that is the case. See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OQnd5ilKx2Y

You must live in a very simple moral bubble Eccles It is not always a case of "occasional mistakes" although that can happen. Often it is a whole series of readily avoidable errors caused by systemic failures in clinical care. Just look at the recent case of the rogue breast cancer surgeon. Also it is not just a case of "compensation for dead babies" The first and only child of an ex colleague of mine suffered from avoidable oxygen deprivation at birth and has spent the rest of his life requiring round the clock nursing care. His case was fought by NHS lawyers tooth and nail at every step. They finally reached an admission of liability and settled the case for £1M and this enabled their house and means of transport to be adapted to improve quality of life....the child was 16 years old by the time that settlement was reached. If the NHS had been honest and settled immediately, the costs to the state would have been a fraction of the final settlement notwithstanding the huge costs of litigation and the stress for the parents.

Eccles Deary deary me I am surprised you can pluck up the courage to cross the road lest you be mowed down by one of those newfangled horseless carriages! Talk about risk averse! I bet you are a barrel of laughs down the local (if you dare to venture that far). Still nursey will be along with the meds soon, so you just stare out of the window and dream about going fishing until comfort arrives. Ps I executed a particulary poor Spey cast on the Oykel a while back and nearly ripped me ear off with an Ally's Shrimp, so fishing brings its own hazards matey :-)

Eccles04 I take it you mean you are past skiing and white water rafting then? Enjoy your retirement :-)

Putting on a bib and trainers and running for a couple of hours is hardly a life threatening risk now is it? Still what you do on your holidays is up to you :-) I would say that paying a few quid to avoid £12-15K Medevac costs (excluding medical bills) is just plain common sense, particularly if you er to the adventurous.

LOL he is probably not up to hitting the ski slopes, scuba diving or waterskiing, probably the most activity he manages is lying on a sunbed :-)

Agreed contacting is just a tax avoidance scheme which benefits both employer and employee and the only loser is the exchequer and poor saps on PAYE. Bring on IR35.

Many moons ago I took out a couple of low interest home improvemnt loans with Barclays and I was totally unaware that the repayments included PPI as this information was most likely buried in the 10 or so pages of small print and not mentioned in any of the cover letters I received from the bank. Interestingly, before I had even heard about miss selling of same I received a letter from Barclays offering me £ 500 or so to "compensate" me for "unspecified errors" to do with "previous transactions" and that if I accepted their offer it would preclude me taking any further action against the bank. I do not bank with Barclays and had always paid off my Barclaycard balance in full each month, so the transactions could only have been the loans, but as I say the letter was completely vague. I took the cash and thought nothing more of it until a year or so later when the s**t hit the proverbial. So the banks clearly knew well in advance that they had transgressed and my sympathy for them is therefore nil, nada, zero.

Solid results and increased dividend. No RNS but I presume this mornings uplift in a flat market reflects a positive reception to the numbers?

As the market is up overall and we are well down on no news are more borrowed shares being dumped on the market as short sellers increase their grip on RMG?

Not much good news on the horizon at present. Boeing has further problems with its Max, which although not RR powered is a dampener on sector sentiment, the Coronavirus outbreak continues to suppress demand for air travel overall and China's expansion in the sector is thus on hold for the time being. Finally, climate change continues to dominate the news agenda with associated "flight shame" set to put a dampener on fleet expansion. Some of these factors are already adversely affecting the lucrative international conference cycle and I know several colleagues who have had overseas meetings cancelled.

I bet you Boris is so up for this! BBC today: Engineering giant Rolls-Royce wants to build a network of mini-reactors, a third of the size of current stations. It hopes to strike a deal with the UK government within the next year. But it says the site of the old Gwynedd reactor ticks all the boxes to pioneer the technology. If it goes ahead, it would also be one of the first small modular reactors (SMRs) in the world.

The C shares are your dividends and at least as I understand this you cannot receive the dividend in any other form. If you are sitting on a pile I would ask your broker how you might go about either redeeming them for cash or converting them into ordinary shares. As cash they are worth 0.1p each and no more. I am completely baffled as to why RR uses this rather arcane form of remuneration. I hold over 30 equities both here and in the USA and RR is the only company that uses this system. If it is so advantageous to them why have other companies not adopted it?

FRTEB, My thoughts entirely. Having ridden this through the ups and downs around the time of the Pfizer bid, with a low £30s's entry point and reinvestment of all dividends this is now my biggest holding and I am sticking with it long term.

set to fall for the first time in a decade. Oh well UKOG might just get going in time for the sector wind down :-)