Climate Assembly: Weekend 2

The programme for the second weekend of the Climate Assembly can be seen here

There’s a message up at the moment saying: “Stay Tuned. We are live at 1915 GMT,” which is about thirty minutes ago, I think.

Subjects to be covered this weekend are: How we travel; In the home; and What we by, land use, food and farming.

Barry Woods has already given some useful information on participants in comments under the Alex & Andy post. I’ll update this as and when, without necessarily announcing the changes.

20:30 GMT still no live feed, but comments are on at Youtube. This could be a good reason to leave comments about this weekend’s sessions there instead of here, (always with a link back to here of course)

The speaker on Friday 7 February 2020 PM is:

Dr Alan Renwick, University College London on: Considering evidence

The programme for Saturday and Sunday I reproduce as at the site. It’s very long, because of the three groups, each of which is addressed by two panels, one on Saturday and one on Sunday. In fact each panel is separated into two sub-panels, with three experts in each, who get together at the end of each morning and afternoon session for a Q&A session with all six experts.

GROUP ONE How we travel

Saturday 8th February

13:00Professor Jim Watson, University College London, introduces the topic area livestream

13:30Panel one livestream

Professor Jillian Anable, University of Leeds – introduction to surface transport (informant)

Ellie Davies, Committee on Climate Change – technical and social options for reducing emissions from cars (informant)

Lynn Sloman, Transport for Quality of Life – alternatives to cars (informant)

14:15 Assembly members prioritise their questions for later Q&A

14:30 Panel one continued lifestream

Jason Torrance, UK 100 – fairness and how that relates to surface transport (informant)

Steve Melia, University of the West of England – how surface transport could be decarbonised via regulations (advocate)

Paul Buchanan, Volterra and John Siraut, Jacobs – how surface transport could be decarbonised via economic incentives (advocate)

15:15 Assembly members prioritise their questions for later Q&A

16:00Q&A with all panel speakers

Sunday 9th February

09:25 Panel two lifestream

Professor Jim Watson, University College London – introduction to the topic of air travel (informant)

Owen Bellamy, Committee on Climate Change – technical options for reducing emission from air travel (informant)

Professor Alice Larkin, University of Manchester – alternatives to air travel (informant)

10:10 Assembly members prioritise their question for later Q&A

10:25 Panel two continued lifestream

Dr Sally Cairns, University of Leeds – fairness and reducing emissions from air travel (informant)

How emissions from air travel could be reduced:

Leo Murray, Possible – perspective one (advocate)

Rachael Everard, Rolls Royce – perspective two (advocate)

11:10 Assembly members prioritise their questions for later Q&A

11:45 Q&A with all panel speakers

GROUP TWO In the home

Saturday 8th February

13:00 Professor Rebecca Willis, University of Lancaster, introduces the topic area lifestream

13:30 Panel one lifestream

Jenny Hill, Committee on Climate – going to introduce the panel and some of the key issues it will cover (informant)

Professor Nick Eyre, University of Oxford – ways to reduce the amount of heat and electricity we use in the home (informant)

Richard Lowes, UK Energy Research Centre – ways we could heat our homes with electricity in future (advocate)

Chris Clarke, Wales and West – ways we could heat our homes using hydrogen in future (advocate)

14:30 Assembly members prioritise their questions for later Q&A

15:35Q&A with all panel speakers

Sunday 9th February

09:25Panel two livestream

Professor Rebecca Willis, Lancaster University – an introduction to the panel (informant)

Polly Billington, UK100 – local area led approaches to making change happen (advocate)

Jonathan Atkinson, Carbon Co-op – Community and non-for-profit approaches to making change happen (advocate)

10:10 Assembly members prioritise their questions for later Q&A

10:25Panel two continued livestream

Dan Alchin, Energy UK – role of the private sector (business) in making change happen (advocate)

Matthew Lipson, Catapult – the idea of selling heat as a service (advocate)

Dhara Vyas, Citizens’ Advice – how to ensure consumer protection and fairness (advocate)

11:10 Assembly members prioritise their questions for later Q&A

11:45 Q&A with all panel speakers

GROUP THREE What we buy, and land use, food and farming

Professor Lorraine Whitmarsh, University of Cardiff, introduces the topic area livestream

13:30Panel one – what we buy livestream

Professor Mike Berners-Lee, Lancaster University – introduction to what we buy and this panel (informant)

Professor John Barratt, University of Leeds – ways to reduce the amount we buy in the first place (informant)

Dr Nicole Koenig-Lewis, Cardiff Business School – ways to reuse products (informant)

14:15 Assembly members prioritise their questions for the later Q&A

14:40 Panel one continued lifestream

Julie Hill, WRAP – waste recovery and recycling (informant)

Libby Peake, Green Alliance – different ways to make change happen (informant)

15:15 Assembly members prioritise their questions for the later Q&A

15:50Q&A with all panel speakers

Sunday 9th February

09:25 Panel two – food, farming and land use lifestream

Indra Thillainathan, Committee on Climate Change – introduce the topic of food, farming and land use (informant) 

Ceris Jones, National Farmers’ Union – the role of farming in reducing emissions (advocate)

Sue Pritchard, Royal Society for the encouragement of Arts, Manufactures and Commerce – the role of farming in reducing emissions (advocate)

10:10 Assembly members prioritise their questions for the later Q&A

10:25 Panel two continued lifestream

Dr Jo House, University of Bristol – role of land uses other than farming in reducing emissions (informant)

Dr Rosie Green, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine – how changing the types of food we eat can reduce emissions (informant)

Professor Tim Lang, City University – how changing the way we consume food can reduce emissions (informant)11:10

Assembly members prioritise their questions for the later Q&A

11:45Q&A with all panel speakers


  1. no Geoff your comment has not turned up yet!!!
    just these 3
    “CoramDeo 3 hours ago
    What time are the climate realists on!!

    John Dinsdale 4 hours ago
    Well at least you turned comments on this week

    John Dinsdale 4 hours ago
    When do the Engineers get to state how you select between options. They could explain how to get the best return on your sacrifices. This would be measured by the effect on the Keeler curve. It would reduce the side tracks of changing the economic model or redistribution of assets. The problem is the biosphere’s stability and the continuation of civilization not SJW agendas.”

    nice classical doom music as well from the web page, just to get you in the mood.


    You’re right. My three comments have disappeared on my screen too. My first comment simply linked to this site:

    20:45 GMT Still no live feed, but for some constructive (I hope) comments on the first weekend, go to

    My second was extremely positive:

    Alan Renwick’s introduction was brilliant – much better than anything last weekend. I’ve been critical, cruel even, about the speakers last weekend. If only they’d started with Renwick! This format could be hugely important in the way politics is conducted in the future. I’ve praised the format and the general principle in comments here (congratulations to the Parliamentary Committee people for a professional job. Keep it up. Democracy depends on it) while critical of the content.

    Renwick’s introduction to critical thinking demands that opposing views be allowed to be expressed. That’s not going to happen, given the makeup of the panels.

    And my third simply corrected an error of linkage

    Woops. Bad link. Should be

    I’ll put up a transcript of what Alan Renwick said tomorow. It was a model of good sense on his subject: “considering evidence.” I praised Renwick, and I praised the parliamentary committees for doing a good job of relaying the content of the assembly meetings. And I get banned.

    British Parliamentary Committees are not like Guardian environmental pages or the Iowa Democratic Party Caucuses. They can’t make up the rules as they go along. I’ll be writing to them soon.


  3. When activist grow up they join think tanks, advisory group, write reports, and get funded by other research organisations, or get paid by writing reports for other similar organisations, and money from councils, etc for advising them on climate, or anti car etc.. Think, George Marshal, rainforest activist, turned co-founder of Earth First uk, protesting against nuclear, cars and roads, and moved onto climate. Rising Tide

    And today we see Jason Torrance speaking about travel at the Climate assembly, of a group sums trans. Sounds very important,just another lobby group with an agenda, previously he was Transport 2000, despite the name. Anti transport ie car, and is on record lobbying against the ABD (association of British drivers, itself a lobby group, obviously pro car. See the technique pick a name, that is the opposite of your intent.. climate Outearch (Marshall). Shutdown your opponents.

    I digress

    Jason Torrance is a career anticar, anti roads protester, adapting to the lobby group system(nouns, salaries, mortgage gets paid)

    He was arrested on the Twyford Downs ant roads demos the other co-founder of Earth First UK. And hates cars,roads and organised countless direct action protests, including any
    Hi nuclear.

    Lynn another speaker is even anti-electric car..

    Is it too much to ask, to get them to present themselves to the audience honestly?
    Or for others to speak, that might be pro car. Ie the SMMT, who could advise the audience of the realities of the car transport, et


  4. lot’s of tweets – search on twitter #climateassemblyuk hashtag

    European Climate Foundation (ECF) funds #climateassemblyUK (but has ‘no influence’)
    Yet UK100 is funded by the ECF(gets to speak)
    & @ECIU (funded by ECF) does the assembly comms..

    activist and lobbyists (do the members know?)


  5. Jason Torrance:
    “I was really moving away from forest stuff,getting more into the whole idea, living in London, of thinking: “F#cking Hell, what is going on with all this traffic going around me? Something has got to be f#cking done about it…”
    Earth First UK #climateassemblyuk


  6. Barry;
    “Is it too much to ask, to get them to present themselves to the audience honestly?
    Or for others to speak, that might be pro car. Ie the SMMT, who could advise the audience of the realities of the car transport, et”

    Isn’t it possible that some of this audience are drivers, possibly for a living or otherwise crucially dependent on private mobility to work and who therefore well aware of the realities of car transport, possibly more so than their lecturers! I cannot think of a better choice of presenter to put in front of such an audience. The comments on the announced future of private transport post 2035 show that there is no intent to provide for 30m BEV vehicles by 2050. I doubt that this will pass unnoticed.
    Contemplating this exercise after week one I was puzzled until Wednesday when I saw my local chanteuse performance of “The Producers”. It was very entertaining and enlightening.


  7. think this link was posted before –

    “What is climate change? A really simple guide
    Scientists say global warming could have a catastrophic effect on the planet.”

    they have a nice little pic of the earth with Carbon dioxide (CO2) as the main driver for temps to increase.

    “What are greenhouse gases?
    The greenhouse gas with the greatest impact on warming is water vapour. But it remains in the atmosphere for only a few days.”

    but it is constantly recycled & back in the atmosphere in the next few days after that happens!!!

    stop scaring the kids FFS.


  8. Paul – had to give up on “Torrance”

    what a dreary presentation – reminds me of the time I told my mum – “no more sunday school for me thanks”


  9. Comments seem to be allowed under the videos up at Youtube, at least under the long ones which come up in the sidebar when I start from the Rylands intro at e.g. this one on farming and land use They’re visible as blue and white blank screens and they start with 20-40 minutes of the William Tell Overture before getting on to the speakers.

    Few commenters so far, but one Jean-Claude Schwartz says under one video, to those who’ve given it a thumbs down: “I’ll go into your houses, break into the basements you’re hiding in, take your electronic devices away from you and smash them into pieces! What the Freak is wrong with you, you Maniacs?? Only a lunatic denies climate change. No joke”

    And under another: “Listen to me you stubborn little shits!!! You owe those video about Climate change a big sincere but immediate Japanese style apology. Before you retards write to me something about free speech, I do not oppose freedom of speech or do I want it suppressed. I WILL CURE IT!!!”

    He says of himself on his YouTube page:
    “Hello my name is Jean-Claude Schwartz. Please do not like all of my videos because it’s rude and it hurts my reputation, please understand me. I Love Korean Cuisine, celtic music, Beer, Peace, good leaders (Mainly Jacinda Ardern, Obama) and languages and even Japanese and South Korea. Right wing fascists, homophobes, racists, whiny Brexitears, white supremacist terrorist sympathisers and extremists should not be tolerated nor enter this channel if they do, i will block them after i investigate every channel. Extremely proud to support Greta Thunberg a Swedish climate activist. I’m also a Norse Pagan, anti-Racist, Smart, Liberal, Freedom lover, Gay rights supporter, Pro-Japanese, Hop fan, Anti-Fake News, environmentalist and proud.”

    On his photo he appears to have a large metallic brooch embedded in his forehead.


  10. What are the odds… so far two of the speakers, have been arrested for making direct action anti-roads and anti flying… Audience won’t know that though…

    Liked by 1 person

  11. I don’t understand why you are all going to such great lengths to gain an insight into what is going on in the Climate Assembly, when all you have to do is visit the BBC news website to get an up-to-date, unbiased account:

    And it’s a wonderfully accomplished piece of journalism, full of original and thought-provoking touches – such as the use of ‘Turning Up the Heat’ as a sub-heading (Pure genius! That’s why these people are professional journalists whilst we are still fumbling bloggers).

    There are also cosy-wosy insights, such as ‘Amanda engaged in the discussion…’. Ah! ‘Engaged’. That old chestnut.

    Of course, I could save you the trouble of reading the whole thing, just by concatenating the sub-headings into one sentence: ‘Turning up the heat; fairness is the key; I’m no environmentalist; put up taxes to protect climate’.

    BBC impartiality at its best – I’m afraid to say.


  12. Interesting that the old discussion about the fairness of allowing the rich to purchase an essential but limited resource has turned up, as one might have predicted. I first encountered this in the Florida Keys where there is no fresh groundwater and all, except that captured and stored from rainfall, comes from a single relatively narrow diameter pipeline running the full length of the Keys. The climate is such that there are periods of up to several weeks where there can be no rainfall and all drinking water comes from the pipeline. Costs vary, those using water for essentials pay a minimum, and prices rise precipitously as use increases. Yet there are numerous large estates with enormous lush gardens that must cost a Trump’s ransom to water during episodes of drought. I always wondered if, nevertheless, the basic purchasers were subsidizing the rich – just as first class passengers on aircraft today don’t pay proportionately for the extra space they occupy during flights.

    Liked by 1 person

  13. FFS

    “Heathrow is set to become a lightning rod for radical climate activists all over the country & the old networks from the former alliance are starting to light up again for the first time in years.Once more, dear friends, once more– but let’s make sure it’s really dead this time”

    one of the speakers, a couple of years back…..

    they are just taking the piss, of course the public think the speaker an every so reasonably chap, despite the multiple arrests, because the Assembly forgot to tell then..

    yes, that speaker was the co-founder of Plane Stupid, and 10:10 (No Pressure) campaign, but the assembly members will never know..


    At least the BBC article kept the tone lighthearted:

    …the average temperature of a British home has increased by 6% since the 1970s and a whole generation has grown up considering it a basic human right to inhabit the home in little more than underwear. The trend’s not helpful for a government wanting to reduce emissions from heating.

    A basic human right to wear what you like in your own home? Whatever next? People will be saying they’ve got a basic human right to travel as much as they like, cook how they like…where will it end?

    Unfortunately we shall probably never know what people thought of the show put on by the CCC and their 36 experts. There are no videos or transcripts of the Q&A sessions, and no videos planned at all as far as I can see for weeks 3 and 4. This is participatory democracy behind closed doors. I think maybe Barry’s approach is the best. Just check out the criminal records of the speakers. I know it’s ad hominem, but what else can we do?

    Here’s possibly my final word, an extract from Alan Renwick’s advice on how to listen:

    I’m going to give you Alan’s three top tips. So first tip. Ask yourself, “Are they backing up their claims with good evidence and good arguments?”… Or have they given you an argument to show you why that makes sense?
    Second point. Why might someone take a different view? .. So maybe the first person is offering only some of the evidence, but there’s also other important evidence that we need to take into account. Or maybe they’re interpreting the evidence in a particular way that someone else might disagree with. Or they have different values about what matters what we should be caring about here. ..
    Third one really important. We’re better at hearing things that fit with what we already think… So it’s really important to try to hear both sides of the argument, including the bits that maybe you don’t agree with initially quite so much.

    Good advice, but pointless, given that it was delivered a week after the 20 minutes of scientific evidence and well into the fifty or so hours of expert guidance to the public on how to respond to the government’s request for guidance on how to persuade them, the public, to accept the government’s guidance. So all the stuff about both sides of the argument was a bit wasted.


  15. Geoff,
    Good grief, so the BBC think it unhelpful that people feel they have the right to be warm and comfortable in their own homes. They lament the 6% increase in average temperature of British homes since the 70s. What they don’t mention is that the increase in warmth was gained via much improved insulation, better, cleaner, more efficient heating and consequently reduced emissions of pollutants and CO2. It would not surprise me in the least if households use less energy now to maintain the home at a warmer temperature than in the 1970s.

    Typical heating in the 70s and even 80s was a coal fire (or gas fire if you were posh), smelly paraffin heaters and sometimes electric bar heaters which consisted of a very basic, inefficient heating wire wrapped around a ceramic element. Gas in the home (which ran the fridge as well) was town gas, not the much cleaner natural gas which we use nowadays. No deep pile carpets and comfy thick underlay either, it was thin lino over floor boards plus a few rugs and windows were single-glazed and drafty. Most lofts were uninsulated – except ours. Dad came home with a load of polystyrene packaging one day and we laid it all out in the loft!


  16. Geoff,

    “Whatever next? People will be saying they’ve got a basic human right to travel as much as they like, cook how they like…where will it end?”

    Well, it might end with people believing they have got a basic human right to think what they want. But surely the planet is far too important for anyone to let that happen.

    Liked by 2 people

  17. ahh – 10:10 (No Pressure) – where schoolkids get blown up if they deviate from the groupthink class, remember it well.

    can’t find a good video link for some reason!!!
    best I can find –

    the assembly needs to be aware of the history behind the speakers.


  18. “the average temperature of a British home has increased by 6% since the 1970s and a whole generation has grown up considering it a basic human right to inhabit the home in little more than underwear”

    “Their task is to give MPs and the government a sense of public priorities as the UK battles to reduce emissions to almost zero by 2050.
    The indoor fleece question was a surprise. One participant asked whether fast fashion firms should make fashionable indoor clothes that save carbon emissions by actually keeping the wearer warm”

    answer to 1 – coal fire in 1 room v central heating (take your word for the 6%)
    answer to 2 – a whole generation has grown up feeling entitled & never have to pay the bills.
    answer to 3 – I’m typing this wearing a fleecy onesy, go to bed & get a life.


  19. Jaime Jessop says “Gas in the home (which ran the fridge as well)”

    your pulling my leg,almost tempted to ask your age!!!

    in Scotland we had a larder, and it wasn’t a fancy car.



    Really, gas fridges were a thing in the 70s and even 80s. My motorhome fridge runs off gas and that was built in 1999!


  21. JAIME 10Feb 20 10.14pm

    “…it was thin lino over floor boards plus a few rugs..”

    Thin lino? You had it cushy. It were straw on the floor in my day, with a fight each night as to who got to snuggle up t’pig. And no entertainment save watching Gran doing her Tai Chi in her underwear at minus three degrees.

    Liked by 2 people

  22. Geoff,

    You had a pig! You had straw! There were nowt but spit and sawdust from t’mill down lane on the floors in our day and we had just a few scraggly hens. Aye lad, they don’t they they’re born nowadays.


    Liked by 1 person

  23. Transcripts are now there, as last time, if you follow the links from the first link in Geoff’s post.

    As Geoff says, Alan Renwick’s comments are good: “Why might someone take a different view?”, “Or maybe they’re interpreting the evidence in a particular way that someone else might disagree with. Or they have different values about what matters what we should be caring about here.”, and so on. But his comments are completely wasted because the organisers have only chosen speakers from the activist community. The participants will never hear any different views, because no policy sceptic or “devil’s advocate” has been allowed in to the echo chamber.

    Also, Ben has a new article up elsewhere,

    UK Govt.’s Climate Assembly Is Anything But Democratic

    “Watching the proceedings of the first assembly, it became clear very quickly that the process is rigged in favor of the environmentalist agenda.

    Expert after expert, each echoing the same message, made his or her presentation to the assembly. This was followed by a rapid question-and-answer session in which the assembled were told what’s what by said experts.

    It didn’t look much like a democratic debate. It looked like instruction.”


  24. Barry Woods
    2 hours ago·
    User Info
    There’s Only One Planet B: Mongo
    the UK climate assembly comms unit (ECIU) are trying to persuade people that they really don’t love gas boilers, and how the public really think heat pumps are great (after some they are coming for your gas boilers stories in the media)

    They have a nice survey to show politicians the evidence of this.
    (but at no point does the survey, tell the public the cost of an air heat pump…

    I have added a comment (not approved yet) but unlike sceptical bloggers they only work when they get paid? – so it might take a while to get approved..?

    meanwhile my comment here updating them on prices..

    & they will keep loving their gas boilers. because the survey ‘forgot’ to tell them how much air heat pumps cost to replace them!
    who are you trying to kid (the public obviously)@CEN_HQ @NetZeroUK #climateassemblyuk

    — BJW (@BarryJWoods) February 22, 2020
    ..some orwellian language.. trying to prep people for taxes on domestic gas.

    “A recent report from the centre-right Onward think tank showed that, by rebalancing policy costs across fuels, the move from boiler to heat pump could take place without an overall increase in energy bills.

    Ending the ‘effective subsidy’ of gas through a lower rate of VAT than other fuels, as noted by the Oxford Institute of Energy Studies, could also help cut the difference between fuel costs.”

    translation rich people that get air heat pumps first, will benefit, whilst poorer people that can’t afford to replace the gas central heating and hot water system, have their their fuel costs (domestic gas) raised by taxes..

    this will not end well.


  25. Here’s a tweet posted today by one of the “experts” from weekend 2

    Compare Leo’s tone to that of Paul Biggs who he was replying to.

    And again:

    In the last few minutes he wrote some vague threat, ‘don’t test me on my mentions’. No idea what that’s supposed to mean.


  26. i had a tin foil tweet from Leo.. aswell… not a pleasant chap is he.. (must be all the arrests)

    (don’t forget the anti trump ballon he organised. and special advisor to Clivae lewis.. he also seem sto think we are all going to die at 8C.. )

    this found it’s way to a few people (6 select committees when I get around to it)

    Speaker Leo Murray – Possible organisation -speaking as an advocate
    (no other bio information for the assembly members)

    His organisation Possible (10:10 rebranded) had and is received funding from the Esmee Fairbairn Foundation (despite Esmee funding the climate assembly, but saying they have no influence)

    Public should have been made aware of his climate and political activism/lobbying and his anti-science, anti-car, anti-nuclear belief..

    A climate activists who is Wrong about science:

    New Green radicals Leo Murray
    Why do you think we need green radicals at a time like this?

    [LEO]The business-as-usual scenarios are the baseline for what we would expect if we keep on our current trajectory, and in those scenarios, we all die. That’s not an overstatement. Business-as-usual will give us seven or eight degrees of warming, and whole regions of Earth become uninhabitable to human life in that scenario, so there is evidently a need to do business differently. ” – Leo Murray

    8C of warming is insane, no scientist is saying earth uninhabitable and we are all going to die.
    In fact business as usual wasn’t and 6C is off the agrend

    Radical professional serial Climate activist (anti-aviation)

    Leo Murray is the co-founder (along with Franny Armstrong) of the anti-aviation Plane Stupid Climate activist group. And then a director of the 10:10 Climate action group.
    10:10 recently rebranded as Possible, which is how he was introduced. He has been arrested numerous times taking direct action, including chaining himself to a runway at Stanstead.

    As 10:10 campaign director, lobbyist for total decarbonisation alongside

    Leo Murray 10:10 Bill McKibben Founder, Naomi Klein Writer and activist Caroline Lucas MP Green party John Sauven Executive director, Greenpeace
    Craig Bennett CEO, Friends of the Earth Ann Pettifor Prime Economics
    Anti Car climate activist (wants to ban all private cars)
    Like many climate and environmental activist netzero is not enough, they want to make profound changes to peoples lifestyles (ie nuclea power and Evs would not be acceptable to them

    Guardian: I applaud Bristol for banning diesel vehicles. But why not ban all private cars? – Leo Murray

    Anti nuclear it seems (like most climate activists)

    Political lobbyists activist (Labour) – he is/was a Labour political advisor
    Leo Murray was the brainchild organiser of the anti-Trump balloon in London. And An Advisor to Clive Lewis MP. And supported Mcdonnell’s4 day week

    Leo Murray – Jul 12, 2018
    Beyond excited to get started on helping Clive to bring environmental economics into the heart of Labour’s programme for government this summer

    Clive Lewis MP
    @labourlewis Jul 12, 2018
    Really pleased to announce the brain child
    of #TrumpBaby @crisortunity is coming to work for my office on sustainability economics. Good luck tomw! #StopTrump…

    Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell, who has previously backed a four-day working week, said: ‘This is a vital contribution to the growing debate around free time and reducing the working week.’
    Leo Murray, adviser to Shadow Treasury minister Clive Lewis, said: ‘I like this take a lot.’


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.