"Currants Bw..."

[Mac76]

https://metro.co.uk/2023/05/23/rolf-harris-dies-aged-93-after-neck-cancer-battle-18830226/

Rolf :rose:

Shame he was a wrong 'un. Was a big fan back in the day.

Always remember he opened the main stage at Glasto in the 90s when his version of Stairway to Heaven was doing well, it was a good way to start the day

Like you say shame he was a wrong 'un cos he was a talented performer

[Letters]

He was a brilliant performer and entertainer.
Saw him a couple of times live and he was good value.
When he was originally Yewtree'd, I did initially try and minimise in my head what he'd done.
But having looked into the details, it wasn't good. Shame.

[HCZ_Reborn]

He was a brilliant performer and entertainer.
Saw him a couple of times live and he was good value.
When he was originally Yewtree'd, I did initially try and minimise in my head what he'd done.
But having looked into the details, it wasn't good. Shame.

You don’t spend years on television unless you are popular (unless it’s Mrs Browns Boys)

But it’s an essential betrayal (though of course not a betrayal anywhere near the scale of those he abused)…deceiving us all into believing he was this amiable slightly cringeworthy light entertainer. Not a shred of remorse or willingness to accept responsibility. I’m one of the strongest advocates of separating the art from the person, but in his case the art was as much selling himself and ingratiating himself to us as it was the actual physical art.

[Letters]

You don’t spend years on television unless you are popular (unless it’s Mrs Browns Boys)
:lol: Yes, that show being on continues to be a mystery for the ages.


But it’s an essential betrayal (though of course not a betrayal anywhere near the scale of those he abused)…deceiving us all into believing he was this amiable slightly cringeworthy light entertainer.
I dunno. I mean do we really expect the people we see on TV to be like that in real life? Mr Rodgers in the US apparently really was as nice and genial as he appeared on screen but with most presenters...sure, it's a bit disappointing if they're dicks in real life but is it really a big surprise? We surely understand that even as presenters they are playing a part.


Not a shred of remorse or willingness to accept responsibility.
Yes. I mean, obviously what he did was reprehensible, but his constant doubling down about having done nothing wrong compounds it.
I do know someone who met him once and apparently he was a bit of an arrogant prick.

[HCZ_Reborn]

:lol: Yes, that show being on continues to be a mystery for the ages.


I dunno. I mean do we really expect the people we see on TV to be like that in real life? Mr Rodgers in the US apparently really was as nice and genial as he appeared on screen but with most presenters...sure, it's a bit disappointing if they're dicks in real life but is it really a big surprise? We surely understand that even as presenters they are playing a part.


Yes. I mean, obviously what he did was reprehensible, but his constant doubling down about having done nothing wrong compounds it.
I do know someone who met him once and apparently he was a bit of an arrogant prick.


No not completely. But there’s a difference between being someone who is generally ok but can be a prima Donna, a bit of a dick etc and someone who beneath the facade is a complete monster.

The thing with Jimmy Saville, is that he couldn’t hide what he was…the strange thing is that someone who was even on the surface quite a dodgy character and who seemed to be straining to confess what he really was and whilst it’s easy to look upon it in retrospect, it was so obvious that he was a wrong un that we feel more like hostages than a willing tv audience.

Harris was completely chameleonic, all the way down to the crocodile tears he’d weep when a dog had to be put to sleep on Animal Hospital.

And I’m not stating for a fact that this was a betrayal, more that it feels like one. What’s factual is the trust of the people he betrayed when he attacked them

[Letters]

No not completely. But there’s a difference between being someone who is generally ok but can be a prima Donna, a bit of a dick etc and someone who beneath the facade is a complete monster
Well, sure. It's difficult with stuff like this. A friend of mine can't listen to Michael Jackson now because of the allegations. To me...I mean, Jackson is, famously, dead. He doesn't benefit from me listening to his songs. So I'm still able to enjoy the music. I'm not going to tell my friend he's wrong to boycott though.


The thing with Jimmy Saville, is that he couldn’t hide what he was…the strange thing is that someone who was even on the surface quite a dodgy character and who seemed to be straining to confess what he really was and whilst it’s easy to look upon it in retrospect, it was so obvious that he was a wrong un that we feel more like hostages than a willing tv audience.
I enjoyed his shows as a kid but he was always odd to say the least. I don't think it was obvious that he was quite as horrible as it turned out though.


Harris was completely chameleonic, all the way down to the crocodile tears he’d weep when a dog had to be put to sleep on Animal Hospital.
There are some people like Fred West who are unremittingly evil, but that's rare.
With Harris, I don't think that it's a given that because he sexually abused young women that means he didn't have real emotions and could be genuinely sad at a dog being put down.
He wasn't a Bond or cartoon villain.

To me it was a disappointment rather than a betrayal that he turned out to be a wrong 'un. I didn't feel personally let down because I didn't know him personally, but it was a shame that one of my heroes turned out to be a serial sexual abuser.

[HCZ_Reborn]

Well, sure. It's difficult with stuff like this. A friend of mine can't listen to Michael Jackson now because of the allegations. To me...I mean, Jackson is, famously, dead. He doesn't benefit from me listening to his songs. So I'm still able to enjoy the music. I'm not going to tell my friend he's wrong to boycott though.


I enjoyed his shows as a kid but he was always odd to say the least. I don't think it was obvious that he was quite as horrible as it turned out though.


There are some people like Fred West who are unremittingly evil, but that's rare.
With Harris, I don't think that it's a given that because he sexually abused young women that means he didn't have real emotions and could be genuinely sad at a dog being put down.
He wasn't a Bond or cartoon villain.

To me it was a disappointment rather than a betrayal that he turned out to be a wrong 'un. I didn't feel personally let down because I didn't know him personally, but it was a shame that one of my heroes turned out to be a serial sexual abuser.

Saville was odd but he was also literally stating that his charity work was a way of making sure he didn’t go to hell for his sins, not only once but several times did he claim this on tv. But people just assumed he was joking


Michael Jackson was a musician, what he was selling was his music. Harris was selling himself to the British tv watching audience, his art was more intangible than just his drawings or his wobble board etc

Again it’s all speculation on my part, but I find it hard to believe that someone who can abuse children like he did and not feel even the slightest hint of remorse for it, is likely to be genuinely choked up by a dog dying….but who knows

Australian girl I knew well (who sadly died last year from a blood clot) told me before the allegations surfaced that Harris was a piece of shit. There’s a verse in Tie me Kangaroo Sport, which sums up his views on race.

[Letters]

The person I know who met him - it was at some charity she worked at or something, he was visiting for some reason. Anyway, she said he strutted round the place like the big I Am. She wasn't impressed.

[WMUG]

https://youtu.be/qRPEDemCA1s

:d

[Letters]

:lol: Yes, this is why we decided to go for monotheism to stop all those silly arguments.

[Letters]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-65698529

Brexit :bow:

Probably :shrug:

[HCZ_Reborn]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-65698529

Brexit :bow:

Probably :shrug:


Could possibly be Brexit as the Tata group are an Indian company and the Indian government do want a bilateral trade agreement with the UK (though probably we aren’t so keen as it will mean importing a lot of Indians with STEM degrees which could be a sore subject)

[HCZ_Reborn]

RIP Tina Turner

This is someone who was undisputedly a great talent and a class act

[Letters]

Tbh I didn’t know she was still alive

[Mac76]

RIP Tina Turner

This is someone who was undisputedly a great talent and a class act

I would dispute it, if only because jumping around in a fur bikini in her 50s wasn't a great look IMO

Oh and the songs were shit too

Still RIP

[Letters]

She was alright and did some decent songs.
I hadn’t realised she was so old, I think of her an 80s star, she was very big when I was a kid.
I hadn’t realised she’d had a whole career before that.

[Letters]

Knickers. Looks like Netflix have made good on their threat to block accounts being shared between households.

We hadn't finished The Crown. No Spoilers :(

[HCZ_Reborn]

Knickers. Looks like Netflix have made good on their threat to block accounts being shared between households.

We hadn't finished The Crown. No Spoilers :(


I wouldn’t mind they used to literally encourage this by allowing people to have different profiles


If you’re sharing your password with like a hundred different people that’s one thing, but if it’s just people in the same household just paying for the one account…that’s just them being fucking greedy


I use other peoples accounts for Amazon Prime and BritBox

[Letters]

Yeah, a colleague shared her Disney+ details so I'm riding on those coat-tails.
But with this Netflix thing, a friend has an account which allows however many profiles/devices. I'm sharing the cost with her so why would Netflix care that we're different households? I mean, obviously money. But I suspect this may backfire and more people will leave them. I haven't decided what to do although the new Sky packages come with Netflix. I need to sort out my Sky subscription as the price has gone through the roof and I can't really justify the cost. So while I'm there maybe I can sort this out too.

[Letters]

Political Correctness gone mad, I tells you

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-65700288

[HCZ_Reborn]

http://https://twitter.com/fourbytwo_/status/1662188694973890560?s=46&t=n1tnxEg6k_DvSqUkaQFrjw (https://twitter.com/fourbytwo_/status/1662188694973890560?s=46&t=n1tnxEg6k_DvSqUkaQFrjw)


https://player.bfi.org.uk/sites/default/files/hero-images/430e00d4adb0739739ca38c22061255a.jpg


Pederast Dude!

[Niall_Quinn]

Political Correctness gone mad, I tells you

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-65700288

After all this time, some people STILL visit the BBC web site. The question "why" is now so far removed from reason I guess we'll need some more weirdness from quantum physics to explain it. Lie after lie after lie after lie, but still the nipple is bruised by the worship.

[Letters]

Lie after lie after lie after lie
Should I just point out again the two stories to declared to be “fake news” at the start of the pandemic, both of which were true?

[HCZ_Reborn]

After all this time, some people STILL visit the BBC web site. The question "why" is now so far removed from reason I guess we'll need some more weirdness from quantum physics to explain it. Lie after lie after lie after lie, but still the nipple is bruised by the worship.

The issue with this story is beyond the rather limited spectrum of truth or lie and that why is it a story to begin with

One girl thinks that a book by Steinbeck shouldn’t be on the curriculum. Who cares? I don’t think Thomas Hardy should be taught as an exemplar of English literature because his writing is numbingly dull, and his omniscient narration where he becomes God within his own fiction and strikes misfortune upon all those that do not meet his values is borderline psychotic.

But that’s just my opinion, one that certainly doesn’t merit a news story, regardless of whether my skin tone is it’s actual Caucasian complexion or if I was as black as the ace of spades.

[Letters]

Aye, that’s a good point.
A lot of these stories about “people outraged by …”
They really mean “a few idiots on Twitter”.

[Niall_Quinn]

Should I just point out again the two stories to declared to be “fake news” at the start of the pandemic, both of which were true?

Erm, okay?

[Niall_Quinn]

But we'll have to run them through BBC Verify :haha:

Priceless. It's incredible isn't it?

[Letters]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-65746524

Well, we’ve had a good run.
I, for one, welcome our digital overlords

[Niall_Quinn]

M&S trialling cashless payments. Plenty of fuckwit corporations have already bowed to this, but institutions like M&S mean we are in the final stages of the cashless society. I'm guessing many people don't have a clue what this means for them and many probably welcome it for the convenience. But, thank fuck, an increasing number realise what cashless is all about and how it represents the final straw that, if plucked, will de facto remove all civil liberties and freedoms from the vast majority of citizens. Once the state can track (bad) and control (existential) your ability to buy and sell in real time we've reached a point where stopping the march of authoritarianism becomes all but impossible, barring bloody revolution.

I can seek posts here of concerned folks standing up to rowdy kids in cinemas. But will they go as far as to defend the liberties of those same kids for the sake of the whole society and the relative (because we have already lost so much) freedom of mankind?

I doubt it. Most will defend this final brick being knocked away. Without ever understanding what it is they relinquished without a murmur, let alone a fight.

We absolutely MUST oppose the cashless society. If we can't make a stand here then we're done. Finished. Lost without a trace. If you think you can't do anything about it then do something anyway. Protest loudly in every establishment that refuses cash. Fill up a basket, make them check it all out and then offer to pay by cash. When they refuse inform them they have broken the law and are endorsing the authoritarian state and discriminating against those who prefer liberty, particularly the elderly who grew up with cash, understand it and innately appreciate its importance.

Centrally controlled digital currencies (the mark of the beast) will hand to the state total, realtime control of YOUR currency that you EARNED with YOUR labour. The state (the beast) using AI control systems will be able to decide what you can purchase, when you can purchase and how much of your labour should be automatically stolen at source. ALL this data will be shared with corporations such as insurance companies, credit agencies, local authoritarians, mainstream spammers such as the energy companies. Your entire existence will become defined by your financial record. YOU as a "person" will become that financial record. Everything else that you are will be of no relevance.

Oh dear. Tin-foil hat? Except if you live in a Chinese city. Then it's very, very real. And M&S have just announced it's coming here at breakneck speed.

Act now or forget about ever acting again.

[HCZ_Reborn]

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/box-office-the-little-mermaid-gets-doused-in-china-south-korea-after-racist-backlash-1235505682/

Gosh who knew that Oriental countries (or the biggest foreign market) hugely dislike Black people (truth be told it’s actually a pretty mutual dislike)

It’s almost as if Racism isn’t about western imperialism

[Mac76]

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/box-office-the-little-mermaid-gets-doused-in-china-south-korea-after-racist-backlash-1235505682/

Gosh who knew that Oriental countries (or the biggest foreign market) hugely dislike Black people (truth be told it’s actually a pretty mutual dislike)

It’s almost as if Racism isn’t about western imperialism

but really we have to ask why you post this piece in particular rather than an article on, say, the life cycle of trees or, as another example, different types of tarmac - instead you post this, which gives the appearance of warped priorities, in this case apparently attempting to present racial prejudice as excusable because everyone's at it...

[HCZ_Reborn]

but really we have to ask why you post this piece in particular rather than an article on, say, the life cycle of trees or, as another example, different types of tarmac - instead you post this, which gives the appearance of warped priorities, in this case apparently attempting to present racial prejudice as excusable because everyone's at it...

:haha:

That’s interesting that you took that from this?

I never said racial prejudice is acceptable (sorry excusable). I think it’s absurd because the difference between us as human beings is completely superficial….it’s about as sensible to judge people on hair colour or eye colour as it is skin colour.

I’m taking aim at the ridiculous argument that to point out that China is a massively racist country, is racist

I do genuinely believe that in western media there is a relatively parochial attitude towards racism as well as this morbid desire for things to be racist. The American media suggests that African Americans are disproportionately more likely to die as a result of interaction with law enforcement, when the evidence shows that although per capita African Americans are more likely to have confrontations with the police it’s actually whites for whom this confrontation is more likely to be deadly.

But African Americans are far more affluent than at any time in U.S. history, and the majority fall under the category of middle class. This is not to say young black men aren’t ever mistreated by the justice system and it does need reform given it’s incarceration rates, but I do tire of this middle class white guilt that presents the Anglosphere as if it’s some kind of racist dystopia.

And in this country we are far more tolerant and accepting of people with different skin colour than any other. But instead this fiction is presented that minorities are wholesale oppressed and cannot make it due to systemic racism.

I personally find China beyond the pale for many reasons, as well as the amount of money Disney make in China that makes it genuflect to a horrible oppressive regime that is attempting to commit genocide whilst I sit here and write this.

I don’t find any race inferior, but I do find cultures inferior….I find the actual Patriarchal cultures in the Middle East and South Asia inferior, and the way social services, police and politicians in this country pander to it in the UK nauseating whether it’s child grooming or honour killings.

People are more than their beliefs, but beliefs that cause otherwise decent human beings to behave inhumanely are not going to be celebrated by me in the name of diversity

[Letters]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CVgiBK-iC4M

[Letters]

Thank duck for that!

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-65823482

[Marc Overmars]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CVgiBK-iC4M

Some would say the Chinese are the most irritating race.

[Mac76]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CVgiBK-iC4M

That subtitle should go on to say "...at his own joke because he's a fat, unfunny, narcissistic bastard"

That felt good, off to bed now, see y'all tomorrow ;)

[HCZ_Reborn]

That subtitle should go on to say "...at his own joke because he's a fat, unfunny, narcissistic bastard"

That felt good, off to bed now, see y'all tomorrow ;)


I’m not really a fan of Gervais, I find his stuff hit and miss at best….I gave up on After life after one season…..the typical comedy written by a stand up, whereby the main character sucks up the oxygen from everyone else….bit like the really shit Star Trek William Shatner wrote and directed where he gave himself all the best lines

But not really sure why he commands such dislike either, he’s self regarding and self important? That’s celebrities for you. Unless you’re a Trans Radical activist (which I’m 99% sure you’re not) and he’s on your enemies list then I don’t really get it. However, there are a lot of people I can’t stand which will seem puzzling to you so there it is

[Letters]

I’m mostly a fan.
I’ve seen him do stand up a few times and always enjoyed it.
His early shows like The Office and Extras were great, the latter being better than the former in my view. Since then it’s been a bit law of diminishing returns. After Life was his best work for a while but the 3rd series wasn’t great and his writing can be lazy at times. I understand you have to exaggerate reality to an extent to create comedic situations, but he does it in a way which is cartoonish and unrealistic at times.

[Niall_Quinn]

:haha:

That’s interesting that you took that from this?

I never said racial prejudice is acceptable (sorry excusable). I think it’s absurd because the difference between us as human beings is completely superficial….it’s about as sensible to judge people on hair colour or eye colour as it is skin colour.

I’m taking aim at the ridiculous argument that to point out that China is a massively racist country, is racist

I do genuinely believe that in western media there is a relatively parochial attitude towards racism as well as this morbid desire for things to be racist. The American media suggests that African Americans are disproportionately more likely to die as a result of interaction with law enforcement, when the evidence shows that although per capita African Americans are more likely to have confrontations with the police it’s actually whites for whom this confrontation is more likely to be deadly.

But African Americans are far more affluent than at any time in U.S. history, and the majority fall under the category of middle class. This is not to say young black men aren’t ever mistreated by the justice system and it does need reform given it’s incarceration rates, but I do tire of this middle class white guilt that presents the Anglosphere as if it’s some kind of racist dystopia.

And in this country we are far more tolerant and accepting of people with different skin colour than any other. But instead this fiction is presented that minorities are wholesale oppressed and cannot make it due to systemic racism.

I personally find China beyond the pale for many reasons, as well as the amount of money Disney make in China that makes it genuflect to a horrible oppressive regime that is attempting to commit genocide whilst I sit here and write this.

I don’t find any race inferior, but I do find cultures inferior….I find the actual Patriarchal cultures in the Middle East and South Asia inferior, and the way social services, police and politicians in this country pander to it in the UK nauseating whether it’s child grooming or honour killings.

People are more than their beliefs, but beliefs that cause otherwise decent human beings to behave inhumanely are not going to be celebrated by me in the name of diversity

Bloody well said.

[Letters]

Oh dear. Tin-foil hat? Except if you live in a Chinese city. Then it's very, very real.
But...I don't. Nor do you. We live in a very different regime from China.


And M&S have just announced it's coming here at breakneck speed.
Not really. I mean, I'm a bit annoyed at certain aspects of the cashless society. These sodding parking apps. I wouldn't even mind if there was a standard one, but different parking companies use different ones. And don't get me started about having to scan QR codes at tables to order or, worse, having to download a sodding app. Some of that is me being old and grumpy, but there are legitimate concerns about accessibility for the less tech savvy.

And that's the point, there are legitimate concerns here but your mind always goes to the darkest places. Let's not go over your pandemic predictions again but when the lockdowns went on longer than expected (and longer than I think anyone can now justify, looking back), you went to some pretty dark places with where it could end. But it didn't end there, we're back to BAU now and the lockdowns and other Covid restrictions now seem like just a weird time we lived through. My gut feeling is it's the same here, there are some concerns but I don't think it's going to end in the dystopia you imagine.

[Letters]

Crocodile Jesus :bow:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-65834167

[Niall_Quinn]

The alien thing is a thing. I was joking, but they aren't. Okay, so once the alien thing is done, what's next? We found God? We found the WMD in Iraq? Or even crazier? It's a broken, broken, broken west - just the west because sane people elsewhere aren't even registering this bullshit.

[HCZ_Reborn]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-stoke-staffordshire-65882169

Aside from the fact that Roe vs Wade was a terrible ruling that left abortion as a sticking plaster solution when the political case should have been made for it in each of the 50 states, the reason it’s gone back to the states is that Liberals as they always do go too far and claim there should be no term limits.

And that’s where polarisation comes in, I think most sensible people think that Abortion should be restricted in some way, I don’t give a fuck about the sanctity of life (quality of life more important than quantity) but if viable life is considered the sole property of the womb renter what’s to stop that mentality being maintained after the child is born.

If you can go to prison for smothering a child in the cot, is flushing it out any better once it’s started to become humanoid in shape?

This woman gave knowingly false information and then gave herself up when she felt bad, I can’t see personally the public interest in a custodial sentence but some kind of punishment does seem appropriate

[Niall_Quinn]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-stoke-staffordshire-65882169

Aside from the fact that Roe vs Wade was a terrible ruling that left abortion as a sticking plaster solution when the political case should have been made for it in each of the 50 states, the reason it’s gone back to the states is that Liberals as they always do go too far and claim there should be no term limits.

And that’s where polarisation comes in, I think most sensible people think that Abortion should be restricted in some way, I don’t give a fuck about the sanctity of life (quality of life more important than quantity) but if viable life is considered the sole property of the womb renter what’s to stop that mentality being maintained after the child is born.

If you can go to prison for smothering a child in the cot, is flushing it out any better once it’s started to become humanoid in shape?

This woman gave knowingly false information and then gave herself up when she felt bad, I can’t see personally the public interest in a custodial sentence but some kind of punishment does seem appropriate

Maybe you aren't aware but post birth "abortion" is already a thing. And if you listen to some of the cultists on the "left" (with Satan) go on about it you'd think they had just been raped, gassed and had their safe zone invaded for not being able to murder children. Yes, most sensible people understand individual circumstances require specific consideration. But most sensible people aren't making policy. The east and west coast of the States have become vast lunatic asylums, which is why there's a stampede to leave and go to American states.

[Niall_Quinn]

You can confine the context of this to the literal or you can use your imagination as to where our society is headed. Fast.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NfiIXooD77s

What happens if Alexa gets offended at something it picks up in your "castle"? Or when tireless and remorseless AIs start trawling everything on the net and rapidly building profiles from all the personal data stolen on a daily basis by the large corporations who pretend to protect your privacy?

Like so much of the language, "smart" is anything but.

Even today, I tried to order 4 tyres from KwikFit over the phone because their crappy web site doesn't work. When it came to the extortion part my card was declines because the company has no mechanism to handle 3D authentication over the phone. Wondering why they couldn't tell me that before we went through the whole order process? Or maybe it's just some banks that have gone all the way in dicking their "stakeholders" around? Whatever - DECLINED.

So I go on the web and do it all over again, this time with the stupid code (that doesn't protect you ONE BIT if you know what's happening in the background). DECLINED.

So I call the asshole bank and they ask, was that you trying to make a payment to KWIKFIT LTD (or whatever) using your correct card details and CCV and then the correct 2FA code? Well I FUCKING HOPE SO! Or else what's the point of the whole song and dance routine just to enjoy the "convenience" of buying online?

The whole thing is so ridiculous now. What could have been a simple order over the phone and pay the engineer cash when you are satisfied with the job has become, no, we don't accept cash, please use our shiny web site and your shitty "smart" phone and your crappy bank's fucked up security that provides no security to conduct a "convenient" transaction.

Is anyone else loving how easy it has all become?

[Letters]

https://metro.co.uk/2023/06/19/bebe-rexha-shows-off-horrific-injury-after-being-hit-in-face-by-phone-18977426

Horrific :lol:

[Letters]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-65981876

:lol:

[Mac76]

https://metro.co.uk/2023/06/19/bebe-rexha-shows-off-horrific-injury-after-being-hit-in-face-by-phone-18977426

Horrific :lol:

And a woman being hit in the face is funny because...?

Oh of course, she's a woman who's dared to be famous, which is of course a crime :rolleyes:

[HCZ_Reborn]

And a woman being hit in the face is funny because...?

Oh of course, she's a woman who's dared to be famous, which is of course a crime :rolleyes:


I think he’s laughing at the idea that someone who paid to go to a concert would throw a not inexpensive item at the performer.

You know there’s no women here right? You don’t have to take offence on their behalf. I’m pretty sure no one here genuinely thinks assaulting women is ok (although I’m totally ok with jokes about it)

[Letters]

And a woman being hit in the face is funny because...?

Oh of course, she's a woman who's dared to be famous, which is of course a crime :rolleyes:

Are you
1) A women and
2) On your period?

I literally quoted the word that amused me.
These were not “horrific” injuries. It’s the ridiculous exaggeration which amused.

[HCZ_Reborn]

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2023/06/21/man-drugged-wife-51-men-rape-court-hears-france/

Now here is violence against a woman that is genuinely horrific

However I know this sounds terrible but I’d have questions, Lorazepam is a powerful antipsychotic but i have doubts over whether it would send you into a deep enough sleep that you wouldn’t wake up whilst someone was raping you.

Or if he was giving it to her in sufficient doses to bring about that effect, she would have become seriously ill in the time frame we are talking about not just fatigue and the obvious gynaecological problems

Yes I get he wouldn’t have been doing this to her every night, but in the dose required to knock her out…you’d be looking at organ damage

[Marc Overmars]

So they’ve found debris from the sub that went missing.

Pretty safe to say they’re dead now.

[Letters]

So they’ve found debris from the sub that went missing.

Pretty safe to say they’re dead now.

I mean, that was all but inevitable from the start really - certainly after the first day, it seemed vanishingly unlikely they'd be found.
Hopefully it was a rapid implosion, that would have at least been mercifully quick.
Spending days trapped in there with no realistic hope of survival would have been grim.

[HCZ_Reborn]

I mean, that was all but inevitable from the start really - certainly after the first day, it seemed vanishingly unlikely they'd be found.
Hopefully it was a rapid implosion, that would have at least been mercifully quick.
Spending days trapped in there with no realistic hope of survival would have been grim.

That’s my feeling, in fact it’s what I hoped had happened from the outset rather than a slow death from oxygen depletion

[Marc Overmars]

Has to be the worst way to go. Stuck in a cramped space with other people slowly suffocating to death.

Sounds like it might have just imploded so hopefully that was indeed the case.

[Niall_Quinn]

Are you
1) A women and
2) On your period?

I literally quoted the word that amused me.
These were not “horrific” injuries. It’s the ridiculous exaggeration which amused.

I'll tell you what's horrific. The idea, with so much going on in the world, this is what you take precious time out to occupy yourself with. Can you not see how much of your life is being drained by clickbait trivia? and then, even though this is "news" you'll claim the news is serious, with a straight face.

Not picking on you specifically, but so many people need to get a grip and start facing the realities that are materialising, apparently unnoticed, right under their noses.

[HCZ_Reborn]

Has to be the worst way to go. Stuck in a cramped space with other people slowly suffocating to death.

Sounds like it might have just imploded so hopefully that was indeed the case.


Mate of mine applied to be a submariner about ten years ago (ultimately because of a lung infection he’d had earlier on in his life he was considered medically unfit) but he talked to me a lot about the process and how the naval recruiter told him he’d rather stick pins in his eyes than spend any length of time serving on board a submarine.

Cramped, hot and there’s a constant risk of implosion because of the intense pressure at certain depths, but the one thing was told to him was that an implosion of that kind meant that the last thing you’d hear was a loud creaking noise but the exposure to such intense pressure would cause instant brain death and you’d have absolutely no idea of what had happened…no fear, no pain just instant demise.

[Niall_Quinn]

So they’ve found debris from the sub that went missing.

Pretty safe to say they’re dead now.

So? Why is that in any way worthy of mention? FIVE people? When maybe 5,000 have died over the last week in a "counteroffensive" (suicide mission) in Ukraine, paid for by our tax revenue, instigated by the government the majority of our voters endorsed. There are genuine tragedies happening right now. And there are distractions meant to stop you looking where it would be inconvenient to look.

[HCZ_Reborn]

I'll tell you what's horrific. The idea, with so much going on in the world, this is what you take precious time out to occupy yourself with. Can you not see how much of your life is being drained by clickbait trivia? and then, even though this is "news" you'll claim the news is serious, with a straight face.

Not picking on you specifically, but so many people need to get a grip and start facing the realities that are materialising, apparently unnoticed, right under their noses.


Your problem here is most of what you regard as going on under peoples noses is to the rest of us utter bullshit, that’s no definitive judgement on whether we should consider it so or not but ultimately as I’m sure I’ve said to you before this difference is unreconcilable.

So if you’re looking to hit the alarm for us to suddenly put aside minutiae and trivia to pay attention to the real dangers, you’re kind of wasting your time.

But then equally my trying to convince you that you’re wasting your time is probably just as futile

[Niall_Quinn]

Your problem here is most of what you regard as going on under peoples noses is to the rest of us utter bullshit, that’s no definitive judgement on whether we should consider it so or not but ultimately as I’m sure I’ve said to you before this difference is unreconcilable.

So if you’re looking to hit the alarm for us to suddenly put aside minutiae and trivia to pay attention to the real dangers, you’re kind of wasting your time.

But then equally my trying to convince you that you’re wasting your time is probably just as futile

Even if any of what you just said had an ounce of validity, even if the ONLY event that happened on planet earth was this mindless "news" piece - WHY would you waste the time on it? Anyone who does must have zero respect for their own life essence.

[HCZ_Reborn]

Even if any of what you just said had an ounce of validity, even if the ONLY event that happened on planet earth was this mindless "news" piece - WHY would you waste the time on it? Anyone who does must have zero respect for their own life essence.

I don’t know if you’ve noticed it but human beings are incredibly adept at wasting time on banality

If they weren’t, there would be no market for dross like Love Island

And if it’s all part of an insidious plot to re-direct people?

Well all I’ll say is that they haven’t had to try very hard

[Niall_Quinn]

I don’t know if you’ve noticed it but human beings are incredibly adept at wasting time on banality

If they weren’t, there would be no market for dross like Love Island

And if it’s all part of an insidious plot to re-direct people?

Well all I’ll say is that they haven’t had to try very hard

Which brings us back to my complaint - they haven't had to try very hard, or at all. Some people are willingly mindless. And I'm wondering, is that a conscious decision, or a biological state, or a political ideology? I don't get it. What's the pay-off for consuming irrelevancies? Obviously this affliction goes way beyond this forum. Somebody explain it to me. Being in possession of a human brain, what makes people attrit that brain at every opportunity? Why is it desirable to be stupid?

[WMUG]

I don’t know if you’ve noticed it but human beings are incredibly adept at wasting time on banality

If they weren’t, there would be no market for dross like Arsenal

:gp:

[WMUG]

Which brings us back to my complaint - they haven't had to try very hard, or at all. Some people are willingly mindless. And I'm wondering, is that a conscious decision, or a biological state, or a political ideology? I don't get it. What's the pay-off for consuming irrelevancies? Obviously this affliction goes way beyond this forum. Somebody explain it to me. Being in possession of a human brain, what makes people attrit that brain at every opportunity? Why is it desirable to be stupid?

Mate, you're on a football forum :lol:

[Niall_Quinn]

Mate, you're on a football forum :lol:

Yes, I knew that already. Your point being?

[HCZ_Reborn]

Yes, I knew that already. Your point being?

I think he’s stating that there’s an irony in bemoaning banal conversation on a platform intended to facilitate banal conversation

[Niall_Quinn]

I think he’s stating that there’s an irony in bemoaning banal conversation on a platform intended to facilitate banal conversation

Yeah, I knew that too. I wanted to hear him state his meagre point, in the defence of banality delivered by supposedly intelligent souls at a time where there are so many significant topics of imminent importance that oughtn't be beyond the wit of the supposedly intelligent to consider on the "Currents" thread. As you have probably seen, the media continues to feast on the five dead occupants of their blatant Hollywood product posing as news. Meanwhile we are on the very real brink of nuclear war, the west has been subverted to the point of being non-functional and the antithesis of everything it was engineered (in blood, sweat and tears) to be, and science itself has been cast into the dustbin. The very foundations of culture and civilisation dying and the species itself set to suffer the same fate if trends continue, and not because of anything some little cunt who excels in truant is selling.

So yes, I can see why celeb news is super important and all. And I also accept this is a football forum. But I also wonder what significance either will have if we are crawling around the radioactive dust or applying black leeches as the next great breakthrough in science.

It's possible that sometimes the trivia and the fun and games are only possible if serious people take the time to deal with serious matters. Yet I find it interesting that as the urgency grows the trivia flows at a greater rate of knots.

It's almost as if the seemingly stupid aren't stupid at all, instead just evil.

[HCZ_Reborn]

The last time I actually bothered to engage with you, you and I’m sure it was quite earnest on your part stated that female commentators were a slippery slope towards legalised paedophilia…so whilst I have concerns about many aspects of what is happening with western culture I simply don’t have it within me to take your raising the alarm on this matter particularly seriously.
My very earnest opinion is that you’ve evolved from libertarian crank to just a full blown crank. Even someone as pedestrian as Letters can spot the bullshit in what you proclaim to be the self evident truth happening right under our noses.
For me the trick has always been to stay skeptical without the whole “we are through the looking glass”. Also as you well know banality is a form of escapism, so even if any of the highly specious ravings you’ve entered into had any weight in reality…the most human reaction would be to look for distraction from the dystopian.

[Niall_Quinn]

The last time I actually bothered to engage with you, you and I’m sure it was quite earnest on your part stated that female commentators were a slippery slope towards legalised paedophilia…so whilst I have concerns about many aspects of what is happening with western culture I simply don’t have it within me to take your raising the alarm on this matter particularly seriously.
My very earnest opinion is that you’ve evolved from libertarian crank to just a full blown crank. Even someone as pedestrian as Letters can spot the bullshit in what you proclaim to be the self evident truth happening right under our noses.
For me the trick has always been to stay skeptical without the whole “we are through the looking glass”. Also as you well know banality is a form of escapism, so even if any of the highly specious ravings you’ve entered into had any weight in reality…the most human reaction would be to look for distraction from the dystopian.

Yeah okay, nice reach. So back to the point you have also invested in avoiding. You can pretend it's MY NEWS if you want. But it's still the actual news. Should you care to notice it. Happening as I type this. But I also guess there's some concert going on somewhere where shit will happen, and maybe there's a kid somewhere who's going to get millions for not being much a footballer. Depends what your priorities are in a time of crisis.

It's okay, I was kidding. You can go back to sleep now.

[HCZ_Reborn]

Yeah okay, nice reach. So back to the point you have also invested in avoiding. You can pretend it's MY NEWS if you want. But it's still the actual news. Should you care to notice it. Happening as I type this. But I also guess there's some concert going on somewhere where shit will happen, and maybe there's a kid somewhere who's going to get millions for not being much a footballer. Depends what your priorities are in a time of crisis.

It's okay, I was kidding. You can go back to sleep now.


There’s news and there’s your interpretation of that news, and I don’t have to pretend that your interpretation of that news is deeply subjective (although not especially original though I’m not going to suggest you’re claiming to be)

But help me out here, are you literally stating that we believe the same stuff as you we just can’t admit it ourselves?

[Niall_Quinn]

There’s news and there’s your interpretation of that news, and I don’t have to pretend that your interpretation of that news is deeply subjective (although not especially original though I’m not going to suggest you’re claiming to be)

But help me out here, are you literally stating that we believe the same stuff as you we just can’t admit it ourselves?

Why can't you just argue on the point instead of meandering anywhere but? I'm suggesting it's time to start focusing on important things rather than trivia, not MY things, important things that affect us all. There are times in life when that becomes necessary. The rest of the time, sure, celebs and sport and gossip and bullshit, if that's your thing. But at this particular juncture if the majority doesn't get its shit in gear we're all going to pay an increasingly costly price. All I'm saying is let's encourage some of the worst offenders to up their game. I mean why are you even disputing something so obvious?

[WMUG]

This whole discussion is essentially what this song by Bastille is about: https://youtu.be/6OLp72eLLc4

[HCZ_Reborn]

Why can't you just argue on the point instead of meandering anywhere but? I'm suggesting it's time to start focusing on important things rather than trivia, not MY things, important things that affect us all. There are times in life when that becomes necessary. The rest of the time, sure, celebs and sport and gossip and bullshit, if that's your thing. But at this particular juncture if the majority doesn't get its shit in gear we're all going to pay an increasingly costly price. All I'm saying is let's encourage some of the worst offenders to up their game. I mean why are you even disputing something so obvious?


That’s the point, I don’t agree with you that humanity or western civilisation is at this crucial juncture

And certainly even if I did, my diagnosis would be completely different from yours to make any engagement with you on it rendered meaningless.

Therefore why not quibble over trivia and minutiae because at least can see it for what it is. Rather than engaging in the extreme hubris of believing can galvanise change.

My honest advice to you, if you think that we collectively need to get our shit together be the change you want to see, rather than condemning yourself to exasperated frustration that a few people on a football forum aren’t realising the gravity of the situation.

[Mac76]

finally - HCZ v NQ - this one could roll on for years... :popcorn:

[HCZ_Reborn]

finally - HCZ v NQ - this one could roll on for years... :popcorn:

I’m sorry to disappoint you but it’s not going to happen

The replies on things like transfers and the petty bickering that I’m only too delighted to engage in are relatively undemanding in terms of my time. He is in my view getting uppity because Letters is the only one who will probably debate him on things, like with me brevity is not his friend so I’d have to spend a reasonable amount of time just reading the voluminous comments he will make. And TL:DR is a bit of an obnoxious comment to make when actually honestly debating with someone.

In some ways I’ll just get some small measure of pleasure from the belief that he’s becoming genuinely aggrieved that we don’t take his claims as solid clear as daylight fact, at this point I do believe he thinks I’m gaslighting him

[Niall_Quinn]

That’s the point, I don’t agree with you that humanity or western civilisation is at this crucial juncture

And certainly even if I did, my diagnosis would be completely different from yours to make any engagement with you on it rendered meaningless.

Therefore why not quibble over trivia and minutiae because at least can see it for what it is. Rather than engaging in the extreme hubris of believing can galvanise change.

My honest advice to you, if you think that we collectively need to get our shit together be the change you want to see, rather than condemning yourself to exasperated frustration that a few people on a football forum aren’t realising the gravity of the situation.

Be the change you want to be? But don't disturb anyone in the process? You've literally just advised me to do what I actually did. But you don't like the result of your honest advice because MY beliefs somehow make the reality less real? You could have just said, "Not interested", rather than arguing yourself up your own arsehole to avoid a simple point. That's fine. I suggested people take a break from trivia at this rather important time. You say it's not important at all because you don't agree with MY analysis of the situation. Tell me how that works again and how it has anything to do with me.

A million zombies are no use to anyone.

[HCZ_Reborn]

Be the change you want to be? But don't disturb anyone in the process? You've literally just advised me to do what I actually did. But you don't like the result of your honest advice because MY beliefs somehow make the reality less real? You could have just said, "Not interested", rather than arguing yourself up your own arsehole to avoid a simple point. That's fine. I suggested people take a break from trivia at this rather important time. You say it's not important at all because you don't agree with MY analysis of the situation. Tell me how that works again and how it has anything to do with me.

A million zombies are no use to anyone.


I’m pretty sure I’ve told you I’m not interested in every single way possible. And I can’t speak for anyone else but I can venture the view that I don’t think anyone else is either.

Be the change you want to see would surely involve you making this call to arms with like minded people, whilst I have an admiration for your stoicism in being the hammer and telling everyone they are surrounded by nails….this is a variation on a theme that you’ve been doing for years….long before I left here in 2018 in fact.

That said, All I can say is if you’re not frustrated by the fact that you’ve made no progress at all, by all means carry on and I’ll stop making suggestions

[Niall_Quinn]

I’m sorry to disappoint you but it’s not going to happen

The replies on things like transfers and the petty bickering that I’m only too delighted to engage in are relatively undemanding in terms of my time. He is in my view getting uppity because Letters is the only one who will probably debate him on things, like with me brevity is not his friend so I’d have to spend a reasonable amount of time just reading the voluminous comments he will make. And TL:DR is a bit of an obnoxious comment to make when actually honestly debating with someone.

In some ways I’ll just get some small measure of pleasure from the belief that he’s becoming genuinely aggrieved that we don’t take his claims as solid clear as daylight fact, at this point I do believe he thinks I’m gaslighting him

Of course it won't happen, he says. Before laying out the provocation for a response. Seasoned with increasing self deprecation. What a tasty dish to lay before the guy he definitely doesn't want to talk to.

You got it all wrong. I did my talking. Pages and pages of it over years. Not so much recently, you must have noticed? It's all been said. There are enough, right under your nose, examples to allow even the most feeble-minded to raise a quizzical glance. And they are. Which is why we've gone from lone tin-foil hat nutters in mummy's basement to 50% of the country being deplorable and racist and extreme, or whatever the hell you reasonable folks are calling inquiring minds these days.

[Niall_Quinn]

I’m pretty sure I’ve told you I’m not interested in every single way possible. And I can’t speak for anyone else but I can venture the view that I don’t think anyone else is either.

Be the change you want to see would surely involve you making this call to arms with like minded people, whilst I have an admiration for your stoicism in being the hammer and telling everyone they are surrounded by nails….this is a variation on a theme that you’ve been doing for years….long before I left here in 2018 in fact.

That said, All I can say is if you’re not frustrated by the fact that you’ve made no progress at all, by all means carry on and I’ll stop making suggestions

Fuck sake - why are you responding then?

[HCZ_Reborn]

Fuck sake - why are you responding then?

Imagine a dining table where two or more people are in conversation, and another person keeps coming up to the table and asking people why they are talking about a certain topic, the two or more people might have absolutely no reason to be curious as to why this other person thinks that…but if this person persistently does it…there comes a point where someone will say to that person “what are you hoping to achieve by this?”

[Niall_Quinn]

Imagine a dining table where two or more people are in conversation, and another person keeps coming up to the table and asking people why they are talking about a certain topic, the two or more people might have absolutely no reason to be curious as to why this other person thinks that…but if this person persistently does it…there comes a point where someone will say to that person “what are you hoping to achieve by this?”

Oh, got you. I forgot about the dining room table thing.

[Niall_Quinn]

The coup has failed. It consisted of three main thrusts, Prigozhin's poorly positioned forces, Ukrainian forces behind the lines in Moscow and other Russian cities, and the Western media. All directed by the British intelligence services because the American operational protocols have collapsed due to the lack of a commander in chief. The Brits and Ukrainians were rounded up earlier in the week and eliminated. So Prigozhin had zero cards when he stupidly went ahead with the plan anyway. Now he'll be killed and his forces will be merged into the military.

One of the most dangerous moments in human history. Avoided until the next one.

[Niall_Quinn]

As for the NATO counter-offensive. Stalled and slaughtered. Hence the Titanic and the half arsed coup attempt.

That's the whole deck now. Russian economy collapsed - not quite, instead grew. Russian forces and people in mutiny - not quite, the coup didn't attract a single (not even one) supporter. Russia degraded and depleted - not quite, out manufacturing NATO at a rate of 20 to 1, cheap and cheerful still wins the day. Russia a pariah - not quite, BRICS continues to sign up eager members.

Still the west won't go to the negotiating table. Too much money still sloshing around I suppose. Hardly worth mentioning it's all paid for by the workers of the west.

Absolute fucking disaster. Donkeys led by donkeys.

[Niall_Quinn]

I'm conflicted by this one. What's that quote? Like Tony Blair going over a cliff in my new Maserati? Wasn't Blair but it works even better.

Online "news" publications have started downsizing (translation: firing their writers) so they can trial (translated: fully implement) AI systems that create news (translated: propaganda and fabricated, activist bullshit) content.

For years these so-called journalists have abused their positions so thoroughly they have left themselves open to rudimentary AI systems being able to create the same garbage they roll out on a daily basis. Of course, if they had done their jobs properly, there would be a gulf between what AI can do today and what a genuine investigative journalist can produce. Real journalists have real sources, they aren't just stenographers for the establishment. Being the latter, of course the modern journalist is up shit street because all you get is the same copy/ paste propaganda plastered across a thousand sites, which AI training systems happily lap up and can rewrite minus the spelling errors and poor grammar.

So these (let's all laugh together) "journalists" deserve to be sacked. Good riddance to bad rubbish. They've done so much damage it's high time they paid a price.

However. Replacing them with AI systems. That's out of the frying pan and into the pits of hell. It means we'll never get actual news again. The economics will be way too far in favour of automation and, coupled with the public's willingness to swallow every turd flushed at them, there will be zero incentive for any mainstream organisation to revert to real journalism. The economics simply won't allow it. In fact real journalism will be a death sentence for the publication that risks it.

But, I suppose, this isn't all doom and gloom because those who already hold the mainstream media in the contempt it deserves won't be consuming the AI sewage either. And those who lap up the current shit won't notice the difference. So the net result is a bunch of whores who have disgraced their profession being kicked onto the breadline. That's a win at least.

But the lose is going to come when AI improves. When we start getting dedicated news on an individual level, and don't worry - that's coming. Articles written JUST FOR YOU, exactly in the way you like them. Psychologically tailored to feed you precisely what you desire and demand. And that's just scraping the surface of possibilities. It will become close on impossible to rescue the current victims of the matrix. They'll be lost forever. And that's a big loss. Because they still might be in the majority.

Choppy waters ahead. A stunning, beautiful and brave new world devoid of anything stunning, beautiful or brave. And a chasm between the normies and the normals that can never be breached.

[Letters]

Can I ask you something, NQ?
What good is it doing you worrying about all this stuff?

I mean, either you’re wrong about it - in which case any worry about it is wasted, as is any preparation for it, if any is possible.
Or you’re right and there’s nothing we can do about it anyway, so what’s the point in worrying anyway?

You lament my obsession with trivia. I wouldn’t say I’m obsessed by it, but I see no sense in dwelling on darker things I can do nothing about anyway. There are situations in the world that concern me but dwelling on it seems fruitless. My nephew spent much of last year wringing his hands about Putin starting a nuclear war at any moment. I told him he was being silly because:

1) I thought he was being silly and
2) Even if he was right, what am I supposed to do about it? I can’t do anything to stop it happening, I can’t really do anything to prepare for it which would actually help if it did happen.

So, y’know, it kinda felt like a waste of energy being preoccupied by it.
My nephew said to me at one point that I could tell him he was wrong if we were all here by Christmas. Obviously I printed that out and pasted it into his Christmas card :lol:

I’m just not sure what good it’s doing you.

[GP]

Musk is such a bozo

[Niall_Quinn]

Can I ask you something, NQ?
What good is it doing you worrying about all this stuff?

I mean, either you’re wrong about it - in which case any worry about it is wasted, as is any preparation for it, if any is possible.
Or you’re right and there’s nothing we can do about it anyway, so what’s the point in worrying anyway?

You lament my obsession with trivia. I wouldn’t say I’m obsessed by it, but I see no sense in dwelling on darker things I can do nothing about anyway. There are situations in the world that concern me but dwelling on it seems fruitless. My nephew spent much of last year wringing his hands about Putin starting a nuclear war at any moment. I told him he was being silly because:

1) I thought he was being silly and
2) Even if he was right, what am I supposed to do about it? I can’t do anything to stop it happening, I can’t really do anything to prepare for it which would actually help if it did happen.

So, y’know, it kinda felt like a waste of energy being preoccupied by it.
My nephew said to me at one point that I could tell him he was wrong if we were all here by Christmas. Obviously I printed that out and pasted it into his Christmas card :lol:

I’m just not sure what good it’s doing you.

Don't worry about me. Either read it or don't.

[Niall_Quinn]

Musk is such a bozo

Show me where the bad man touched you.

[HCZ_Reborn]

Show me where the bad man touched you.

Rate Limited exceeded

Please wait a few moments and try again

[Letters]

Don't worry about me. Either read it or don't.

I did read it. I’m not really sure how to respond.
I mean, my post sort of was a response not to that specific post, more to a bunch of them.
I’m not worried about you, but I’m not clear what you’re getting out of the “old man yells at cloud” stuff. It doesn’t seem to be doing you much good

[Niall_Quinn]

I did read it. I’m not really sure how to respond.
I mean, my post sort of was a response not to that specific post, more to a bunch of them.
I’m not worried about you, but I’m not clear what you’re getting out of the “old man yells at cloud” stuff. It doesn’t seem to be doing you much good

So now you have read it you can either think about it, or ignore it and continue trying to shoot the messenger by unsubtle means which I'm guessing you think are subtle. I told you what will be happening with the mainstream media. Perhaps you find that useful to know, perhaps you don't. There's no right or wrong approach to this, no trick.

[Letters]

continue trying to shoot the messenger by unsubtle means which I'm guessing you think are subtle.
I think you infer malicious motives too much when none exist. It's why you get so much stuff wrong. I have explained this to you before, with examples.


I told you what will be happening with the mainstream media.
You also told me about the upcoming marshal law, the curfews and checkpoints, the army on the streets. You see the problem?
And the reason you got that all wrong is the same reason I gave above, combined with a deep distrust of authority.

[Niall_Quinn]

I think you infer malicious motives too much when none exist. It's why you get so much stuff wrong. I have explained this to you before, with examples.


You also told me about the upcoming marshal law, the curfews and checkpoints, the army on the streets. You see the problem?
And the reason you got that all wrong is the same reason I gave above, combined with a deep distrust of authority.

Assuming my accurate assessment of your motivation is incorrect, why are you responding? Why do you need what I said to be wrong and shown to be wrong (albeit through character assassination rather than focus on the issue), especially as I'm wrong all the time?

Are you like one of these new fact checking services that never actually discusses the facts? Irony is, you'll be out of a job soon for the very reasons I gave.

[Letters]

Assuming my accurate assessment of your motivation is incorrect, why are you responding?
I mean. It's a messageboard. I reply to things I want to respond to. Things I'm interested in, often things I diagree with and want to challenge or discuss.
In this instance, I'm genuinely interested. You spend a lot of time wringing your hands about how we're all doomed. As I said you're either
1) Wrong - in which case you're wasting a lot of time worrying about it or
2) Correct - in which case you're still wasting your time, unless you think there's anything you can do to stop it.

I'm just not sure what you're getting out of dwelling on this stuff. Is it helping your mental state?


Why do you need what I said to be wrong and shown to be wrong
I don't need you to be wrong. Obviously I hope you're wrong when you predict things like marshal law, checkpoints and curfews. Who wants that?
And thankfully you were wrong about those things. Aren't you pleased about that? Did you want curfews and marshal law?


albeit through character assassination rather than focus on the issue
It's not character assassination to say that you infer malicious motives all the time or that you have a deep distrust of authority. Both of those things are evident in many of your posts


especially as I'm wrong all the time?
I don't think you're wrong all the time. But you were wrong about some of the things I mentioned above. I regard that as a good thing.


Are you like one of these new fact checking services that never actually discusses the facts?
Well, you rarely present facts or provide sources.


Irony is, you'll be out of a job soon for the very reasons I gave.
Nah. I'm too old for that. The younger generation maybe, but I'm sceptical about how much AI will actually replace. Some things, certainly, and that's already happening. But previous revolutions in automation have simply created other jobs and opportunities. There are legitimate concerns here but your mind always goes to the darkest places with stuff like this. Which leads us back to the two options I presented above.

[Niall_Quinn]

Who are you talking to Letters? Me, or some sort of fan base? You say you are interested in things but then conclude that no matter what's happening nobody can do anything so why worry. That doesn't signify interest at all, it's the opposite. Then you play your usual diversionary trick of focusing on an unrelated issue, claiming I was wrong about it, then extrapolating to cast doubt no matter what the issue. That's a basic propaganda technique. So when you say your intent is not malicious, well once again the opposite is true. Next you try to reinforce this propaganda by making a sweeping claims that facts and sources are hardly provided to support the issues you'd rather I not talk about. This despite official government documents, detailed videos, links to interviews, analysis. And the confirmed facts that usually emerge well after the event and suddenly become accepted as if there was never a concerted effort to shut discussion down when such facts were most vital. What you actually mean is I don't provide links to the propaganda sources you approve of, which you generally provide anyway so it's not like you have missed out. It doesn't matter how many times those approved sources can be demonstrated as having lied to you, that's all dismissed as an innocent mistake, regardless of the unwavering consistency. You have a dismissal for everything, designed to avoid the causes at all costs and pick through the symptoms one item at a time carefully avoiding all connection. And you are doing it here again.

I come on and say here's a bit of news. The mainstream media is kind of fucked.

And you come on and say I'm mentally afflicted, I think troops are marching up and down your street and shut up because you can't do anything about it.

Fair enough? That's what it says in the posts above.

But what about the actual issue Letters? If you are so interested the do you have any contribution on that? Hardly worth it though, because nobody can do anything, right?

Lightweight. Go away.

[Letters]

Who are you talking to Letters? Me, or some sort of fan base?
You. I don't really feel I have a fan base. There's about 10 people on here these days. I'm sure some of them like me, some of them don't.
I don't go out of my way to either be offensive/unpopular or court popularity.


You say you are interested in things but then conclude that no matter what's happening nobody can do anything so why worry. That doesn't signify interest at all, it's the opposite.
Well, no. Those aren't opposites. There are levels of interest. I can take an interest in world events without dwelling on the more negative ones, especially those which I can't change.
I'm interested in and concerned about the situation in Ukraine. But I have zero power to change it.
My nephew's obsession with it and hand wringing about impending nuclear destruction seemed unhelpful. It didn't seem to help his mental state.


Then you play your usual diversionary trick of focusing on an unrelated issue, claiming I was wrong about it, then extrapolating to cast doubt no matter what the issue. That's a basic propaganda technique.
Again, calling it a "diversionary trick" is another example of you inferring some malicious motive where none exists. And it's somewhat ironic when I have asked you some straight questions which you have failed to answer.
I'm not claiming you were wrong. We've been through those posts many times so I won't do so again, but the things you said would happen didn't happen. There's no debate to be had about that.
It's like saying I'm "claiming" you were wrong about Utd finishing 10 points clear of us. I mean it's not a "claim", they just...didn't.
And it's not a "technique" at all. You're here telling us that <bad things> will happen. I'm merely pointing out that you have done that before and were wrong.
And sure, it doesn't mean you're wrong this time - as I said, you're not wrong about everything. But your continued rock solid confidence in your 20:20 foresight baffles me given your track record.
You don't even admit you were wrong about those things much less consider why.


So when you say your intent is not malicious, well once again the opposite is true.
This remains incorrect.
But doubling down on that assertion when you've been told it's incorrect does rather reinforce my point about your routinely inferring malicious intent from people when it doesn't exist.


Next you try to reinforce this propaganda by making a sweeping claims that facts and sources are hardly provided to support the issues you'd rather I not talk about. This despite official government documents, detailed videos, links to interviews, analysis.
None of those were provided in your post.


What you actually mean is I don't provide links to the propaganda sources you approve of, which you generally provide anyway so it's not like you have missed out.
No, I meant what I said. It would be interesting to see what you're looking at which has shaped your opinions. And sure, if the source is questionable then I'll point that out. You don't like me using the BBC as a source and you point that out, if I can demonstrate that your sources have a track record of lying then it's reasonable to point that out. I have done that before with Jimmy Dore, I broke down his lies in some detail. It all just bounced off you. You don't seem to have a problem with people lying to you if you agree with what they're saying
I've picked you up on this before but your definition of "propaganda" is largely things you don't agree with.


It doesn't matter how many times those approved sources can be demonstrated as having lied to you, that's all dismissed as an innocent mistake, regardless of the unwavering consistency.
Well, there are a couple of issues with that. One is the examples I've highlighted previously where you have declared BBC articles "fake news" when in fact they were entirely accurate.
The second is yes, sometimes the MSM report things which aren't incorrect. One of your favourite go to examples is the infamous WMD thing. But the MSM were merely reporting what was in a government dossier.
Now obviously screaming headlines like The Sun's "HE'S GOT 'EM, LET'S GET HIM!" aren't helpful but that's The Sun for you. Are you expecting the MSM to not report on that dossier at all until they have independently verified the contents. Is that even possible in real time? They don't have the resources of a state. But in time the lies in that dossier were eventually revealed and reported by the MSM.


You have a dismissal for everything, designed to avoid the causes at all costs and pick through the symptoms one item at a time carefully avoiding all connection. And you are doing it here again.
I'm not clear what you mean by that.


I come on and say here's a bit of news. The mainstream media is kind of fucked.
That isn't news. It was you speculating about where some of the AI tools being trialled are heading.


And you come on and say I'm mentally afflicted,
Incorrect. I said that you have a deep distrust of authority and you infer malicious intent far too easily.
Do you dispute those things?
Neither of those things are mental afflictions, they're just part of your worldview and the evidence for those two things is shown in many of your posts.


I think troops are marching up and down your street
No. But you did think that would happen during the Covid times. The army were in Birmingham handing out tests and you inferred from the fact they were in uniform that it was to "get us used to the presence of the army on our streets". It's another example of you seeing a piece of news and extrapolating it to extremes. I'd suggest that your distrust of authority and tendency to infer malicious intent are factors in why your mind went there.
You are doing the same here.


and shut up because you can't do anything about it.
Well, no. I didn't say shut up. But I do wonder what you're getting out of dwelling on stuff like this.


Fair enough? That's what it says in the posts above.
It doesn't. But the fact you think that is a good example of what I'm talking about.


But what about the actual issue Letters? If you are so interested the do you have any contribution on that? Hardly worth it though, because nobody can do anything, right?

I've addressed that above. There are some legitimate concerns with AI, but as I said there have been people wringing their hands about automation for centuries. We haven't all been automated out of jobs just yet.
My gut feeling is it's not going to happen any time soon, although someone I was talking to about this recently noted that AI is in its infancy, relatively speaking. Where will we be in 100 years? The only honest answer is "I don't know" but I'll be dead anyway so I'm not sure wasting any time worrying about it is in any way fruitful.

[Niall_Quinn]

Holy hell. All I was saying is you'll have robots writing your reality instead of stenographers. To warrant this sort of snow job though. Lucky it's me with the mental issues and not you.

[Mac76]

I wouldn't care if the army was on the streets tbh, if they stopped the anti-social behaviour

I remember at the Olympics when G4S couldn't fulfil the security contract and the army stepped in - they just walked around, vigilant but very relaxed

They weren't trying to boss anyone around like those playground bullies and sacked policemen from G4S would have - these guys are used to real danger, they can't be arsed with looking for trouble for the sake of it

[HCZ_Reborn]

It’s the principle though, the idea of Martial law is the last refuge of the scoundrel in terms of largely over hyped fears for safety and security.

The military supplanting awful private security forces for a one off event is one thing, for it to be a routine event…

It depends what constitutes anti social behaviour as well, we aren’t really in an epidemic of people stabbing each other in the street in fact there’s been a recent surge in the last year or two that’s completely consistent with the end of lockdown measures but overall violent crime has been falling for years.

There are of course things that need improving, whilst it’s definitely overstated one can’t help but feel that removing the pointless emphasis on arresting people for online crimes (including misgendering people) might free up resources for maintaining a standard level of police presence.

Ultimately the police tend to come down heavy on these non offences because it’s far easier for them than doing the leg work to bust criminal gangs, people traffickers and the proliferation of weapons occurring in north western cities.

[Letters]

Holy hell. All I was saying is you'll have robots writing your reality instead of stenographers. To warrant this sort of snow job though

I had to Google "snow job". Never heard that phrase before:
"a deception or concealment of one's real motive in an attempt to flatter or persuade."

That's what you think it is? :lol:
Dear me.


Lucky it's me with the mental issues and not you.
Well, I said previously that you infer malicious intent too easily and you have an extreme distrust of authority.
I never said you had "mental issues". But...
If you seriously misinterpret genuine questions as a "snow job".
If you can hear about the army going door to door in Birmingham handing out Covid tests and conclude that it's to "get us used to the presence of the army on our streets".
Then yeah, I think you have some issues dude.

Especially when the army fail to arrive, the curfews and checkpoints don't materialise, and you refuse to admit you were wrong or consider why.
It's not rational. And it doesn't seem to be doing you much good. Which brings me back to the original question about what you're getting out of this.

[Niall_Quinn]

I had to Google "snow job". Never heard that phrase before:
"a deception or concealment of one's real motive in an attempt to flatter or persuade."

That's what you think it is? :lol:
Dear me.


Well, I said previously that you infer malicious intent too easily and you have an extreme distrust of authority.
I never said you had "mental issues". But...
If you seriously misinterpret genuine questions as a "snow job".
If you can hear about the army going door to door in Birmingham handing out Covid tests and conclude that it's to "get us used to the presence of the army on our streets".
Then yeah, I think you have some issues dude.

Especially when the army fail to arrive, the curfews and checkpoints don't materialise, and you refuse to admit you were wrong or consider why.
It's not rational. And it doesn't seem to be doing you much good. Which brings me back to the original question about what you're getting out of this.

Sorry fella, was just trying to get a mention in for the actual subject of the initial post. The thing you have typed 10,000 words to avoid. The definition of a snow job, btw.

I do apologise for misinterpreting your deceptive intentions.

[Letters]

Sorry fella, was just trying to get a mention in for the actual subject of the initial post. The thing you have typed 10,000 words to avoid.
I already responded about AI.
Care to respond to my question? No? Fair enough :good:

[Letters]

Actually, maybe you're on to something...

https://news.sky.com/story/windsor-castle-intruder-encouraged-by-ai-chat-bot-in-star-wars-inspired-plot-to-kill-queen-12915353

:lol:

[Niall_Quinn]

I already responded about AI.
Care to respond to my question? No? Fair enough :good:

Yep, I saw you moving the focus from the media and AI to AI in general. Obviously stuff like that doesn't work on me, so I passed on the invitation to change the subject.

[Niall_Quinn]

Actually, maybe you're on to something...

https://news.sky.com/story/windsor-castle-intruder-encouraged-by-ai-chat-bot-in-star-wars-inspired-plot-to-kill-queen-12915353

:lol:

You are either a propaganda genius or the most trivial man alive.

You are good training for the coming challenges with AI though. Imagine, a tireless protagonist that relentlessly distracts using every means available. The only option will be to set another bot against it and go to the pub.

[WMUG]

I'm keeping an eye on the situation in Ukraine, as I do think it's worth seeing what I can do about it.

I got myself an Australian passport (long story) as soon as I could after the 2022 invasion, just in case I need to very quickly put a planet between myself and Europe.

If the front lines ever feel like they're moving closer to home, that's my get out of jail free card. It's not perfect, Australia's pretty NATO aligned and could get dragged into it too, but it's a good option to have.

If conscription starts becoming a serious political debate in this country, off I fuck.

I have my own biases about who I think should win and I do kinda follow it for that reason as well, but that's such a propaganda minefield that I don't think it's worth getting into all that much. What I'm concerned with is, in the unlikely scenario that They try to throw me into the meat grinder, how do I escape?

[Letters]

If conscription starts becoming a serious political debate in this country, off I fuck.
Being old :bow:

I remember when I was a kid and we were learning about the World Wars worrying about a big war breaking out while I was of age to be conscripted.
I'm more likely to be in Dad's Army these days :lol:

[WMUG]

Being old :bow:

I remember when I was a kid and we were learning about the World Wars worrying about a big war breaking out while I was of age to be conscripted.
I'm more likely to be in Dad's Army these days :lol:

Yeah :lol:

I'm 30 this year so it'll become less of a worry with each passing year, but still good to have an out, just in case.

[Letters]

I'm 30 this year.
Holy shit! :lol:

[HCZ_Reborn]

Why would conscription become a consideration? (And I know even by writing this I risk a lecture that I’m not going to ever read by NQ)

The irony is this conflict in Ukraine has been prolonged by the unwillingness to direct military engagement, and let’s be fair most of us are even above the age where we’d be considered for enlistment to help in a war that was going really badly (the way the Russians are recruiting murderers in true Dirty Dozen style)

As for escalation into a nuclear conflict, the only people ultimately you should be afraid of having nuclear weapons are Islamic fundamentalist states like Saudi or Iran….because their belief system incorporates a large desire to bring about the end of the world.

For everyone else it’s a Pandora’s box full of too many variables to be worth the risk. Of course there’s the risk of miscalculation or even technological error.

[HCZ_Reborn]

Yeah :lol:

I'm 30 this year so it'll become less of a worry with each passing year, but still good to have an out, just in case.

You’re too young for this place, come back in another decade

[WMUG]

Why would conscription become a consideration? (And I know even by writing this I risk a lecture that I’m not going to ever read by NQ)

The irony is this conflict in Ukraine has been prolonged by the unwillingness to direct military engagement, and let’s be fair most of us are even above the age where we’d be considered for enlistment to help in a war that was going really badly (the way the Russians are recruiting murderers in true Dirty Dozen style)

As for escalation into a nuclear conflict, the only people ultimately you should be afraid of having nuclear weapons are Islamic fundamentalist states like Saudi or Iran….because their belief system incorporates a large desire to bring about the end of the world.

For everyone else it’s a Pandora’s box full of too many variables to be worth the risk. Of course there’s the risk of miscalculation or even technological error.

Like I say, it's unlikely.

But so are plane crashes, and they still have oxygen masks and lifejackets.

[HCZ_Reborn]

Like I say, it's unlikely.

But so are plane crashes, and they still have oxygen masks and lifejackets.

Both of which are unlikely to be much help to you in the event of a plane crash (in terms of saving your life). And in the event of a nuclear exchange, an Aussie passport will be as much good to you as volcano insurance in the event of the Yellowstone caldera erupting.


And conscription apart from anything else has been long rendered obsolete

[WMUG]

Both of which are unlikely to be much help to you in the event of a plane crash (in terms of saving your life). And in the event of a nuclear exchange, an Aussie passport will be as much good to you as volcano insurance in the event of the Yellowstone caldera erupting.


And conscription apart from anything else has been long rendered obsolete

Oh yeah nuclear exchange means apocalypse, no doubt there.

But geopolitics isn't fully predictable, and obsolete things can return. Who knows, maybe Britain starts fighting some Russian proxy state. Maybe we get taken over by Farage and he turns us into a Russian proxy state that's suddenly fighting NATO. Or something else I can't think of.

There's like a 99.95% chance you're right and nothing will happen over here. I certainly hope you are.

[HCZ_Reborn]

Oh yeah nuclear exchange means apocalypse, no doubt there.

But geopolitics isn't fully predictable, and obsolete things can return. Who knows, maybe Britain starts fighting some Russian proxy state. Maybe we get taken over by Farage and he turns us into a Russian proxy state that's suddenly fighting NATO. Or something else I can't think of.

There's like a 99.95% chance you're right and nothing will happen over here. I certainly hope you are.

99.95% is a drastic over-estimate. That would make it a vague possibility. It’s more 99.999999999999999999999999999995%

That’s also about the same percentage chance of someone like Farage becoming prime minister.

[WMUG]

99.95% is a drastic over-estimate. That would make it a vague possibility. It’s more 99.999999999999999999999999999995%

That’s also about the same percentage chance of someone like Farage becoming prime minister.

Yup. I'd bet my house on it not happening.

Not my life though.

[HCZ_Reborn]

Yup. I'd bet my house on it not happening.

Not my life though.

Yet you take far more substantial risks every day, touching surfaces risking life threatening bacteria, crossing the road risking being mown down by a drunk driver or someone breaking the speed limit (young father in his thirties was killed up the road from me on a zebra crossing no less).

Don’t get me wrong, dual passports can be very useful especially if you actually ever wanted to live in Australia (though for the life of me I don’t get why anyone would) but looking at it as insurance against risk of military conscription or annihilation is bit strange is all I’m saying.

Far more likely to die from flooding or out of control bush fires in Oz

[WMUG]

Yet you take far more substantial risks every day, touching surfaces risking life threatening bacteria, crossing the road risking being mown down by a drunk driver or someone breaking the speed limit (young father in his thirties was killed up the road from me on a zebra crossing no less).

Don’t get me wrong, dual passports can be very useful especially if you actually ever wanted to live in Australia (though for the life of me I don’t get why anyone would) but looking at it as insurance against risk of military conscription or annihilation is bit strange is all I’m saying.

Far more likely to die from flooding or out of control bush fires in Oz

Sure, and I'd always had it in my mind to get it one day in case I wanted to go there. We'd be more likely to go to NZ actually, as they have a similar arrangement to us and Ireland.

The invasion was just the moment I thought, "right, might as well be now".

[Ollie the Optimist]

Musk is such a bozo

It’s amazing how he has completely destroyed a website that he spent 44 billion dollars on. This whole thing of making it open so people can have a platform to speak etc only works if you actually allow people to browse/read tweets rather than a limit of was it 600 a day?

Hes now threatening legal action against Meta over threads which so far does appear to be a copycat of twitter. The lawyers letter states Meta hired loads of ex twitter staff who konw all the secrets of twitter etc so meta shouldnt be using them.

Musk slightly undermines that argument with a tweet he made saying if those he sacked were such genius as claimed, they’d easily find other work. Looks like they did :lol:

[GP]

I wish he'd spend his time visiting the Titanic or something.

[HCZ_Reborn]

I wish he'd spend his time visiting the Titanic or something.

Owning the Libs is superficially entertaining but it’s not especially a great business model. It’s a shame also that someone who is a self-declared champion of free speech (free speech is a good thing which not enough people genuinely believe in as a principle) is also a massive hypocrite as well as a thin-skinned narcissist.

[Niall_Quinn]

The irony is this conflict in Ukraine has been prolonged by the unwillingness to direct military engagement...

What does that mean?

[WMUG]

Well if we nuked Russia, it'd all be over pretty quickly :lol:

[GP]

I've been saying that for years!

[Niall_Quinn]

The democratic peace-mongers are now sending cluster bombs to the definitely democratic state of Ukraine. Ukraine ran out of them in the early stages of the war. 98% of casualties from these bombs are inflicted on civilians after hostilities have ended. But apparently that's okay because they will be used on Ukrainian soil. So no foul. Not a barbaric crime. Saul Goodman.

Have you figured out who the bad guys are yet? No more clues.

[Niall_Quinn]

The next BBC nonce is about to be outed. Not sure why they don't just do them all in one go.

[HCZ_Reborn]

The next BBC nonce is about to be outed. Not sure why they don't just do them all in one go.

My money is on Greg Wallace

However I should say as disgusting as the behaviour is, it doesn’t meet the criteria for noncery. It’s a form of pederasty of the heart, a predlicition for young boys but making it acceptable to some degree by waiting till they are of legal age.

Basically like Schofield


Oh no turns out they were underage because of an absurd law where even if someone can consent to sex at 16 they can’t consent to sending indecent images of themselves. Now frankly if you are coercing someone to send those kind of images that should be illegal no matter what the age. But if a 17 year old sends a picture of her milkers to her 17 year old boyfriend that’s no one’s business but theirs.

[Mac76]

The democratic peace-mongers are now sending cluster bombs to the definitely democratic state of Ukraine. Ukraine ran out of them in the early stages of the war. 98% of casualties from these bombs are inflicted on civilians after hostilities have ended. But apparently that's okay because they will be used on Ukrainian soil. So no foul. Not a barbaric crime. Saul Goodman.

Have you figured out who the bad guys are yet? No more clues.

Well you're correct, the cluster bombs thing is a disgrace, indefensible irrespective of the scenario, I didn't even know the US even still made any but hey that's the American way, if there's a market let's supply it - free market libertarianism etc - on which subject, why are you angry, surely as a libertarian you think people should have the inalienable right to use cluster bombs whenever they feel like it, as telling them not to is a curb on their freedom...?

[Niall_Quinn]

Well you're correct, the cluster bombs thing is a disgrace, indefensible irrespective of the scenario, I didn't even know the US even still made any but hey that's the American way, if there's a market let's supply it - free market libertarianism etc - on which subject, why are you angry, surely as a libertarian you think people should have the inalienable right to use cluster bombs whenever they feel like it, as telling them not to is a curb on their freedom...?

Wait a second, this isn't about me. I don't have any cluster bombs. Roll it back and focus on the people that do. The cover story for NATOs war against Russia is the ludicrous idea western governments represent good and the eastern lot are obviously evil. Same plot for the war on terror waged by terrorists. People in the west who genuinely want to stop war need to understand the enemy is here, at home. It might serve the purposes of Russia to say so, another great stick to beat the peace movement with, but that's a secondary concern compared to dealing with our own local war criminals. Make sure your own house is squared away before handing out decorating tips to others.

I'm not a libertarian, I'm an anarchist. But because people don't and won't understand what that is I use the concepts of libertarianism to help them out. The foundational principle of libertarianism is, unsurprisingly, liberty and freedom to live your life as you see fit, provided you do no harm to life or private property. So no, dropping cluster bombs on people is not something I'd do personally. Owning them though, sure, why not? Don't see what's wrong with that even though it'd be a fairly useless prize.

Also, I'm not angry. And inalienable rights would not include blowing people up. And even if I was entitled to use self defence against an aggressor I still couldn't use cluster bombs because, "98% of casualties from these bombs are inflicted on civilians after hostilities have ended", and I'd have no right to indiscriminately harm people like that.

There's nothing complicated about any of this.

[Niall_Quinn]

My money is on Greg Wallace

However I should say as disgusting as the behaviour is, it doesn’t meet the criteria for noncery. It’s a form of pederasty of the heart, a predlicition for young boys but making it acceptable to some degree by waiting till they are of legal age.

Basically like Schofield


Oh no turns out they were underage because of an absurd law where even if someone can consent to sex at 16 they can’t consent to sending indecent images of themselves. Now frankly if you are coercing someone to send those kind of images that should be illegal no matter what the age. But if a 17 year old sends a picture of her milkers to her 17 year old boyfriend that’s no one’s business but theirs.

I think it was the payments and the drugs and the health of the victim that has concerned the family more than the legal argument.

[HCZ_Reborn]

I think it was the payments and the drugs and the health of the victim that has concerned the family more than the legal argument.

Ultimately we live in a society where we infantilise the young and deny them agency. Even people with clear addictive personalities you have to say no one makes you put the substance past your lips, if they wanted to do crack cocaine I doubt it was out of blocking out the shame…it was more a case of sending photographs to fuel the habbit. And whilst I cannot blame the mother for wanting the beast who has facilitated this to get there just desserts ultimately the real problem for her is that her son is a junkie.
That doesn’t excuse this degenerate exploiting that for sexual gratification, but it is what it is

[Niall_Quinn]

Ultimately we live in a society where we infantilise the young and deny them agency. Even people with clear addictive personalities you have to say no one makes you put the substance past your lips, if they wanted to do crack cocaine I doubt it was out of blocking out the shame…it was more a case of sending photographs to fuel the habbit. And whilst I cannot blame the mother for wanting the beast who has facilitated this to get there just desserts ultimately the real problem for her is that her son is a junkie.
That doesn’t excuse this degenerate exploiting that for sexual gratification, but it is what it is

Well okay, but again, not really the main issue. Leaving aside the victim, who is female as I understand it, the family informed the BBC a month ago and only after going to the newspapers has this come to light. So did we have another Saville routine being spun up at the loveable old Beeb? How many are lurking in that place, using our money for their nasty habits? Probably best to defund it so our money can't be used in this way.

I wonder when Lineker will be outed? No way does that creepy-crawly git bat straight.

[HCZ_Reborn]

Well okay, but again, not really the main issue. Leaving aside the victim, who is female as I understand it, the family informed the BBC a month ago and only after going to the newspapers has this come to light. So did we have another Saville routine being spun up at the loveable old Beeb? How many are lurking in that place, using our money for their nasty habits? Probably best to defund it so our money can't be used in this way.

I wonder when Lineker will be outed? No way does that creepy-crawly git bat straight.


No the victim in question is a boy

The issue of whether a cover up has happened would also depend on whether this is a pattern of behaviour (which would seem likely, like with Schofield)

BBC like any institution is often terrified into inaction (and with these kind of allegations you have to be careful even when you suspend people) so they went to the papers and even with the papers you have to be incredibly careful with libel laws even if the person is guilty (see Jeffrey Archer). But after the whole Jimmy Saville thing the same depressing attitude of defensiveness and carpet brushing is still there….same with all institutions too worried about being seen as racist or homophobic or what have you to do anything useful…plus they don’t actually give a fuck about the victims.


Couldn’t give a fuck about Lineker’s sexuality, as long as he’s not rumping teenagers none of my business

[Mac76]

Wait a second, this isn't about me. I don't have any cluster bombs. Roll it back and focus on the people that do. The cover story for NATOs war against Russia is the ludicrous idea western governments represent good and the eastern lot are obviously evil. Same plot for the war on terror waged by terrorists. People in the west who genuinely want to stop war need to understand the enemy is here, at home. It might serve the purposes of Russia to say so, another great stick to beat the peace movement with, but that's a secondary concern compared to dealing with our own local war criminals. Make sure your own house is squared away before handing out decorating tips to others.

I'm not a libertarian, I'm an anarchist. But because people don't and won't understand what that is I use the concepts of libertarianism to help them out. The foundational principle of libertarianism is, unsurprisingly, liberty and freedom to live your life as you see fit, provided you do no harm to life or private property. So no, dropping cluster bombs on people is not something I'd do personally. Owning them though, sure, why not? Don't see what's wrong with that even though it'd be a fairly useless prize.

Also, I'm not angry. And inalienable rights would not include blowing people up. And even if I was entitled to use self defence against an aggressor I still couldn't use cluster bombs because, "98% of casualties from these bombs are inflicted on civilians after hostilities have ended", and I'd have no right to indiscriminately harm people like that.

There's nothing complicated about any of this.

Good stuff and yes I got your point and agree, 'good guys' don't use cluster bombs

Interested in the use of "liberty and freedom to live your life as you see fit, provided you do no harm to life or private property."

Denying or refusing to tackle climate change does exactly that, so when your hero Trump does it as president, it causes inaction which ultimately will and has already harmed life and private property through a) extreme climate events and b) the steady long term effects

Also at a more immediate level, you'vd made threats to me and others on here of doing violence to them, how does that work...?

[Niall_Quinn]

Good stuff and yes I got your point and agree, 'good guys' don't use cluster bombs

Interested in the use of "liberty and freedom to live your life as you see fit, provided you do no harm to life or private property."

Denying or refusing to tackle climate change does exactly that, so when your hero Trump does it as president, it causes inaction which ultimately will and has already harmed life and private property through a) extreme climate events and b) the steady long term effects

Also at a more immediate level, you'vd made threats to me and others on here of doing violence to them, how does that work...?

Trump is not my hero. The climate scam is operated by self-interested individuals who are prepared to harm most of the population of the planet, it's not operated by me. Anyone who believes the climate scam is a real threat has failed to examine the evidence in an impartial manner. Even if the scam is accepted as real, the solutions proposed by the self-interested parties who perpetuate the scam are quite clearly crimes against humanity. Their argument is ludicrous. They are harming people to save them.

Can't recall precisely what threats you are talking about, was it the time you mentioned a member of my family, or was that somebody else? Libertarians are not pacifists, that's a common misunderstanding. You come up and scream in my face or threaten a member of my family and I'll wipe you out, like any self-respecting man would. I'm certain I didn't allegedly threaten you for no reason. If such threats occurred then you will have been the one initiating conflict, not me.

[Globalgunner]

In other news a man won the 2023 Miss Netherlands beauty contest.

https://www.timesnownews.com/entertainment-news/miss-netherlands-2023-rikkie-valerie-kolle-becomes-first-transgender-model-to-win-prestigious-title-article-101616888

Prettiest girl in Holland is a dude

[HCZ_Reborn]

In other news a man won the 2023 Miss Netherlands beauty contest.

https://www.timesnownews.com/entertainment-news/miss-netherlands-2023-rikkie-valerie-kolle-becomes-first-transgender-model-to-win-prestigious-title-article-101616888

Prettiest girl in Holland is a dude


We mustn't judge

Dutch birds were just having a bad year

[Niall_Quinn]

In other news a man won the 2023 Miss Netherlands beauty contest.

https://www.timesnownews.com/entertainment-news/miss-netherlands-2023-rikkie-valerie-kolle-becomes-first-transgender-model-to-win-prestigious-title-article-101616888

Prettiest girl in Holland is a dude

This sort of shit is designed to make people angry and to divide people. Just ignore it. The backlash is quietly gaining momentum. We won't have to put up with it for much longer.

[HCZ_Reborn]

This sort of shit is designed to make people angry and to divide people. Just ignore it. The backlash is quietly gaining momentum. We won't have to put up with it for much longer.

I’m inclined to agree, I never gave a fuck about these beauty pageants when actual women were winning them

And either way it’s actually still less objectionable than child beauty pageants. Utter noncery

[Mac76]

Trump is not my hero. The climate scam is operated by self-interested individuals who are prepared to harm most of the population of the planet, it's not operated by me. Anyone who believes the climate scam is a real threat has failed to examine the evidence in an impartial manner. Even if the scam is accepted as real, the solutions proposed by the self-interested parties who perpetuate the scam are quite clearly crimes against humanity. Their argument is ludicrous. They are harming people to save them.

Can't recall precisely what threats you are talking about, was it the time you mentioned a member of my family, or was that somebody else? Libertarians are not pacifists, that's a common misunderstanding. You come up and scream in my face or threaten a member of my family and I'll wipe you out, like any self-respecting man would. I'm certain I didn't allegedly threaten you for no reason. If such threats occurred then you will have been the one initiating conflict, not me.

BS, I would never say anything about anyone's family, it was about something to.do with the nonsense you post and you didn't like it so you threatened violence

And if libertarians aren't pacifists, how does that equate with your claim about libertarians being against harming people or their property?

Gosh how easy it is to expose your complete jypocrisy

[Niall_Quinn]

BS, I would never say anything about anyone's family, it was about something to.do with the nonsense you post and you didn't like it so you threatened violence

And if libertarians aren't pacifists, how does that equate with your claim about libertarians being against harming people or their property?

Gosh how easy it is to expose your complete jypocrisy

Libertarians aren't pacifists by definition, that's just a fact. Some might be by choice, but that's a choice and not a requirement.

No, if I ever did threaten you it certainly wouldn't have been for disagreeing with a post. There will have been far more to it than that. Until I actually engage in violence against you I haven't engaged in violence against you.

I said the fundamental principle of libertarianism is do no harm. That doesn't preclude the right to self-defence nor does it mean you have to turn the other cheek. Leave me alone and you are 100% safe. Invite yourself into my space with malicious intentions and I'll smash you. I'll never be the one initiating it though. What are you confused about? You think because I believe people should be left to their own lives I will meekly stand by while others trample over me?

Getting back to the original point, the cluster bombs, the only person exposed here is the one who took the message and tried to shoot the messenger. Obviously you have some chip on your shoulder from past discussions. If you aren't man enough to shake stuff like that off then cry somewhere else because it doesn't interest me.

[Mac76]

Getting back to the original point, the cluster bombs, the only person exposed here is the one who took the message and tried to shoot the messenger. Obviously you have some chip on your shoulder from past discussions. If you aren't man enough to shake stuff like that off then cry somewhere else because it doesn't interest me.

It's not about shooting the messenger, it's just trying to understand how you can see some things very correctly - the cluster bombs issue being a good example - and yet ignore all the evidence on others to take up a contrary position which seems to have more to do with trying to fit the world into your own ideological standpoint, rather than the other way around

[Ollie the Optimist]

Cluster bombs are clearly a horrific invention and should almost certainaly being outlawed however, its interesting taht NQ chooses to attack the US & Ukraine for selling/using them now them now but has not said a word about the Russians who have been happily using them in their war with Ukraine.

[Niall_Quinn]

It's not about shooting the messenger, it's just trying to understand how you can see some things very correctly - the cluster bombs issue being a good example - and yet ignore all the evidence on others to take up a contrary position which seems to have more to do with trying to fit the world into your own ideological standpoint, rather than the other way around

Yes, you were. Your entire argument turned to me rather than the subject matter, as does your latest post.

Which contrary positions are you talking about? The climate scam? Being mean to you on the internet?

[Niall_Quinn]

Cluster bombs are clearly a horrific invention and should almost certainaly being outlawed however, its interesting taht NQ chooses to attack the US & Ukraine for selling/using them now them now but has not said a word about the Russians who have been happily using them in their war with Ukraine.

It's not at all interesting and neither is it relevant. I don't have any control over what Russia does nor do I fund its government. Neither is the UK allied with Russia or in thrall to it, which cannot be said about the USA and its war criminal activities. Our association with these criminals is the issue. Why should I be highlighting crimes abroad when they are going on at home?

However, if we start collaborating with Russia to drop cluster bombs on people then I'll complain about that too.

[Mac76]

Yes, you were. Your entire argument turned to me rather than the subject matter, as does your latest post.

Which contrary positions are you talking about? The climate scam? Being mean to you on the internet?

it's not a scam, it's scientifically proven beyond doubt, however the consequences of having to deal with it - i.e. everyone taking collective action - just doesn't fit with your ideology, that's why you won't accept it - which is exactly my point about your ideology getting in the way

as for cluster boombs, what's there to say other than that you, Ollie and eveeyone else is right - they shouldn't be giving them to Ukraine because they're morally indefensible and also counterproductive - end of

[Niall_Quinn]

it's not a scam, it's scientifically proven beyond doubt, however the consequences of having to deal with it - i.e. everyone taking collective action - just doesn't fit with your ideology, that's why you won't accept it - which is exactly my point about your ideology getting in the way

as for cluster boombs, what's there to say other than that you, Ollie and eveeyone else is right - they shouldn't be giving them to Ukraine because they're morally indefensible and also counterproductive - end of

That's what you have been told. But you couldn't lay your hand on a single study or analysis that supports such a wild assertion. All you'd be able to do is post up links to summaries that are presented in the required context. It has nothing to do with ideology. It's about science and fraud. Anyone can educate themselves. You don't have to learn it all in a day. Pick a sub-topic and get reading. The claims of the alarmists are so unscientific and inflated you don't need to be a scientist to quickly see through it. Even the source materials used by these nutters utterly refutes their claims. It's hilarious. Apart from the bit where they want to kill potentially billions of people.

My point was the cluster bombs are just the latest data point in something you can prove beyond all reasonable doubt.

[Mac76]

That's what you have been told. But you couldn't lay your hand on a single study or analysis that supports such a wild assertion.


Really? Try this: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2096511718300628

The evidence is everywhere - from collapsing permafrost in Russia to melting icebergs in the arctic to the fact that our own hottest weather records are being broken year-on-year - this June being the latest example

Your objection to it is purely based on your own objection that we have to act collectively and there is no sane choice - you just hate "being told what to do" - except when it comes to YouTube nutter - then you're perfectly happy to let them BS you

[Niall_Quinn]

Really? Try this: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2096511718300628

The evidence is everywhere - from collapsing permafrost in Russia to melting icebergs in the arctic to the fact that our own hottest weather records are being broken year-on-year - this June being the latest example

Your objection to it is purely based on your own objection that we have to act collectively and there is no sane choice - you just hate "being told what to do" - except when it comes to YouTube nutter - then you're perfectly happy to let them BS you

That document is absolute nonsense. Sea level rises of 3.4mm per year? Pure bullshit. You can go to any US eastern seaboard harbour and look at the water level indicators and they haven't shifted in a century.

From your proof beyond doubt:


From 1979 to 2017, the extent of the Arctic sea ice decreased significantly, whereas that of the Antarctic sea ice generally showed an upward trend. However, the range of the Antarctic sea ice was abnormally small in 2017, with a minimum value in March and the second smallest value in September since the start of satellite observation records. In addition, the global sea level has been rising consecutively for six years. In 2016, the global average sea level reached a new height, approximately 82 mm higher than when satellite recording began in 1993. Over the past 20 years, the sea level has risen at an average rate of approximately 3.4 mm per year, with the highest increases being observed in the Western Pacific and Indian oceans.

Do you have any idea how nuts that is, how far it is from actual science? From 1979 to 2017? That's literally the blink of an eye and as far from a valid geological sample as it is possible to be. Start talking in tens of thousands of years and then you can spot trends. This is geology not politics. If we are still talking about science, that is.

You've been scammed sonny. The authors of that paper probably know what they are doing, but YOU don't know what they are doing.

Here. Bods like you have been walking about for around 315,000 years. Survived ice ages and meteor strikes and shit like that. With only sticks for spears and animal skins for underpants. Somehow they devolved into the sort of people who wrote that paper, but hey, nobody's perfect.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/356606430/figure/fig3/AS:1095462799060993@1638190092136/Global-mean-temperatures-over-the-last-500-000-years-11.ppm

Okay?

Don't be having a go at me because you got scammed.

[Niall_Quinn]

I agree with the bits on pollution though. Which we won't be tackling any time soon because we're so busy pissing our pants about plant food.

What a coincidence that the real environmental issues won't be subject to net zero and the remedies all involve transferring money from the poor to the rich.

Couldn't possibly be a scam, could it. It's far, far more likely the world's about to end.

Jeez. How have they pulled this off. When did everyone get so stupid?

[Niall_Quinn]

Just so you know, even your nutters accept that were it even remotely possible for humans to control the global temperature - if every nation on the planet stopped burning fossil fuels today (leaving aside we'd all die as a result) it would still take somewhere between 200 to 1,000 years for the effects to be realised in global mean temperature. Even your nutters admit this. And that's assuming their crackpot claims of controlling the environment and that imaginary control having any effect are real.

To be a climate alarmist you literally have to pile a heap of bullshit onto another heap of bullshit and then pile another on top, just to form the foundation of a "scientific" argument. An argument which doesn't allow scrutiny, btw, like all the most valid arguments. And even then you ignore the essence of science by replacing observation with computer modelling. I wonder why?

Don't worry, rhetorical question with obvious answer.

Have a word with China and Russia too will you? Because they aren't on-board with the crackpot climate scam.

But let's all install heat pumps and start eating bugs and driving $30K golf buggies so we can tackle that 1% of global emissions we are responsible for. If we can get that down to zero then China definitely won't be laughing their arse off.

But that's it. No point reasoning with cultists.

Proof beyond doubt. Hey look ma! The bus didn't come today. That means no bus ever arrived in all of history! Fucking buses.

[Mac76]

For which read - so it's all too difficult so let's just using oil, concrete, flying everywhere, driving 4x4s, eating beef every day etc etc

and you don't care what happens in 200 years - to your great grandchildren?

[HCZ_Reborn]

For which read - so it's all too difficult so let's just using oil, concrete, flying everywhere, driving 4x4s, eating beef every day etc etc

and you don't care what happens in 200 years - to your great grandchildren?

The only point I would say NQ is right on is that the contraction of globalisation means that any global effort to move away from high carbon output energy makes is going to be almost impossible.

China due to demographic issues because of its own Ill thought out one child policy, the massive geographic differences between north and south, and it’s own dependence for importing for food means it’s totally fucked economically but for the Chinese communist party that will be ideal for them to clamp down and become even more authoritarian so there’s even less chance of coming to any agreement with them

Russia, and the Caucus and Eurasian states are the biggest natural sources of rare earth metals that would be necessary for viable alternatives to oil and gas (Chile, Brazil and places in Africa have them as well but not in the abundance we’d need)


And if we went on boondoggles like solar, wind it’s entirely dependent on where you are in order to utilise these


There is a school of thought that we are already passed the point of no return in terms of avoiding flooding, mass fires and migration and food shortage. And that any measure is about not making things any worse, what the groups like Just Stop Oil are ridiculously over the top is that they predict climate failure to be an existential disaster for mankind it’s not…a lot of people will die in excess of who normally die…and more areas will become uninhabitable for some considerable time and you may also see a dramatic decrease of human population as well as the extinction of several animal/plant species.

None of which is particularly pleasant or desirable, but I’m not entirely sure it can be avoided. Plus Famine is going to be the biggest issue irregardless of climate change as there will be a lot of break down of supply chains on the horizon and will take a long time to inaugurate new ones

[Letters]

Anyone can educate themselves. You don't have to learn it all in a day. Pick a sub-topic and get reading.
Sure, anyone can read. But the problem is you have shown repeatedly that your ability to process data is skewed so much by your worldview that it leads you to wrong conclusions.
The information you accept as "real science" depends entirely on whether it confirms what you want to believe. Everything else is dismissed as "propaganda" or "fake science".
And sure, humans have survived other shifts of climate. We will survive this one - as a species we will survive, but the effects of climate change will kill a lot of people.
I looked at the source of that long term climate graph you posted. This is the paper it's from:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/356606430_Review_of_Climate_Change_Impacts_on_Huma n_Environment_Past_Present_and_Future_Projections

Quote from it:


An undisputed fact, which the scientific community has agreed upon today, is the increased burning of fossil fuel since the beginning of the industrial revolution has resulted in the profound results of climate change, which we witness at the present. In the early days of the Industrial Revolution, no one would have thought that the burning of fossil fuels would have an almost immediate effect on the climate. The impacts of such increase began to be felt, however, in some regions of the world as early as the 1830 s. Scientific findings show that warming did not develop at the same time across the whole planet. The tropical oceans and the Arc-tic were the first regions to begin warming in the 1830 s. Europe, North America, and Asia followed roughly two decades later. This warming in most regions reversed what would otherwise have been a cooling trend related to high volcanic activity during the preceding centuries. From all available evidence, we can conclude that this warming is due to the carbon dioxide released into the atmosphere by humans.
Since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, humans have expelled considerable amounts of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. This has triggered unnatural warming that has seen the Earth’s temperature rise dramatically over a short period. The average global temperature was 12˚C during the Last Glacial Maximum. During the following interglacial period, the average global temperature slowly rose to 13.8˚C. From 1880 to 2015, it has increased by another 0.6˚ degree to 14.4˚C. This rate of warming is about 50 times faster than the rate of warming during the previous 21,000 years. From 1950 to 2000 and beyond, carbon has increased in the atmosphere is a far steeper, more exponential curve

That's from the source you posted :shrug:

Now. I don't think there's anything we can do about it. The UK isn't anywhere near the worst offender and we're not going to get countries like China or India to stop developing, or the US to temper their excesses.
And actually in this country probably won't suffer as much as some others. I also agree that some of the "green" ideas aren't actually going to improve things. I don't think Electric Vehicles are the silver bullet some seem to think.

In brief - climate change is happening, it's happened in my lifetime. There is pretty much consensus that we are a cause. But there's bugger all we can do about it anyway. I don't think that means we shouldn't try, we might as well recycle and think about our carbon footprints. But when push comes to shove I'm not willing to give up my comfortable lifestyle and nor is anyone else. So we'd be better off trying to work out how to deal with climate change rather than trying to stop it.

[Mac76]

The only point I would say NQ is right on is that the contraction of globalisation means that any global effort to move away from high carbon output energy makes is going to be almost impossible.

China due to demographic issues because of its own Ill thought out one child policy, the massive geographic differences between north and south, and it’s own dependence for importing for food means it’s totally fucked economically but for the Chinese communist party that will be ideal for them to clamp down and become even more authoritarian so there’s even less chance of coming to any agreement with them

Russia, and the Caucus and Eurasian states are the biggest natural sources of rare earth metals that would be necessary for viable alternatives to oil and gas (Chile, Brazil and places in Africa have them as well but not in the abundance we’d need)


And if we went on boondoggles like solar, wind it’s entirely dependent on where you are in order to utilise these


There is a school of thought that we are already passed the point of no return in terms of avoiding flooding, mass fires and migration and food shortage. And that any measure is about not making things any worse, what the groups like Just Stop Oil are ridiculously over the top is that they predict climate failure to be an existential disaster for mankind it’s not…a lot of people will die in excess of who normally die…and more areas will become uninhabitable for some considerable time and you may also see a dramatic decrease of human population as well as the extinction of several animal/plant species.

None of which is particularly pleasant or desirable, but I’m not entirely sure it can be avoided. Plus Famine is going to be the biggest issue irregardless of climate change as there will be a lot of break down of supply chains on the horizon and will take a long time to inaugurate new ones

but the point is NQ is denying it altogether as some kind of conspiracy by 'nutters' - and then he goes on to talk about the 200-year thing which tbh shoudl be irrelevantt according to him, because it's all a lie - i.e. he's trying to have it both ways - very typical of how he argues, he shifts from one point to another to avoid admitting he's been proved wrong - e.g. he said i couldn't produce evidence and i immediately did so, so it then became a discussion about the 200 years thing

on the bigger question, whether we are past the point of no return or not, that doesn't excuse everyone trying to do what they can - and of course it's existential - if the planet continues to leep heating up ad infinitum we're talking total wipeout

basically the deniers who've caused this all in the first place can now say - "ok, we're wrong but hey let's just all keep doing all those carbon-producing things because it's too late"

People can knock the JSO people and perhaps they are to some extent counter-productive in maybe alienating some people from their cause (although only the stupid ones IMO) but at least they're on the right side of the argument

[Mac76]

Gosh it can't possibly be true that somone has made up something nasty about the BBC which actually isn't accurate - can it? :faint:

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2023/jul/10/claims-about-bbc-presenter-are-rubbish-says-young-person-at-centre-of-scandal

[HCZ_Reborn]

but the point is NQ is denying it altogether as some kind of conspiracy by 'nutters' - and then he goes on to talk about the 200-year thing which tbh shoudl be irrelevantt according to him, because it's all a lie - i.e. he's trying to have it both ways - very typical of how he argues, he shifts from one point to another to avoid admitting he's been proved wrong - e.g. he said i couldn't produce evidence and i immediately did so it became a discussion about the 200 years thing

on the bigger question, whether we are past the point of no return or not, that doesn't excuse everyone trying to do what they can - and of course it's existential - if the planet continues to leep heating up ad infinitum we're talking Mercury adn no-one can

basically the deniers who've caused this all in the first place can now say - "ok, we're wrong but hey let's just all keep doing all those carbon-producing things because it's too late"

People can knock the JSO people and perhaps they are to some extent counter-productive in maybe alienating some people from their cause (although only the stupid ones IMO) but at least they're on the right side of the argument


I don’t even engage with NQ’s view on climate change, like with everything else it’s based on a contrarian world view and his counter-argument is equally as contrarian.

I’m simply stating that he might have an argument when he says “even if I accept the science is true, the barrier to getting where we need to be is insurmountable”

Now that’s not me saying we should do nothing, any effort towards amelioration is worthwhile if it is sustainable and doesn’t cause more damage in the short term than it prevents in the long term.

This is where I abhor JSO, they are for me on the wrong side of the argument because they are causing mass disruption in pursuit of a goal that would be monstrously irresponsible. We as a country simply cannot safely avoid signing new oil and gas contracts in the short term, now that’s partly our fault because governments have done nothing to provide the infrastructure to make us energy independent but there’s also a necessity for primary materials that we would need to import (lithium, copper, uranium - if we go down the nuclear road)

My feeling is that we should go strong on nuclear, fuck the NIMBYs and not just fission but putting the funding into Fusion research. Not against solar and wind but they are for me back up sources.

But I’m aware that there’s a question of materials and time

But any movement towards stopping using oil and gas has to be gradual and incremental, but JSO are like “no new contracts” and worry about the consequences later. Fuck them

[HCZ_Reborn]

Gosh it can't possibly be true that somone has made up something nasty about the BBC which actually isn't accurate - can it? :faint:

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2023/jul/10/claims-about-bbc-presenter-are-rubbish-says-young-person-at-centre-of-scandal


Isn’t the problem that we are looking at this issue through the lens of Anti Beeb vs Anti Murdoch rather than critically examining why this accusation came about.

This is ostensibly a mother concerned about her son because presumably they are reliant on the money they are getting from this presenter to fund a drug habit. The denial from the individual seems to me more about someone wanting this arrangement to carry on for purposes of money.

Could be wrong, and the Sun behaving irresponsibly and unethically? Quelle Surprise

But the specific nature of the allegation suggests to me that it’s not a lie

[Niall_Quinn]

For which read - so it's all too difficult so let's just using oil, concrete, flying everywhere, driving 4x4s, eating beef every day etc etc

and you don't care what happens in 200 years - to your great grandchildren?

For which read, we have serious problems with pollution which are being ignored so polluters can preach about carbon and, surprise, surprise, tax us on the back of those sermons.

The proposal is to blow TRILLIONS on "green" (see Michal Moore documentary that was censored out of existence) "solutions" that just so happen to enrich the usual suspects. If the climate threat was real we could do things like:

Make public transport free - that would cost pennies by comparison.
Utilise nuclear power (by far the safest technology even compared to these new non-green green alternatives)
Fund projects that improve existing technologies rather than replace them with ruinously costly non-alternatives like the impractical and entirely unsustainable electric car.
Send practical assistance to third world countries to assist with upgrading efficient and cleaner power grids, again for a faction of the cost of net zero.
And do on...

But no real solutions are on the table. Instead the plan is for the rich to get rich and the for everyone else to eat less, heat less, meet less (pun intended). All so we can win an alleged 1 degree drop in global climate within the next thousand years?

If we'd never heard of climate catastrophe and I came along and proposed all this to you you'd be calling me insane. But because self-interest criminals who have lied to you time and time again say it, well it must be true.

[Niall_Quinn]

The only point I would say NQ is right on is that the contraction of globalisation means that any global effort to move away from high carbon output energy makes is going to be almost impossible.

China due to demographic issues because of its own Ill thought out one child policy, the massive geographic differences between north and south, and it’s own dependence for importing for food means it’s totally fucked economically but for the Chinese communist party that will be ideal for them to clamp down and become even more authoritarian so there’s even less chance of coming to any agreement with them

Russia, and the Caucus and Eurasian states are the biggest natural sources of rare earth metals that would be necessary for viable alternatives to oil and gas (Chile, Brazil and places in Africa have them as well but not in the abundance we’d need)


And if we went on boondoggles like solar, wind it’s entirely dependent on where you are in order to utilise these


There is a school of thought that we are already passed the point of no return in terms of avoiding flooding, mass fires and migration and food shortage. And that any measure is about not making things any worse, what the groups like Just Stop Oil are ridiculously over the top is that they predict climate failure to be an existential disaster for mankind it’s not…a lot of people will die in excess of who normally die…and more areas will become uninhabitable for some considerable time and you may also see a dramatic decrease of human population as well as the extinction of several animal/plant species.

None of which is particularly pleasant or desirable, but I’m not entirely sure it can be avoided. Plus Famine is going to be the biggest issue irregardless of climate change as there will be a lot of break down of supply chains on the horizon and will take a long time to inaugurate new ones

Why do you just accept these catastrophes will happen? Such things have been predicted for decades and none of the predictions have ever been correct. Not one. Natural disasters are not on the rise. Islands haven't sunk beneath the oceans. Ice caps haven't vanished. Polar bears are still chasing seals.

How many "points of no return" are we going to have before we reach the point of no more bullshit?

[Mac76]

Make public transport free - that would cost pennies by comparison

Agreed



Utilise nuclear power (by far the safest technology even compared to these new non-green green alternatives)

Nuclear power is incredibly dangerous, no matter how 'safe' people claim it to be, Murphy's Law needs to be applied here - especailly in an era where. yes, climate change is causing mroe earthquakes and natural disasters

it has demonstrably gone disatrously wrong on several occasions, plus it creates waste which needs to be buried for thousands of years because it's so unsafe



Fund projects that improve existing technologies rather than replace them with ruinously costly non-alternatives like the impractical and entirely unsustainable electric car.

We need to move away from oil as much as possible - and do you think car manufacturers aren't already trying to make engines as fuel-efficient as possible - it's one of their constant priorities as it's a major selling point

I think the real answer is to use your first proposition to discourge such heavy car use as we see in this country.

One advantage of electric cars is that the wankers who love driving around revving their engines loudly will no longer be able to do so, meanigng they will have to go and find a quieter way of making up for their small-penis syndrome



Send practical assistance to third world countries to assist with upgrading efficient and cleaner power grids, again for a faction of the cost of net zero.


agreed, but those power grids should be based on using renewables wherever possible

[Niall_Quinn]

Sure, anyone can read. But the problem is you have shown repeatedly that your ability to process data is skewed so much by your worldview that it leads you to wrong conclusions.
The information you accept as "real science" depends entirely on whether it confirms what you want to believe. Everything else is dismissed as "propaganda" or "fake science".
And sure, humans have survived other shifts of climate. We will survive this one - as a species we will survive, but the effects of climate change will kill a lot of people.
I looked at the source of that long term climate graph you posted. This is the paper it's from:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/356606430_Review_of_Climate_Change_Impacts_on_Huma n_Environment_Past_Present_and_Future_Projections

Quote from it:



That's from the source you posted :shrug:

Now. I don't think there's anything we can do about it. The UK isn't anywhere near the worst offender and we're not going to get countries like China or India to stop developing, or the US to temper their excesses.
And actually in this country probably won't suffer as much as some others. I also agree that some of the "green" ideas aren't actually going to improve things. I don't think Electric Vehicles are the silver bullet some seem to think.

In brief - climate change is happening, it's happened in my lifetime. There is pretty much consensus that we are a cause. But there's bugger all we can do about it anyway. I don't think that means we shouldn't try, we might as well recycle and think about our carbon footprints. But when push comes to shove I'm not willing to give up my comfortable lifestyle and nor is anyone else. So we'd be better off trying to work out how to deal with climate change rather than trying to stop it.

Consensus is irrelevant in science and this is where the great "proof" has come from. A single, fraudulent study that has been mercilessly picked apart. The climate scam is a political and economic issue but it isn't and never has been scientific. That's why consensus is constantly mentioned because nobody can put down science to prove the point.

But yes, you are right, the little unelected Indian chap who was bowing to the dementia patient in chief yesterday insists we will all just have to get fucked so we can save the planet, even though nobody else can be bothered and whatever we do can't possibly make any difference.

What a manifesto. Definitely voting for that. Who's with me?

[HCZ_Reborn]

Agreed



Nuclear power is incredibly dangerous, no matter how 'safe' people claim it to be, Murphy's Law needs to be applied here - especailly in an era where. yes, climate change is causing mroe earthquakes and natural disasters

it has demonstrably gone disatrously wrong on several occasions, plus it creates waste which needs to be buried for thousands of years because it's so unsafe



We need to move away from oil as much as possible - and do you think car manufacturers aren't already trying to make engines as fuel-efficient as possible - it's one of their constant priorities as it's a major selling point

I think the real answer is to use your first proposition to discourge such heavy car use as we see in this country.

One advantage of electric cars is that the wankers who love driving around revving their engines loudly will no longer be able to do so, meanigng they will have to go and find a quieter way of making up for their small-penis syndrome



agreed, but those power grids should be based on using renewables wherever possible


https://youtu.be/ciStnd9Y2ak

[Niall_Quinn]

Agreed



Nuclear power is incredibly dangerous, no matter how 'safe' people claim it to be, Murphy's Law needs to be applied here - especailly in an era where. yes, climate change is causing mroe earthquakes and natural disasters

it has demonstrably gone disatrously wrong on several occasions, plus it creates waste which needs to be buried for thousands of years because it's so unsafe



We need to move away from oil as much as possible - and do you think car manufacturers aren't already trying to make engines as fuel-efficient as possible - it's one of their constant priorities as it's a major selling point

I think the real answer is to use your first proposition to discourge such heavy car use as we see in this country.

One advantage of electric cars is that the wankers who love driving around revving their engines loudly will no longer be able to do so, meanigng they will have to go and find a quieter way of making up for their small-penis syndrome



agreed, but those power grids should be based on using renewables wherever possible

Nuclear powered generators that can be transported on the back of trucks and use spent fuel from older technologies already exist. Funded privately because governments don't want to go near solutions because then there would be no more problems.

Nuclear power has the best safety record of all the energy industries, far, far safer than coal which has the worst. Yet coal fired stations are being reactivated all over the world to supplement failing grids that rely on new technologies that are unreliable and pollute just as much as the older technologies - the trick being the pollution is shifted out of sight and therefore out of mind.

The real issue with nuclear power is water. The technology requires a lot of water. But even this is being solved by private funding. And there are future "impossible" technologies on the horizon that terrify the profiteers of the green revolution.

We should be directing every scrap of R&D into these technologies so because, whether the climate catastrophe is real or not, these are better technologies with far more scope to provide clean, cheap and reliable energy globally.

It's another dead giveaway that exposes the climate scam. All actual solutions are ruthlessly ignored.

[Niall_Quinn]

https://youtu.be/ciStnd9Y2ak

Haven't seen that one. Interesting, but a lot of stuff glossed over. Like the air pollution. He should have mentioned how that's constituted. Just like radiation, when you dig into the figures it's surprising where the main pollutants come from. Unfiltered exhaust from power production, obviously, but also vehicle brakes and tyres. These create hundreds of times more pollution than the exhaust coming out of combustion engines. Because electric vehicles are heavier than real cars they pollute even more in this respect. He also whitewashed Fukushima, a little bit at least. The real problem there was the long term release of contaminated water back into the sea. That's definitely going to have at least a localised an effect on the environment long term.

But yes, the risk assessment of nuclear by those pushing the climate alarm is hysterical and abusive to science.

[WMUG]

From what I understand, the cost of public transport is a much less significant barrier to entry than its viability as an alternative to driving.

To get to the city centre from where I live, driving takes about as much time as the tram. It's a clean, comfortable and overall pleasant environment, and you'll never be waiting longer than 12 minutes (I know that's unconscionable to Londoners, but it's honestly fine). Unsurprisingly, the tram gets excellent ridership from all sorts of people, including people who have cars.

To get to the shopping centre on the edge of town, you'd either need to get the tram into the city centre and back out again, or get a bus. Either way takes about an hour.

The bus goes on a windy route that makes you feel sick, and the suspension on the buses is crap so it's a loud, bumpy, uncomfortable ride all the way. Oh, and if you miss it, you'll be waiting for at least half an hour, maybe an hour depending on the route you choose.

Alternatively, you could drive there in 15 minutes. Unsurprisingly, the only people on the bus are old biddies who can't drive any more. The bus prices were recently put down to £2 for a single, in preparation for them coming under public ownership soon. It doesn't seem to have had any effect on those routes, because the overall experience is so poor.

If you want to get more people out of their cars and onto those buses, you need to increase their frequency so that people don't have to plan when to get there, they can just turn up and go. You also need to make them more comfortable, and give them routes that don't go all around the houses so the journey isn't artificially lengthened.

Making it free would be nice too, but not the most important piece of the puzzle.

[Letters]

Consensus is irrelevant in science and this is where the great "proof" has come from.
Well it's not irrelevant, is it? I mean, if all of the relevant experts agree on something in a scientific field - or the vast majority do - then it does lend credibility to the idea about which there is agreement.
It's not proof of course, nothing should ever be said to be proven in science. But it's certainly not irrelevant.


That's why consensus is constantly mentioned because nobody can put down science to prove the point.
When you're shown evidence you dismiss it. For example:
https://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/
No doubt you'll say that's propaganda. Which is fine, but don't say that there's no science which indicates climate change. There's loads, you simply reject it.

But given that you're not going to get the big offenders to change - and actually, why should they? The West have caused this problem, it's a bit rich of us to tell them they can't develop as we have.
Given that, we'd do better working on mitigating the effects of climate change - I think we can all agree the climate is changing, even if you reject the notion that we're causing it.
Thinking that putting solar panels on buildings or buying electric cars is going to have any effect is ludicrous.

[Mac76]

From what I understand, the cost of public transport is a much less significant barrier to entry than its viability as an alternative to driving.

To get to the city centre from where I live, driving takes about as much time as the tram. It's a clean, comfortable and overall pleasant environment, and you'll never be waiting longer than 12 minutes (I know that's unconscionable to Londoners, but it's honestly fine). Unsurprisingly, the tram gets excellent ridership from all sorts of people, including people who have cars.

To get to the shopping centre on the edge of town, you'd either need to get the tram into the city centre and back out again, or get a bus. Either way takes about an hour.

The bus goes on a windy route that makes you feel sick, and the suspension on the buses is crap so it's a loud, bumpy, uncomfortable ride all the way. Oh, and if you miss it, you'll be waiting for at least half an hour, maybe an hour depending on the route you choose.

Alternatively, you could drive there in 15 minutes. Unsurprisingly, the only people on the bus are old biddies who can't drive any more. The bus prices were recently put down to £2 for a single, in preparation for them coming under public ownership soon. It doesn't seem to have had any effect on those routes, because the overall experience is so poor.

If you want to get more people out of their cars and onto those buses, you need to increase their frequency so that people don't have to plan when to get there, they can just turn up and go. You also need to make them more comfortable, and give them routes that don't go all around the houses so the journey isn't artificially lengthened.

Making it free would be nice too, but not the most important piece of the puzzle.

Well if it was free then demand would go up quite a bit i suspect, which in turn would lead to the provision of more services and routes

[WMUG]

Well if it was free then demand would go up quite a bit i suspect, which in turn would lead to the provision of more services and routes

You'd think so, but that's not what happened here when fares got reduced :lol:

It seems like there was a small increase in passenger numbers, looking at the data they've provided, but extra routes haven't been provided.

Then again, with a big overhaul to the bus system due to happen over the next couple of years, it could be that they're holding off until then.

[Niall_Quinn]

Well it's not irrelevant, is it? I mean, if all of the relevant experts agree on something in a scientific field - or the vast majority do - then it does lend credibility to the idea about which there is agreement.
It's not proof of course, nothing should ever be said to be proven in science. But it's certainly not irrelevant.


When you're shown evidence you dismiss it. For example:
https://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/
No doubt you'll say that's propaganda. Which is fine, but don't say that there's no science which indicates climate change. There's loads, you simply reject it.

But given that you're not going to get the big offenders to change - and actually, why should they? The West have caused this problem, it's a bit rich of us to tell them they can't develop as we have.
Given that, we'd do better working on mitigating the effects of climate change - I think we can all agree the climate is changing, even if you reject the notion that we're causing it.
Thinking that putting solar panels on buildings or buying electric cars is going to have any effect is ludicrous.

And don't change the argument to one that requires a lower threshold to make. The claim was the science is settled beyond all doubt. It isn't. There's a sea of doubt and for pretty obvious reasons. The arguments being made by climate alarmists are on their face ludicrous. Their science is based on modelling. Opposition voices aren't even allowed to speak. The debate is outlawed and the "consensus" holds sway. Countless examples of data being faked, taken out of context, viewed in simple isolation rather than as part of a complex whole, the vested interests, the non-sensical "solutions" that don't survive even cursory scrutiny.

Yes it's a scam. The most obvious scam imaginable. A scam as huge as the mystery that surrounds why so many buy into it.

Even if we all just say sure, human activity is increasing global temperatures (a massive, unsubstantiated beyond spaghetti code assumption) there are far better, cheaper, humane and socially just policies that could be deployed. If this really is an existential threat (as in a real threat as opposed to somebody invading some faggot's safe space) then of course we must all pull together to solve the problem with science and economic commitment and a determination to preserve a life worth living. Instead we hollow out the earth making crappy solar panels that don't even serve the purpose, crappy electric buggies that don't serve the purpose, we kill all the cows, eat the bugs, live in shoe boxes, shiver in winter and hand over our last pennies to the corporations.

While still finding the time to cheer for war.

Absolutely, our leaders are in this for our benefit, mine and yours. Who could ever doubt it?

Do most people want clean air, clean oceans, natural foods (instead of the processed shit that apparently isn't a threat), real healthcare (instead of vaccines that don't vaccinate)? I'm betting most do. Except, hilariously enough, those charged with saving us from global warming. It's a joke.

And I don't dismiss evidence. I read it and point out the glaring flaws. When evidence is so far from actual science it has no value. It's not me dismissing it, it's the charlatans who push it out in the service of politics and economics - but never science. What I've always wanted to see is the foremost alarmists sit in a room with scientists and debate this properly, in front of a global audience and on the record. But that transparency can never be allowed on such a public stage because the alarmist arguments are absurd and their science is compromised beyond all usefulness. And they know it.

So many are under the boot of authoritarians they can't even have a sensible discussion about public transport. So many things that could just be assumed or left to common sense have to be teased out in painstaking detail. Where did intelligence disappear to. Of course if you make public transport free you do a proper fucking job and double, treble, times ten the number of buses and routes. Compared to the trillions we are being urged to spend to save the world from ending let's just have a bus for every fucking person - way, way cheaper and people don't have to starve or freeze or have their property stolen.

The warmist nutters aren't looking for solutions. They are looking for bumper profits. You'd better get a hold of that idea soon, along with millions more, or we are all fucked. There is a threat, but it has nothing to do with the climate.

[Niall_Quinn]

You'd think so, but that's not what happened here when fares got reduced :lol:

It seems like there was a small increase in passenger numbers, looking at the data they've provided, but extra routes haven't been provided.

Then again, with a big overhaul to the bus system due to happen over the next couple of years, it could be that they're holding off until then.

How can there be a big overhaul to the bus system? It exists for one reason and only one reason, profit. When there's only a single criteria, how can you overhaul it? Or maybe that's code for cutting unprofitable routes? Like the bus service in the town (more like village) I grew up in. The last bus will be cut at the end of this month. OAPs will then have the option to walk (or zimmer) a mile to the station, which will be having its ticket office closed. So I guess nanny (who we did all that covid shit to save - for profit) will have to figure out the ticket machine. Except it broken 90% of the time. And doesn't accept cash anyway. And it takes a maths degree to figure out if you want to go more than 5 stops.

But you can book on a £50 per month mobile phone, granny pensioner. It's so convenient. I bet half of them wish they had died from covid.

If the world is about to end, why haven't we said fuck it, profits be damned, our arses are on the line? And worked on the solution? Why do we still have to pay more and more to rich people for less and less?

[WMUG]

How can there be a big overhaul to the bus system? It exists for one reason and only one reason, profit. When there's only a single criteria, how can you overhaul it? Or maybe that's code for cutting unprofitable routes? Like the bus service in the town (more like village) I grew up in. The last bus will be cut at the end of this month. OAPs will then have the option to walk (or zimmer) a mile to the station, which will be having its ticket office closed. So I guess nanny (who we did all that covid shit to save - for profit) will have to figure out the ticket machine. Except it broken 90% of the time. And doesn't accept cash anyway. And it takes a maths degree to figure out if you want to go more than 5 stops.

But you can book on a £50 per month mobile phone, granny pensioner. It's so convenient. I bet half of them wish they had died from covid.

If the world is about to end, why haven't we said fuck it, profits be damned, our arses are on the line? And worked on the solution? Why do we still have to pay more and more to rich people for less and less?

It's coming under public ownership over the next two years, so (hopefully) moving away from a profit-based model and towards a service-based one. That's the idea, anyway, let's see what actually happens. They've got the bloke who'd been in charge of London's transport in charge of it, so I am cautiously optimistic.

Yeah, the situation in that place sounds pretty dire and is exactly the problem with profit-based transport.

[Niall_Quinn]

It's coming under public ownership over the next two years, so (hopefully) moving away from a profit-based model and towards a service-based one. That's the idea, anyway, let's see what actually happens. They've got the bloke who'd been in charge of London's transport in charge of it, so I am cautiously optimistic.

Yeah, the situation in that place sounds pretty dire and is exactly the problem with profit-based transport.

What, the entire bus network? I would want to see the numbers on that, pretty urgently. Because I'm guessing there will be bumper pay-offs for the private operators, but let's see what they leave us in return. If there's a sea of debt, or a decades long backlog on maintenance and replacement vehicles it'll be us picking up that bill too.

[WMUG]

What, the entire bus network? I would want to see the numbers on that, pretty urgently. Because I'm guessing there will be bumper pay-offs for the private operators, but let's see what they leave us in return. If there's a sea of debt, or a decades long backlog on maintenance and replacement vehicles it'll be us picking up that bill too.

Yeah, all bus routes within Greater Manchester. From the sounds of it, it'll run similarly to how London does now (except they'll be yellow not red).

They'll be letting each franchise expire and taking over from there so no pay-off (officially), but obviously with the franchises expiring at different times (my area's the last to come under TfGM :( ) there'll be an overlap period where some operators are publicly run and some not. That overlap period is due to end in late 2025 iirc.

They've recently taken delivery of a few dozen new buses to be added to the fleet as well, and I expect that'll continue.

I think inevitably the companies will be less incentivised to do high quality maintenance work on the vehicles during the "lame duck" period, so that may be an issue to begin with. I doubt it'll last decades, though.

[Letters]

Huw Edwards, eh?
Who’d a thunk it?

[HCZ_Reborn]

Huw Edwards, eh?
Who’d a thunk it?

Me for the last five days….not because I’m a detective but because he was the most prominent BBC presenter for who there was radio silence for (yes I said Greg Wallace but that was because I don’t like him)

“In the last few moments Buckingham Palace has confirmed the death of her majesty Queen Elizabeth…send me a cock pic”

[Letters]

Me for the last five days….not because I’m a detective but because he was the most prominent BBC presenter for who there was radio silence for
Well yes, that is an obvious way to rule people out and so work it out by a process of elimination. I just couldn’t be arsed trying to do that, the name was always going to emerge sooner or later.


“In the last few moments Buckingham Palace has confirmed the death of her majesty Queen Elizabeth…send me a cock pic”
:haha:

[HCZ_Reborn]

Well yes, that is an obvious way to rule people out and so work it out by a process of elimination. I just couldn’t be arsed trying to do that, the name was always going to emerge sooner or later.


:haha:

Usually wouldn’t make the effort as celebrity nonsense bores me, but when it comes to nonces…(although the police aren’t looking to charge him with anything) different matter. I hope they don’t try the Schofield bollocks of calling it homophobia, it’s not about the sexuality, it’s about power imbalance and preying on vulnerable people for sexual gratification.

[WMUG]

Hasn't the lawyer of the alleged "victim" come out and basically said it's all bollocks?

[HCZ_Reborn]

Hasn't the lawyer of the alleged "victim" come out and basically said it's all bollocks?

A) There’s more than one

B) The fact that he has the money to pay for someone to make representations on his behalf given his main occupation appears to be crack head, I’d say that this denial ironically makes the accusation more likely to be true

[HCZ_Reborn]

Fucking hell

A lot of liberal finger wagging going on at the moment “don’t you feel bad for hounding a man about his private life”

Even If it wasn’t illegal (and let’s be fair the jury is out on that, there’s no evidence of illegality but absence of evidence not evidence of absence) one of these lads was still in school. This was clearly exploitative, and because he’s taken refuge in the overburdened mental health sector….it’s him I’m meant to feel sorry for?

Is he now likely to be suicidally depressed/anxious….Im sure he is, but that’s knowledge that his own behaviour has bitten him on the arse.

Don’t get me wrong, whilst he can’t keep his job at the Beeb….I think he should be left alone now, maybe in a couple of years when it’s all blown over he can return to tv in some form….but maybe he should reflect on why he’s a wrong un. Spend some time working with charities that deal with the fall out of sexual abuse/substance abuse of young sex workers.

[Letters]

And don't change the argument to one that requires a lower threshold to make. The claim was the science is settled beyond all doubt. It isn't.
Well hang on a minute. That was Mac's claim, not mine. He said it was "scientifically proven beyond doubt".
I later said "There is pretty much consensus that we are a cause [of climate change]",
Those two claims are not equivalent.

You then said "consensus is irrelevant in science". I said that of course it isn't irrelevant, but I also said
"It's not proof of course, nothing should ever be said to be proven in science."


Their science is based on modelling.
Well of course. What else can it be based on? This is a "softer" science than, say, physics. In the latter you can hypothesise that, say, heavier cannonballs accelerate as they fall at the same rate as lighter ones and then you can go and directly test that. Climate science can only do modelling and make predictions. They can of course, over time, check those predictions against observations. I posted a video some time ago where someone went through old models and showed how actually they hadn't done a bad job of predicting the rise which has been observed.


Opposition voices aren't even allowed to speak. The debate is outlawed and the "consensus" holds sway.
You are going to have to evidence that. Opposition voices in science are why we no longer believe the earth is the centre of the universe or that the Newtonian model of gravity is correct.
New ideas may take time to find acceptance but there is always debate in science. If there wasn't then it would stop.


Countless examples of data being faked, taken out of context, viewed in simple isolation rather than as part of a complex whole, the vested interests, the non-sensical "solutions" that don't survive even cursory scrutiny.
Can you provide examples of those things? I have provided examples of some of those things being done by the people who deny man-made climate change - cherry picking data or only looking at a short term trend, ignoring the longer term one. In the video I mentioned above the bloke gave an example where some people had dishonestly claimed that an old model had massively overestimated the warming. In fact the old model had made 3 predictions, each making different assumptions. The model which made the assumptions which most closely reflected what happened (the 3 models were based on different assumptions of how CO2 emissions would change over time) made a prediction more or less in line with what has happened.


Even if we all just say sure, human activity is increasing global temperatures (a massive, unsubstantiated beyond spaghetti code assumption) there are far better, cheaper, humane and socially just policies that could be deployed.
Well, I think this part is where we are aligned.
I don't think it's an existential threat, it's not going to wipe us out as a species. But it's going to affect a lot of people, it already is.
But I don't think the powers that be have the ability or desire to deal with it.
To deal with it effectively would mean such radical changes to our lifestyles that no-one would vote for it. So sure, they come up with flim-flam about solar panels and EVs.


And I don't dismiss evidence.
Dude, come on. When I've posted videos like the one I mentioned above you've dismissed them as "propaganda" with no real effort to discuss the contents.

[Niall_Quinn]

Well hang on a minute. That was Mac's claim, not mine. He said it was "scientifically proven beyond doubt".
I later said "There is pretty much consensus that we are a cause [of climate change]",
Those two claims are not equivalent.

You then said "consensus is irrelevant in science". I said that of course it isn't irrelevant, but I also said
"It's not proof of course, nothing should ever be said to be proven in science."


Well of course. What else can it be based on? This is a "softer" science than, say, physics. In the latter you can hypothesise that, say, heavier cannonballs accelerate as they fall at the same rate as lighter ones and then you can go and directly test that. Climate science can only do modelling and make predictions. They can of course, over time, check those predictions against observations. I posted a video some time ago where someone went through old models and showed how actually they hadn't done a bad job of predicting the rise which has been observed.


You are going to have to evidence that. Opposition voices in science are why we no longer believe the earth is the centre of the universe or that the Newtonian model of gravity is correct.
New ideas may take time to find acceptance but there is always debate in science. If there wasn't then it would stop.


Can you provide examples of those things? I have provided examples of some of those things being done by the people who deny man-made climate change - cherry picking data or only looking at a short term trend, ignoring the longer term one. In the video I mentioned above the bloke gave an example where some people had dishonestly claimed that an old model had massively overestimated the warming. In fact the old model had made 3 predictions, each making different assumptions. The model which made the assumptions which most closely reflected what happened (the 3 models were based on different assumptions of how CO2 emissions would change over time) made a prediction more or less in line with what has happened.


Well, I think this part is where we are aligned.
I don't think it's an existential threat, it's not going to wipe us out as a species. But it's going to affect a lot of people, it already is.
But I don't think the powers that be have the ability or desire to deal with it.
To deal with it effectively would mean such radical changes to our lifestyles that no-one would vote for it. So sure, they come up with flim-flam about solar panels and EVs.


Dude, come on. When I've posted videos like the one I mentioned above you've dismissed them as "propaganda" with no real effort to discuss the contents.

Yeah, and I already informed you that scientific consensus is irrelevant. So stop trying to change the context of the debate to make it easier to reach a point from which you can argue. Even your consensus, irrelevant as it is, holds no water because that claim was comprehensively debunked.

I thought you were an avid BBC viewer? Are you saying you haven't witnessed the overwhelming bias when it comes to who can speak and who can't on platforms that reach a wide target audience? On every media platform, in every international forum, everywhere where politics holds sway the debate STARTS from the assumption the science is settled. Laughably this arrangement also stems from yours and Macs supposition the debate is settled, whether by consensus or beyond all doubt (in terms of the science, presumably).

Yet studies (which I have little doubt are also biased in favour of the so-called, already debunked, consensus) suggest there is no significant bias in the volume of peer reviewed research once private funding is removed as a factor. Obviously the majority of scientific literature favours the climate agenda because operators of the agenda fund science to find specific outcomes. Science that questions the agenda tends to be independently financed. So you can say, it is lucrative to be pro-agenda, and expensive to question that agenda. Nevertheless there is a scientific discussion which you will never see reflected in parliaments or on wide audience media platforms.

The alarmists also have the great advantage of being able to point out the window and scream, "It's a Cerberus heatwave!" (not even a joke), and the average citizen will be able to feel it is hot. Whereas subjecting them to the science will cause them to flip the channel. Same scam as Covid. Nobody was dying in the streets but the fear of it was sufficient.

But if you COULD get people to pay even a little attention to the science the climate scam would collapse completely. That's what we need, somebody who hasn't been banished from our screens to be reinstated and to deliver the science in a palatable manner. Bellamy would have been a good choice but "everyone knows" he's a nutter, right? Unlike that stand-up guy Attenborough who hob-nobs with the WEF and our new cuckoo king.

Not even a little suspicious? Sounds to me like you're doing the Covid thing again. SOMETHING MUST BE DONE! It sounds like you are saying you believe nothing will be done (apart from the disintegration of our economies and civil liberties) but you would like to see MUCH MORE done? Like what?

Despite the bias media and the bullshit politics and the same grasping claws hungry for total profit, there is actual science operating beyond the rigged models and the doctored data.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XltFOh7Cg2U

Ignore the political bits. Focus on how the models are rigged and the data manipulated. Don't worry about the speaker and focus on the message. He mentions a fraction of the ongoing corruption in climate science (which is not a proper science).

[WMUG]

If you want me to organise an appointment for you, is it really such a difficult ask to keep your calendar up to date?

:fury:

[Letters]

No it isn't. Well, it shouldn't be. But people are idiots, welcome to the world of work :shrug:

[WMUG]

No it isn't. Well, it shouldn't be. But people are idiots, welcome to the world of work :shrug:

Well they should just stop, obviously.

[HCZ_Reborn]

https://twitter.com/bestforbritain/status/1681790709991342081?s=46&t=n1tnxEg6k_DvSqUkaQFrjw

Redolent of the kind of idiocy on display from people who just don’t want to admit because they don’t like Farage (I don’t like him either) they were hoping that this was about dodgy money rather than Coutts taking an overtly political decision.

Farage is a tiresome, attention seeking self-styled fifth columnist. But this kind of thing just fuels his grievance mongering.

And the comparison to Asher’s bakery is a joke. If the Bakery were denying service to gay people that obviously would be discriminatory, but they didn’t want to make a cake promoting gay marriage because they were personally opposed to it. Now ask me I think that’s churlish, but that should be up to them…it’s not turning away someone’s custom in general.

[Niall_Quinn]

Fifth columnist? Was that serious are are you seriously that confused? Fifth columnist? That's hilarious. I'm putting it down to a brain blip. If you want a fifth column look at the people deliberately trashing our culture and economy in service of an alien agenda. No seriously. This isn't a political thing, it's societal.

The cake thing bears no comparison whatsoever of course.

What's up with you? That was a seriously unintelligent post.

[Niall_Quinn]

You might also want to remember that Coutts had its begging bowl out not that long ago and we, the people, were volunteered to rush to the rescue of this zero benefit, all downside institution. And now it is speaking of incongruent values? I would hope that every decent person has nothing whatsoever in common with Coutts bank and abides by none of it "standards."

[HCZ_Reborn]

So ULEZ turns out to be a policy about as popular as having a child sex offender living on your street. Who knew

[Mac76]

So ULEZ turns out to be a policy about as popular as having a child sex offender living on your street. Who knew

Your neighbours presumably

[Mac76]

Alright for some...

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jul/20/king-charles-to-receive-huge-pay-rise-from-uk-taxpayers

[HCZ_Reborn]

Your neighbours presumably

:haha: that’s not bad for you

[Letters]

Your neighbours presumably

:lol:

[Letters]

I don't know what I think about ULEZ. It feels like a money grab but maybe it will help pollution. But my car is compliant so overall I don't really care.

[Letters]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-66271090

Tony Bennett :rose:

[HCZ_Reborn]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-66271090

Tony Bennett :rose:

As far back as I can remember I always wanted to be a gangster


https://youtu.be/Y22tIJ6toPY

[HCZ_Reborn]

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/man-jailed-after-dragging-dead-30532347


Weekend at Peadar’s doesn’t really have the same ring to it

[Letters]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X2HX5wsQVEA

:haha:

[HCZ_Reborn]

Kevin Spacey been cleared at Southwark crown court

My rule of thumb is, if there are multiple accusers you did it

Of course for good reason, the British legal system sets it’s bar far higher than that.

[Letters]

Does that mean I can watch House of Cards now?

[HCZ_Reborn]

Does that mean I can watch House of Cards now?

Well if you can live with the fact that it’s rubbish after series 2

I still prefer the British version

[Mac76]

It's a shame about Spacey, he's been in some great movies - American Beauty for one - and also did a lot of great work with the Old Vic

not that it excuses anything if he did them, but if he's cleared then that's that

[HCZ_Reborn]

It's a shame about Spacey, he's been in some great movies - American Beauty for one - and also did a lot of great work with the Old Vic

not that it excuses anything if he did them, but if he's cleared then that's that


Don’t disagree. I like him as an actor, whatever my personal opinion of his guilt or innocence…he was cleared in a court of law and that should be enough to allow him to resume his career.

[Globalgunner]

Don’t disagree. I like him as an actor, whatever my personal opinion of his guilt or innocence…he was cleared in a court of law and that should be enough to allow him to resume his career.

How come you don't feel the same about all the footballers that were freed?. You came up with some hocus pocus that they were still guilty despite the courts saying otherwise. Or you just hate people that kick a ball for a living

[Globalgunner]

It's a shame about Spacey, he's been in some great movies - American Beauty for one - and also did a lot of great work with the Old Vic

not that it excuses anything if he did them, but if he's cleared then that's that

He has been found not guilty, but I doubt Hollywood will have him back. He will have to do a lot more than apologise for just the accusations. Did they take his Hollywood pavement plaque away from him. I wonder? He is still a great actor in my eyes

[Letters]

https://www.mirror.co.uk/3am/celebrity-news/breaking-music-legend-sinad-oconnor-30560484.amp

Nothing compared to her :rose:

[HCZ_Reborn]

https://www.mirror.co.uk/3am/celebrity-news/breaking-music-legend-sinad-oconnor-30560484.amp

Nothing compared to her :rose:


No age for her to die, but always thought she had a few screws loose

She campaigns about the abuse of women and children by the Catholic Church only to become a Muslim later in life

If that’s not jumping from the frying pan to the fire I don’t know what is

She did have a bit of a fucked up childhood, and spent time in one of those Magdalene homes which would be enough to send anyone round the bend.

Shame though

[Letters]

Couldn’t name a single song she did apart from that one, which is iconic.
And yes, she was properly cray cray.
But 56 is no age.

[Letters]

Of course it was preparing us. Two years ago you'd never think it would be illegal to hug your parents, or any of the other bullshit, now we're waiting, condition to expect and accept another lockdown. Part of the new normal.

And it will be.
Nah.

[Mac76]

Couldn’t name a single song she did apart from that one, which is iconic.
And yes, she was properly cray cray.
But 56 is no age.

i'm sorry that she's died but personally i didn't like her singing voice and particularly dislked 'Nothing Compares...' - the fact that the overhyped bag of nothing sometimes know as 'Prince' wrote it didn't help either

[HCZ_Reborn]

i'm sorry that she's died but personally i didn't like her singing voice and particularly dislked 'Nothing Compares...' - the fact that the overhyped bag of nothing sometimes know as 'Prince' wrote it didn't help either

It’s one of those instances where the cover is better than the original track. Like Heartbeats by Jose Gonzalez is better than the version by the Knives and Johnny Cash’s version of Hurt is better than the Nine Inch Nails version.

That’s literally the best I can do by way of eulogy

[Letters]

Not really a fan of Prince either, but that song is good* and it's a brilliant* version of it.

*obviously these things are subjective, but it's pretty iconic so is a fairly commonly held view.

[LDG]

Prince as a person (though I obvs didn’t know him personally) was supposed to be a bit of a dick.

That said, you can be a rubbish person and a brilliant musician. And he was a brilliant mucisian. One of the greatest in fact…the boy could play unbelievable guitar.

When Harrison died, he played Gently Weeps with a massive ensemble at a tribute gig and it’s well documented that the likes of Tom Petty didn’t want him to play…especially the solo bit. Google it…what he does with it is fucking waaaaaayyy more amazing than any of the other boring celebrated artists…

[Mac76]

Not really a fan of Prince either, but that song is good* and it's a brilliant* version of it.

*obviously these things are subjective, but it's pretty iconic so is a fairly commonly held view.

you mean it was music made for and popular with the general masses?

that's no mark of genuine musical integrity or quality

I'm sure you're aware that music is far from democratic - certain songs get played to death on all the radio stations because they are pushed by the record company marketing teams - it's literally pile-it-high-sell-it-cheap music - the few big acts are the ones that make the money for the record companies - the Ed Sheerans, Beyonces etc

admittedly that helps the companies support smaller acts but it doesn't mean I have to like the sugary popular stuff

[Mac76]

was supposed to be a bit of a dick.

yes


he was a brilliant mucisian

no


the boy could play unbelievable guitar.



yes - unbelievably shite

[Letters]

Mac, you're just being silly and contrarian


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dWRCooFKk3c

Never really liked Prince that much but I respect him as a musician and song-writer.

[HCZ_Reborn]

you mean it was music made for and popular with the general masses?

that's no mark of genuine musical integrity or quality

I'm sure you're aware that music is far from democratic - certain songs get played to death on all the radio stations because they are pushed by the record company marketing teams - it's literally pile-it-high-sell-it-cheap music - the few big acts are the ones that make the money for the record companies - the Ed Sheerans, Beyonces etc

admittedly that helps the companies support smaller acts but it doesn't mean I have to like the sugary popular stuff


I personally couldn’t give a fuck whether a song or an artist is popular or not, the important thing is whether I like it

Most modern chart music is in my mind shite because it all sounds the same. But it’s all subjective anyway, plus music like films is a business and record labels are in the business of pushing what they think will sell.

Id argue there’s more of a democratisation to music now because bands can upload their own material and market their own product far more than they ever used to be able to.

I’ve never been a fan of Prince but I think it’s fair to say he was a good artist whether you’re a fan of his or not…..it’s clear there was a talent to him which made the industry push him on the consumer.

[Mac76]

Mac, you're just being silly and contrarian



no i'm not he's one of the most overrated artists of all time - i have ears and i can hear

The truth is most people's knowledge of music is pretty limited, precisely because most radio stations collectively play less than 0.000001% of music ever made.

My shelves are stacked with CDs by people you've never heard of but of whose music i'd rather listen to 1 second of rather than than a whole song by someone like Ponce

[Letters]

i have ears and i can hear
Wow. What an amazing, unique ability you have there. Well I guess that ends this discussion.

:rolleyes:

Music is subjective, dude.
And one can not particularly enjoy someone's output while recognising they clearly have talent.
Which is pretty much where I am with Prince. I'm not a huge fan but recognise he was clearly a talented musician and composer.
If you're one of those people who thinks you're "cool" because you don't like mainstream music then grow up, ffs.

Although, while we're here, there's a bloke in NY who is basically a glorified busker. I've got a few of his albums and one of them is one a favourite of mine (although, annoyingly, I have lost it, I think I lent it to someone and didn't get it back). He's called David Ippolito and the album is called Common Ground. Would recommend. I basically agree that there is a lot of talent out there from people who will never make it big.

[Mac76]

Music is subjective, dude...

...but recognise he was clearly a talented musician and composer.



those two statements are mutually exclusive - you say musical taste is subjective and yet you state that "he was clearly a talented musician and composer" as though it's a demonstrable fact

so which is it? :unsure:

[Letters]

They're not mutually exclusive. I can recognise that someone has talent and ability and also not particularly like his style of music.
I mean, that solo in WMGGW in that video above. Holy shit, he can play. Now, you might not like the sound he makes, but that's separate from acknowledging the technical ability he clearly has.

[Mac76]

They're not mutually exclusive. I can recognise that someone has talent and ability and also not particularly like his style of music.
I mean, that solo in WMGGW in that video above. Holy shit, he can play. Now, you might not like the sound he makes, but that's separate from acknowledging the technical ability he clearly has.

well maybe he could play as series of notes in the right way for a minute or two, but it is musically interesting? I'm not sure

as for 'composer' it make me laugh that someone who composed shite like 'Little Red Corvette' can be in any way lauded for thier songwriting

and '1999' isn't really a song as such, just a fairly basic keyboard riff that's been produced up to the nines

and I'd rather die than listen to a dirge like 'Purple Rain'

while we're on the subject i find it fascinating that it's often an artist's worst song thast's lauded the most

for example 'Bridge over troubled water' is a turgid piece of crap and probably the worst song Paul Simon ever wrote (and yes i do have a LOT of Paul simon material even though - my god - he's popular and probably not very cool)

[Letters]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-66337767

This is pretty much how I took over GW :cool:

[HCZ_Reborn]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-66337767

This is pretty much how I took over GW :cool:

And if this site was uranium rich, you can feel sure that you’d have been deposed and probably given the same fate as Salvador Allende

[Letters]

Anyone seen NQ? :unsure:

https://metro.co.uk/2023/07/28/mummified-remains-of-family-who-lived-off-the-grid-found-in-forest-19207853/

[WMUG]

Flying to France this evening.

Got an hour between the landing and the last bus to where Daddy is picking me up.

Tried to buy a ticket in advance to save time.

To do that, you need the app.

To get the app, you need to be in France.

:doh:

[Letters]

Sacred blue!

Could you use a VPN?

[LDG]

The horse! Why didn’t you ride the horse!

[WMUG]

Sacred blue!

Could you use a VPN?

I did try that, but it seems Google are wise to it.

My girlfriend managed to buy one on the apple store without even having to pretend :rolleyes:

Anyway, managed to elbow enough people out of the way in the passport queue to get there in time.

Turns out you just buy the tickets on board anyway :lol:

Allons-y!

[Niall_Quinn]

Anyone seen NQ? :unsure:

https://metro.co.uk/2023/07/28/mummified-remains-of-family-who-lived-off-the-grid-found-in-forest-19207853/

Yeah I'm here Mr Lickspittle. What do you need?

[Niall_Quinn]

no i'm not he's one of the most overrated artists of all time - i have ears and i can hear

The truth is most people's knowledge of music is pretty limited, precisely because most radio stations collectively play less than 0.000001% of music ever made.

My shelves are stacked with CDs by people you've never heard of but of whose music i'd rather listen to 1 second of rather than than a whole song by someone like Ponce

Never realised you were so cool.

Even though you still use CDs.

[Niall_Quinn]

Keep your eye on the alien invasion project. As insane as it might be, it looks. like they're going to try and pull it off. If they can convince people of this then all is lost. On the other hand, if I only have Letters laughing at me for saying this is a scam, that'll be a result.

[Letters]

Yeah I'm here Mr Lickspittle. What do you need?

Someone with a better sense of humour

[Letters]

Keep your eye on the alien invasion project. As insane as it might be, it looks. like they're going to try and pull it off.
Is this the same "they" as were "gearing up for marshal law" or a different one? :)

[HCZ_Reborn]

Is this the same "they" as were "gearing up for marshal law" or a different one? :)

I’m not even sure what he’s getting at, and there’s no point in asking him as you’ll get one of those “knowing” cryptic responses. Either he’s saying they are trying to con us by making us believe that there are extraterrestrials in hiding somewhere which if that’s the case I’d have thought they’d have gone to some effort to make the congressional witnesses more credible. Or he’s saying that they are bringing half wits to testify by means of a double bluff, so people think there aren’t aliens when in fact there are.

Who knows, who cares. It’s virtually certain we aren’t the only intelligent life in the galaxy let alone the universe, but given that faster than light travel is a theoretical impossibility we won’t ever meet them to know what they look, sound or smell like. And it’s debatable whether Homo sapiens qualify as intelligent life anyway

[Mac76]

And it’s debatable whether Homo sapiens qualify as intelligent life anyway

indeed - halfway through your post I was gearing up to say exactly the same thing

[Mac76]

Never realised you were so cool.

Even though you still use CDs.

just wait until everyone realises the reasons people gave up vinyl in the first place, namely: a) it damages easily b) it takes far more storage space c) it's boring having to turn over a record every 20-odd minutes and d) it takes far longer and is more complicated to rip a record than ripping a CD

CDs will come storming back in, you mark my words - I'm just ahead of my time

[Letters]

"And pray that there's intelligent life somewhere out in space because there's bugger all down here on earth"
- Monty Python

I think the question of whether there is intelligent life out there is basically unknowable. Any number we put on the probability of it emerging is little better than a guess and the distances involved make finding out or communicating practically impossible.

[Mac76]

given the number of exoplanets in the universe it would be unlikely that there isn't some form of evolved life (let's use that term rather than 'intelligent') somewhere

personally i still think it's really naive that we send those probes out with all sorts of information including our location etc, for any old malevolent alien species to pick up and then come and enslave us or just wipe us all out

[Letters]

But it depends how likely live evolving is, and that's what we don't really know. If we found solid evidence that it did exist on Mars then I guess that would indicate that there should be life everywhere.
But I doubt we'll ever be able to meet up, or even communicate.

https://i.ibb.co/mFtGGdm/Pool.jpg

[Letters]

CDs will come storming back in, you mark my words - I'm just ahead of my time
I dunno, dude. I mean, I still have CDs but they can get damaged too and start skipping.
People like convenience and digital formats are that. It has rather killed the art of the album though, which is a shame. I don't just mean cover art, also the artistry in crafting a collection of songs, putting them in order and so on.

[Marc Overmars]

CD’s have moved into relic territory really. Having to psychically change something over whether that be an album I’m listening to or a DVD I’m watching seems so dated.

[Mac76]

I dunno, dude. I mean, I still have CDs but they can get damaged too and start skipping.
People like convenience and digital formats are that. It has rather killed the art of the album though, which is a shame. I don't just mean cover art, also the artistry in crafting a collection of songs, putting them in order and so on.

sure it was always a silly myth that CDs were indestructable, but they're much more resilient than vinyl.

I agree with your point about 'crafting' an album but some out-and-out pop material has at least some album tracks are quite clearly space-fiuillers, as opposed to something where each track stands up in its own right.

tbh while i do still buy CDs sometimes, I'm now finding that some new releases are only vinyl-or-download which is reidiculous but it guess it costs money to produce it in lots ff different formats.

I have now begun to embrace simply buying downloads, but when i do, I still mainly buy an album as it's cheaper per track and you can just delete the ones you don't like

ulitmtely i do rip everything and almost entirely play it on my phone through noise-cancelling headphones, or in the car - of course some people slag off any kind of music compression format but in most cases it really doesn't make much difference most of the time - if you use the highest-quality MP3 at least, though i know some people insist on Flac - but Flac files takes up much more space

Anyway the vinyl-coming-back thing is just one big stupid pose which makes no real sense - and of course now we're seeing cassettes again which really is nuts

ultimately any physical format is more environmentally-intensive than digital download

[Mac76]

This is no surprise https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-66336058

btw while presumably those who signed up were also on Instagram, I think linking Threads to Instagram is a huge mistake.

I'm not on instgram and no-one i know is on it either and we won't be alone, so he's wiping out a whole load of potential sign-ups

[HCZ_Reborn]

This is no surprise https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-66336058

btw while presumably those who signed up were also on Instagram, I think linking Threads to Instagram is a huge mistake.

I'm not on instgram and no-one i know is on it either and we won't be alone, so he's wiping out a whole load of potential sign-ups


Instagram is more likely to be used by women, same as apps like Pinterest. If your social circle is majority male that would probably explain it

[Letters]

I don't understand Instagram. Like a lot of these platforms, it seems to be just a subset of what FB already does.
Although I know the younger generation tends not to go on FB.

[Marc Overmars]

I prefer Instagram as it’s more of a snippet and quicker to navigate aimlessly. I deleted Facebook years ago and I’m sure I’ll get rid of Insta soon enough.

[HCZ_Reborn]

I prefer Instagram as it’s more of a snippet and quicker to navigate aimlessly. I deleted Facebook years ago and I’m sure I’ll get rid of Insta soon enough.

I only keep Facebook because there are people on there (including relatives who live abroad) that Facebook messenger is the only way to contact them.

It shows the adaptation of human solipsism that we’ve changed from writing a paragraph about ourselves and our lives that we want people to be interested in to a snapshot through holiday pictures, pictures of our offspring or pictures of some average looking cake we’ve made.

[Marc Overmars]

It’s come full circle. During my uni days and early 20’s I loved posting about random shit I was doing. Now I’m 35 I rarely share anything about my life. There’s certainly a place for social media but I think the way we use it has definitely evolved. Like most things tend to really.