Totally O/T, I see Glyn Razzell has had his parole request turned down under Helen's Law as he would not identify where he buried his wife's body as he continues to plead his innocence and states he does not know where she is.
This is truly one of the oddest cases in legal history as there is no evidence that his wife is in fact dead. The only thing that convicted him was that police found her blood in a car he was using, but only found it on their third look. They had it for four days on the 2nd time they looked and returned the car to the owner, who then had it valetted due to the state the police left it in with fingerprint powder everywhere. When they took it in for the third time they found a few bloodspots that was visible to the naked eye in the boot. There is no explanation as to how the police missed these in their first 2 looks. No other DNA from his wife was found.
No one saw him abduct her from a busy Swindon street, none of the 25 CCTV cameras videoed his vehicle on his drive to the abduction site, and none videoed him on his drive to whereever he buried her. His neighbour confirmed that the vehicle was on Razell's driveway just 45 minutes after the alleged abduction.
Razzell also provided a decent alibi to the police. He claimed to have walked by a police station at the time of the abduction which had numerous CCTV cameras that would have videoed him. All were out of order (which Razzell would not have known).
If he gave up the place he buried his wife he would probably be realeased by now as he has been a model prisoner.
Just imagine if he has not killed her, he will not know where her body is and therefore will probably never be released.
Juries have their own dynamic but I suspect there was more to the story than you have just laid out otherwise I don’t think there would have been a conviction
This is a thought process we are all guilty of - ah, it is probably more complicated than it looks, lets move on. Juries are not infallible, there are lots of dodgy convictions.
There are positives and negatives to this. On the one hand, the law will motivate murderers to reveal what actually happened after they have given up on appealing their convictions, but this is at the expense of the genuinely innocent who get a defacto whole life sentence, unless they give a false confession or make up a story about where the body is in order to eventually get out of jail.
I would argue that the negatives outweigh the positives, but it was clearly a politically irresistable law. There will be lots of perverse and unfair outcomes.
Making up a story about where the body is would be hard as I’m fairly certain someone would check.
Indeed, but there's presumably an out if you describe something that cannot be verified, such as dumped at sea, fed to the local crocodiles etc.
Of course, if the person subsequently turns up alive, would you then be liable for something? Perjury, possibly? (not sure of the legal weight of such a statement). Providing false information?
Would really suck to be wrongly imprisoned for murder, then imprisoned again for lying about where the body was when it turned out the person was in fact alive!
There's the Muriel McKay case, of course, where the body has never been found although it's generally assumed that she's dead.
Morning all, that's shocking data in the header, isn't it? Or maybe not, because I recall something similar on evolution. Lots of Republicans in the US don't believe in that either. And speaking of evolution, I think there may lie the answer.
In my (new) quest to become more generally knowledgeable (not hard given my startpoint) I was brushing up yesterday on how we humans came to be. Turns out it was a longish process, about 10 million years, soup to nuts, where the earliest uprights were the soup and we are the nuts. This is how it read to me anyway. We have Got Evolution Done. That the process is ongoing, that we are still evolving, didn't seem to feature, but I'd have thought we are. Or at least we might be.
In which case, why should there not be a repeat of something that has happened before and which was key to us being what we are today? I refer to the Big Fork, when our lineage split into 2 streams, one (I forget the exact name) went with bigger jaws and the other with bigger brains, the latter further evolving over deep time into us, the former into something else. We then achieved dominance due to that "choice". It was the brains wot won it. Hard to credit, looking at much of what goes on, but there you go. Still true.
So, what I'm wondering, seeing these bizarre (to me) mindsets on climate change, is whether we might be seeing the very first inklings of such a seismic event taking place now and, like the financial crisis, like most things, starting in America. If this is the case, the schism between these 2 "tribes", Democrats and Republicans, takes on a much deeper significance than just its potential impact on next year's midterms and the betting implications thereof.
Speciation is one of the hardest parts of evolutionary theory to explain, because to survive a species has to procreate a lot, but to split into two species you have to prevent two populations of one species from procreating with each other for a long time.
The secret ballot will be enough to prevent speciation from happening.
Yes, speciation almost always happens where there is a geographical separation. Often caused by some sort of climate change. And it takes a long, long, long time. The Asian populations who crossed the Bering straits to the Americas were separated from other humans for around 10,000 years, I think? (Including, ISTR, 1000 years for which they were marooned in an area the size of half a Canadian province which was surrounded by solid ice. That must have been one of pre-history's grimmer periods.) But this wasn't nearly enough for them to evolve into a separate species. Even the 40-60,000 years for which Australian aborigines were separated from the rest of humanity wasn't enough (though there, there was probably some contact between aborigines and melanesians).
The format and structure of this conference makes pretty clear it's purpose is to make everyone involved feel important. If they wanted to achieve anything they wouldn't design them like this.
Or the end result is already known (more done but no where near enough) so you may as well make everyone feel important and that they've achieved something.
Very depressed to hear on the radio this morning that this COP26 thing is going on for 12 days. I'm already bored of hearing what such important voices as Archbishops think will be a good result from the conference.
Thank goodness we're on the verge of war with the Frogs to keep things at least slightly interesting!
So about diplomacy.. It comes to English in the late 18C, (unsurprisingly) from the French diplomatie, formed from diplomate the same way aristocratie was from aristocrate. The French diplomate was from Modern Latin diplomaticus, which game from the genitive case diplomatis of diploma - an official document.
This was from Ancient Greek δίπλωμα, which means "twice folded thing" and was the word for an official document, but also for the parallel streams of the milky way, the foetal position, or a double pot for boiling unguents.
In modern Greek δίπλωμα has the common modern meaning of diploma in English, but still retains its 'double folded' sense, meaning "the folding of, say, a map - especially in half".
Let's hope these holders of double folded official documents don't act like climate diplodocuses! (diplodocus - means 'double beamed' which is (surprisingly to me) nothing to with its long neck, and is to do with the shape of chevron bones in the tail)
In some old novels, the word "diplomat" is rendered as "diplomatist", which is an arrestingly ugly word for reasons I can't quite fathom.
Sounds more like someone who discriminates against those without proof of education
I quite like bicyclist and vegetableist, which seem to fit some.
Are you a bicyclist? No, I'm heterosexual.
Are you a transpenninine train driver? No, I'm cis.
Ok. That's a reasonable pragmatic view. I got the impression from your previous posts you could not be a republican and a conservative. Are there really no openly republican Tories?
That's neither reasonable nor pragmatic! He's literally talking about cancelling views he doesn't agree with and purging people who hold them. HYUFD is a Stalinist nightmare of a politician and almost everyone, Conservatives included, would fail his ridiculous purity tests.
I'm not entirely convinced that HYUFD is genuine. Would a party office-holder really go out of his way to drive sympathisers away from the party and urge them to vote Labour, or talk of "cancelling" people (surely the kind of language that right-wingers accuse lefties of using)? He's often interesting and well-informed on polling, and always polite, but politically he doesn't seem quite credible - but no offence if that's how he really feels.
Was talking to a lurker the other day who was saying much the same. Can't be real. Also seems, for a youngish person, to have a lot of time to comment here.
He is an elected official of the party
So are his duties that light that he can spend the time here he does?
I'm retired, and find plenty of other things to do, especially when there's cricket or Rugby League to watch!
Town Councils are serious business I have you know
Thornaby Town Council was a serious joke. Still is. As was neighbouring Billingham (a financial black hole with zero oversight) and Yarm (two rival groups of ex-Tory independents literally fighting in council meetings).
I'd abolish that whole tier in a heartbeat.
Town and parish councils are the closest layer of local government to most market towns and villages and arguably most relevant to what goes on there.
Indeed in some unitary councils like Buckinghamshire and Cornwall the old district councils have been abolished and the town and parish councils are the only layer of local government before the unitary councils (which have effectively replaced the old county councils there)
I know that there are some big ones. But from my experience they are the most remote from what goes on in towns and villages.
A council. Sometimes "elected" uncontested with no election. With no standards oversight of any practical description. Able to collect any amount of money they like via the precept. Which they can then spend on bonkers with no interest or oversight or due diligence.
It is the town council and parish council which runs the local market, the local fete and town show, remembrance parades, the local public toilets, allotments, recreation and playgrounds, cemeteries and has the first stage input into local licensing and planning applications.
They are very relevant to local life, especially if you only live in a village or small town and are based in that village or town. Certainly they are more directly connected than a unitary council based in a city or the county town on the other side of the county.
Most town council elections are contested by all parties, some parish council elections in villages are uncontested with local independents winning but then again much of their work is not party political but for the good of the local community
Yours might be. Teesside's town councils are responsible for dog poo bins. Everything else you mention is the borough council not the town council.
Appreciate that some are bigger - IIRC Salisbury is run by a council in this tier. But many were accurately portrayed on the Vicar of Dibley.
Of course the more borough and district and county councils get abolished and replaced by unitary councils, the more influential town and parish councils will be. As unitaries will do what the old county councils did and most but not all of what the old district and boroughs did with the town and parish councils doing the rest
In which case we need oversight. Stockton Borough Council is a unitary authority, and its practical oversight over the various dog poo bin town councils in its area was near zero.
Either the switching of cars was part of a very cunning plan, or the police stitched him up good and proper.
It is completely bizarre, he managed to drive past 25 CCTV cameras both ways and was never caught on any of them.
He managed to abduct his wife from a busy walkway at 9 a.m. on a workday morning with no one seeing him or the car before, after or during the abduction.
If he was as cunning as they say then he would have made sure there was no blood left and would never have abducted her in his friends car (he owned up to the police staright away that he had borrowed his friends car on the day of the abduction)
And police scientists took three attempts to find blood that was easily seen with the naked eye in a car that had been valetted after the police's first two attempts to find stuff had yielded nothing.
Morning all, that's shocking data in the header, isn't it? Or maybe not, because I recall something similar on evolution. Lots of Republicans in the US don't believe in that either. And speaking of evolution, I think there may lie the answer.
In my (new) quest to become more generally knowledgeable (not hard given my startpoint) I was brushing up yesterday on how we humans came to be. Turns out it was a longish process, about 10 million years, soup to nuts, where the earliest uprights were the soup and we are the nuts. This is how it read to me anyway. We have Got Evolution Done. That the process is ongoing, that we are still evolving, didn't seem to feature, but I'd have thought we are. Or at least we might be.
In which case, why should there not be a repeat of something that has happened before and which was key to us being what we are today? I refer to the Big Fork, when our lineage split into 2 streams, one (I forget the exact name) went with bigger jaws and the other with bigger brains, the latter further evolving over deep time into us, the former into something else. We then achieved dominance due to that "choice". It was the brains wot won it. Hard to credit, looking at much of what goes on, but there you go. Still true.
So, what I'm wondering, seeing these bizarre (to me) mindsets on climate change, is whether we might be seeing the very first inklings of such a seismic event taking place now and, like the financial crisis, like most things, starting in America. If this is the case, the schism between these 2 "tribes", Democrats and Republicans, takes on a much deeper significance than just its potential impact on next year's midterms and the betting implications thereof.
Speciation is one of the hardest parts of evolutionary theory to explain, because to survive a species has to procreate a lot, but to split into two species you have to prevent two populations of one species from procreating with each other for a long time.
The secret ballot will be enough to prevent speciation from happening.
Yes, speciation almost always happens where there is a geographical separation. Often caused by some sort of climate change. And it takes a long, long, long time. The Asian populations who crossed the Bering straits to the Americas were separated from other humans for around 10,000 years, I think? (Including, ISTR, 1000 years for which they were marooned in an area the size of half a Canadian province which was surrounded by solid ice. That must have been one of pre-history's grimmer periods.) But this wasn't nearly enough for them to evolve into a separate species. Even the 40-60,000 years for which Australian aborigines were separated from the rest of humanity wasn't enough (though there, there was probably some contact between aborigines and melanesians).
I think some environmental pressures are needed as well. And of course that which applies to the Native Australians also applies to their dogs. AIUI dingoes can and do mate with dogs brought by Europeans.
Totally O/T, I see Glyn Razzell has had his parole request turned down under Helen's Law as he would not identify where he buried his wife's body as he continues to plead his innocence and states he does not know where she is.
This is truly one of the oddest cases in legal history as there is no evidence that his wife is in fact dead. The only thing that convicted him was that police found her blood in a car he was using, but only found it on their third look. They had it for four days on the 2nd time they looked and returned the car to the owner, who then had it valetted due to the state the police left it in with fingerprint powder everywhere. When they took it in for the third time they found a few bloodspots that was visible to the naked eye in the boot. There is no explanation as to how the police missed these in their first 2 looks. No other DNA from his wife was found.
No one saw him abduct her from a busy Swindon street, none of the 25 CCTV cameras videoed his vehicle on his drive to the abduction site, and none videoed him on his drive to whereever he buried her. His neighbour confirmed that the vehicle was on Razell's driveway just 45 minutes after the alleged abduction.
Razzell also provided a decent alibi to the police. He claimed to have walked by a police station at the time of the abduction which had numerous CCTV cameras that would have videoed him. All were out of order (which Razzell would not have known).
If he gave up the place he buried his wife he would probably be realeased by now as he has been a model prisoner.
Just imagine if he has not killed her, he will not know where her body is and therefore will probably never be released.
Juries have their own dynamic but I suspect there was more to the story than you have just laid out otherwise I don’t think there would have been a conviction
This is a thought process we are all guilty of - ah, it is probably more complicated than it looks, lets move on. Juries are not infallible, there are lots of dodgy convictions.
There are positives and negatives to this. On the one hand, the law will motivate murderers to reveal what actually happened after they have given up on appealing their convictions, but this is at the expense of the genuinely innocent who get a defacto whole life sentence, unless they give a false confession or make up a story about where the body is in order to eventually get out of jail.
I would argue that the negatives outweigh the positives, but it was clearly a politically irresistable law. There will be lots of perverse and unfair outcomes.
Making up a story about where the body is would be hard as I’m fairly certain someone would check.
Indeed, but there's presumably an out if you describe something that cannot be verified, such as dumped at sea, fed to the local crocodiles etc.
Of course, if the person subsequently turns up alive, would you then be liable for something? Perjury, possibly? (not sure of the legal weight of such a statement). Providing false information?
Would really suck to be wrongly imprisoned for murder, then imprisoned again for lying about where the body was when it turned out the person was in fact alive!
I expect you would get away with time served.
Anyway, must get back to staff training…
Quite possibly. Make you wonder whether you could also get away with that for topping the newly discovered alive person who had set you up, particularly given the mitigating circumstances. "Yes, your honour, I did kill the deceased, but I would like to point out that I've already done the time; now I have simply done the crime"
Morning all, that's shocking data in the header, isn't it? Or maybe not, because I recall something similar on evolution. Lots of Republicans in the US don't believe in that either. And speaking of evolution, I think there may lie the answer.
In my (new) quest to become more generally knowledgeable (not hard given my startpoint) I was brushing up yesterday on how we humans came to be. Turns out it was a longish process, about 10 million years, soup to nuts, where the earliest uprights were the soup and we are the nuts. This is how it read to me anyway. We have Got Evolution Done. That the process is ongoing, that we are still evolving, didn't seem to feature, but I'd have thought we are. Or at least we might be.
In which case, why should there not be a repeat of something that has happened before and which was key to us being what we are today? I refer to the Big Fork, when our lineage split into 2 streams, one (I forget the exact name) went with bigger jaws and the other with bigger brains, the latter further evolving over deep time into us, the former into something else. We then achieved dominance due to that "choice". It was the brains wot won it. Hard to credit, looking at much of what goes on, but there you go. Still true.
So, what I'm wondering, seeing these bizarre (to me) mindsets on climate change, is whether we might be seeing the very first inklings of such a seismic event taking place now and, like the financial crisis, like most things, starting in America. If this is the case, the schism between these 2 "tribes", Democrats and Republicans, takes on a much deeper significance than just its potential impact on next year's midterms and the betting implications thereof.
At some point, millions of years ago, a few pieces of stinking slime crawled from the Sea and shouted to the Heavens "I am Man!"
Much more recently than that. And wasn't it "...Trump !" ?
A couple of years ago, a friend of mine went to a Republican barbecue in Texas, thinking it would be much the same as a Conservative barbecue in this country.
Wrong! He said that almost every conversation he had with them was completely outlandish.
Morning all, that's shocking data in the header, isn't it? Or maybe not, because I recall something similar on evolution. Lots of Republicans in the US don't believe in that either. And speaking of evolution, I think there may lie the answer.
In my (new) quest to become more generally knowledgeable (not hard given my startpoint) I was brushing up yesterday on how we humans came to be. Turns out it was a longish process, about 10 million years, soup to nuts, where the earliest uprights were the soup and we are the nuts. This is how it read to me anyway. We have Got Evolution Done. That the process is ongoing, that we are still evolving, didn't seem to feature, but I'd have thought we are. Or at least we might be.
In which case, why should there not be a repeat of something that has happened before and which was key to us being what we are today? I refer to the Big Fork, when our lineage split into 2 streams, one (I forget the exact name) went with bigger jaws and the other with bigger brains, the latter further evolving over deep time into us, the former into something else. We then achieved dominance due to that "choice". It was the brains wot won it. Hard to credit, looking at much of what goes on, but there you go. Still true.
So, what I'm wondering, seeing these bizarre (to me) mindsets on climate change, is whether we might be seeing the very first inklings of such a seismic event taking place now and, like the financial crisis, like most things, starting in America. If this is the case, the schism between these 2 "tribes", Democrats and Republicans, takes on a much deeper significance than just its potential impact on next year's midterms and the betting implications thereof.
Speciation is one of the hardest parts of evolutionary theory to explain, because to survive a species has to procreate a lot, but to split into two species you have to prevent two populations of one species from procreating with each other for a long time.
The secret ballot will be enough to prevent speciation from happening.
Yes, speciation almost always happens where there is a geographical separation. Often caused by some sort of climate change. And it takes a long, long, long time. The Asian populations who crossed the Bering straits to the Americas were separated from other humans for around 10,000 years, I think? (Including, ISTR, 1000 years for which they were marooned in an area the size of half a Canadian province which was surrounded by solid ice. That must have been one of pre-history's grimmer periods.) But this wasn't nearly enough for them to evolve into a separate species. Even the 40-60,000 years for which Australian aborigines were separated from the rest of humanity wasn't enough (though there, there was probably some contact between aborigines and melanesians).
I think some environmental pressures are needed as well. And of course that which applies to the Native Australians also applies to their dogs. AIUI dingoes can and do mate with dogs brought by Europeans.
Well crossing the Bering Strait was a response to an environmental opportunity, which then disappeared as sea levels rose. And crossing to Australia from possibly Timor was also a response to low sea levels, which rose, cutting the travellers off. Environmental pressures can be push factors towards encouraging populations to move - but there are also pull factors (i.e. economic opportunities).
Either the switching of cars was part of a very cunning plan, or the police stitched him up good and proper.
It is completely bizarre, he managed to drive past 25 CCTV cameras both ways and was never caught on any of them.
He managed to abduct his wife from a busy walkway at 9 a.m. on a workday morning with no one seeing him or the car before, after or during the abduction.
If he was as cunning as they say then he would have made sure there was no blood left and would never have abducted her in his friends car (he owned up to the police staright away that he had borrowed his friends car on the day of the abduction)
And police scientists took three attempts to find blood that was easily seen with the naked eye in a car that had been valetted after the police's first two attempts to find stuff had yielded nothing.
And yet the BBC researcher who examined the case later expressed herself satisfied. I certainly feel that there's more than was reported in the piece you posted.
Totally O/T, I see Glyn Razzell has had his parole request turned down under Helen's Law as he would not identify where he buried his wife's body as he continues to plead his innocence and states he does not know where she is.
This is truly one of the oddest cases in legal history as there is no evidence that his wife is in fact dead. The only thing that convicted him was that police found her blood in a car he was using, but only found it on their third look. They had it for four days on the 2nd time they looked and returned the car to the owner, who then had it valetted due to the state the police left it in with fingerprint powder everywhere. When they took it in for the third time they found a few bloodspots that was visible to the naked eye in the boot. There is no explanation as to how the police missed these in their first 2 looks. No other DNA from his wife was found.
No one saw him abduct her from a busy Swindon street, none of the 25 CCTV cameras videoed his vehicle on his drive to the abduction site, and none videoed him on his drive to whereever he buried her. His neighbour confirmed that the vehicle was on Razell's driveway just 45 minutes after the alleged abduction.
Razzell also provided a decent alibi to the police. He claimed to have walked by a police station at the time of the abduction which had numerous CCTV cameras that would have videoed him. All were out of order (which Razzell would not have known).
If he gave up the place he buried his wife he would probably be realeased by now as he has been a model prisoner.
Just imagine if he has not killed her, he will not know where her body is and therefore will probably never be released.
Juries have their own dynamic but I suspect there was more to the story than you have just laid out otherwise I don’t think there would have been a conviction
This is a thought process we are all guilty of - ah, it is probably more complicated than it looks, lets move on. Juries are not infallible, there are lots of dodgy convictions.
There are positives and negatives to this. On the one hand, the law will motivate murderers to reveal what actually happened after they have given up on appealing their convictions, but this is at the expense of the genuinely innocent who get a defacto whole life sentence, unless they give a false confession or make up a story about where the body is in order to eventually get out of jail.
I would argue that the negatives outweigh the positives, but it was clearly a politically irresistable law. There will be lots of perverse and unfair outcomes.
Making up a story about where the body is would be hard as I’m fairly certain someone would check.
Indeed, but there's presumably an out if you describe something that cannot be verified, such as dumped at sea, fed to the local crocodiles etc.
Of course, if the person subsequently turns up alive, would you then be liable for something? Perjury, possibly? (not sure of the legal weight of such a statement). Providing false information?
Would really suck to be wrongly imprisoned for murder, then imprisoned again for lying about where the body was when it turned out the person was in fact alive!
There's the Muriel McKay case, of course, where the body has never been found although it's generally assumed that she's dead.
There comes a point, of course, at which you can be pretty safe in assuming that. She'd be 107 now? So not completely nailed on, but very likely.
Very depressed to hear on the radio this morning that this COP26 thing is going on for 12 days. I'm already bored of hearing what such important voices as Archbishops think will be a good result from the conference.
Thank goodness we're on the verge of war with the Frogs to keep things at least slightly interesting!
So about diplomacy.. It comes to English in the late 18C, (unsurprisingly) from the French diplomatie, formed from diplomate the same way aristocratie was from aristocrate. The French diplomate was from Modern Latin diplomaticus, which game from the genitive case diplomatis of diploma - an official document.
This was from Ancient Greek δίπλωμα, which means "twice folded thing" and was the word for an official document, but also for the parallel streams of the milky way, the foetal position, or a double pot for boiling unguents.
In modern Greek δίπλωμα has the common modern meaning of diploma in English, but still retains its 'double folded' sense, meaning "the folding of, say, a map - especially in half".
Let's hope these holders of double folded official documents don't act like climate diplodocuses! (diplodocus - means 'double beamed' which is (surprisingly to me) nothing to with its long neck, and is to do with the shape of chevron bones in the tail)
In some old novels, the word "diplomat" is rendered as "diplomatist", which is an arrestingly ugly word for reasons I can't quite fathom.
Sounds more like someone who discriminates against those without proof of education
I quite like bicyclist and vegetableist, which seem to fit some.
Are you a bicyclist? No, I'm heterosexual.
Are you a transpenninine train driver? No, I'm cis.
Totally O/T, I see Glyn Razzell has had his parole request turned down under Helen's Law as he would not identify where he buried his wife's body as he continues to plead his innocence and states he does not know where she is.
This is truly one of the oddest cases in legal history as there is no evidence that his wife is in fact dead. The only thing that convicted him was that police found her blood in a car he was using, but only found it on their third look. They had it for four days on the 2nd time they looked and returned the car to the owner, who then had it valetted due to the state the police left it in with fingerprint powder everywhere. When they took it in for the third time they found a few bloodspots that was visible to the naked eye in the boot. There is no explanation as to how the police missed these in their first 2 looks. No other DNA from his wife was found.
No one saw him abduct her from a busy Swindon street, none of the 25 CCTV cameras videoed his vehicle on his drive to the abduction site, and none videoed him on his drive to whereever he buried her. His neighbour confirmed that the vehicle was on Razell's driveway just 45 minutes after the alleged abduction.
Razzell also provided a decent alibi to the police. He claimed to have walked by a police station at the time of the abduction which had numerous CCTV cameras that would have videoed him. All were out of order (which Razzell would not have known).
If he gave up the place he buried his wife he would probably be realeased by now as he has been a model prisoner.
Just imagine if he has not killed her, he will not know where her body is and therefore will probably never be released.
Juries have their own dynamic but I suspect there was more to the story than you have just laid out otherwise I don’t think there would have been a conviction
This is a thought process we are all guilty of - ah, it is probably more complicated than it looks, lets move on. Juries are not infallible, there are lots of dodgy convictions.
There are positives and negatives to this. On the one hand, the law will motivate murderers to reveal what actually happened after they have given up on appealing their convictions, but this is at the expense of the genuinely innocent who get a defacto whole life sentence, unless they give a false confession or make up a story about where the body is in order to eventually get out of jail.
I would argue that the negatives outweigh the positives, but it was clearly a politically irresistable law. There will be lots of perverse and unfair outcomes.
We had a case locally where the police failed to notice the body chopped up in the bath whilst searching a 1 bedroom flat. It was only when the bits had been taken out of the bath and put in black plastic bags for collection on the curb that someone else noted that there was something rather odd about them. So missing blood stains in the boot is maybe not that surprising.
Totally O/T, I see Glyn Razzell has had his parole request turned down under Helen's Law as he would not identify where he buried his wife's body as he continues to plead his innocence and states he does not know where she is.
This is truly one of the oddest cases in legal history as there is no evidence that his wife is in fact dead. The only thing that convicted him was that police found her blood in a car he was using, but only found it on their third look. They had it for four days on the 2nd time they looked and returned the car to the owner, who then had it valetted due to the state the police left it in with fingerprint powder everywhere. When they took it in for the third time they found a few bloodspots that was visible to the naked eye in the boot. There is no explanation as to how the police missed these in their first 2 looks. No other DNA from his wife was found.
No one saw him abduct her from a busy Swindon street, none of the 25 CCTV cameras videoed his vehicle on his drive to the abduction site, and none videoed him on his drive to whereever he buried her. His neighbour confirmed that the vehicle was on Razell's driveway just 45 minutes after the alleged abduction.
Razzell also provided a decent alibi to the police. He claimed to have walked by a police station at the time of the abduction which had numerous CCTV cameras that would have videoed him. All were out of order (which Razzell would not have known).
If he gave up the place he buried his wife he would probably be realeased by now as he has been a model prisoner.
Just imagine if he has not killed her, he will not know where her body is and therefore will probably never be released.
Juries have their own dynamic but I suspect there was more to the story than you have just laid out otherwise I don’t think there would have been a conviction
This is a thought process we are all guilty of - ah, it is probably more complicated than it looks, lets move on. Juries are not infallible, there are lots of dodgy convictions.
There are positives and negatives to this. On the one hand, the law will motivate murderers to reveal what actually happened after they have given up on appealing their convictions, but this is at the expense of the genuinely innocent who get a defacto whole life sentence, unless they give a false confession or make up a story about where the body is in order to eventually get out of jail.
I would argue that the negatives outweigh the positives, but it was clearly a politically irresistable law. There will be lots of perverse and unfair outcomes.
Making up a story about where the body is would be hard as I’m fairly certain someone would check.
No need to worry, they thought about that when baking it up.
"The proposals also take into account instances where, for example, a murderer may genuinely not know the location of a victim’s body if it has been moved."
Totally O/T, I see Glyn Razzell has had his parole request turned down under Helen's Law as he would not identify where he buried his wife's body as he continues to plead his innocence and states he does not know where she is.
This is truly one of the oddest cases in legal history as there is no evidence that his wife is in fact dead. The only thing that convicted him was that police found her blood in a car he was using, but only found it on their third look. They had it for four days on the 2nd time they looked and returned the car to the owner, who then had it valetted due to the state the police left it in with fingerprint powder everywhere. When they took it in for the third time they found a few bloodspots that was visible to the naked eye in the boot. There is no explanation as to how the police missed these in their first 2 looks. No other DNA from his wife was found.
No one saw him abduct her from a busy Swindon street, none of the 25 CCTV cameras videoed his vehicle on his drive to the abduction site, and none videoed him on his drive to whereever he buried her. His neighbour confirmed that the vehicle was on Razell's driveway just 45 minutes after the alleged abduction.
Razzell also provided a decent alibi to the police. He claimed to have walked by a police station at the time of the abduction which had numerous CCTV cameras that would have videoed him. All were out of order (which Razzell would not have known).
If he gave up the place he buried his wife he would probably be realeased by now as he has been a model prisoner.
Just imagine if he has not killed her, he will not know where her body is and therefore will probably never be released.
Juries have their own dynamic but I suspect there was more to the story than you have just laid out otherwise I don’t think there would have been a conviction
This is a thought process we are all guilty of - ah, it is probably more complicated than it looks, lets move on. Juries are not infallible, there are lots of dodgy convictions.
There are positives and negatives to this. On the one hand, the law will motivate murderers to reveal what actually happened after they have given up on appealing their convictions, but this is at the expense of the genuinely innocent who get a defacto whole life sentence, unless they give a false confession or make up a story about where the body is in order to eventually get out of jail.
I would argue that the negatives outweigh the positives, but it was clearly a politically irresistable law. There will be lots of perverse and unfair outcomes.
Making up a story about where the body is would be hard as I’m fairly certain someone would check.
Indeed, but there's presumably an out if you describe something that cannot be verified, such as dumped at sea, fed to the local crocodiles etc.
Of course, if the person subsequently turns up alive, would you then be liable for something? Perjury, possibly? (not sure of the legal weight of such a statement). Providing false information?
Would really suck to be wrongly imprisoned for murder, then imprisoned again for lying about where the body was when it turned out the person was in fact alive!
There's the Muriel McKay case, of course, where the body has never been found although it's generally assumed that she's dead.
There comes a point, of course, at which you can be pretty safe in assuming that. She'd be 107 now? So not completely nailed on, but very likely.
True; however the question now is how long has she been dead? And, where is the body.
To be fair, they have gathered in Scotland. He just happens to be in a different bit of it.
Edit to add: to Americans the 40 or so miles that he is out by might seem trivial.
Our own Philip Thompson would not understand. Great Scottish Central Desert separating the two (and admittedly, what is much worse, what sauce to put on chips if any).
I am about as much of an east coaster as you can get but I absolutely draw the line at putting sauce on your chips. C3COOH is the way for all civilised people.
Morning all, that's shocking data in the header, isn't it? Or maybe not, because I recall something similar on evolution. Lots of Republicans in the US don't believe in that either. And speaking of evolution, I think there may lie the answer.
In my (new) quest to become more generally knowledgeable (not hard given my startpoint) I was brushing up yesterday on how we humans came to be. Turns out it was a longish process, about 10 million years, soup to nuts, where the earliest uprights were the soup and we are the nuts. This is how it read to me anyway. We have Got Evolution Done. That the process is ongoing, that we are still evolving, didn't seem to feature, but I'd have thought we are. Or at least we might be.
In which case, why should there not be a repeat of something that has happened before and which was key to us being what we are today? I refer to the Big Fork, when our lineage split into 2 streams, one (I forget the exact name) went with bigger jaws and the other with bigger brains, the latter further evolving over deep time into us, the former into something else. We then achieved dominance due to that "choice". It was the brains wot won it. Hard to credit, looking at much of what goes on, but there you go. Still true.
So, what I'm wondering, seeing these bizarre (to me) mindsets on climate change, is whether we might be seeing the very first inklings of such a seismic event taking place now and, like the financial crisis, like most things, starting in America. If this is the case, the schism between these 2 "tribes", Democrats and Republicans, takes on a much deeper significance than just its potential impact on next year's midterms and the betting implications thereof.
Speciation is one of the hardest parts of evolutionary theory to explain, because to survive a species has to procreate a lot, but to split into two species you have to prevent two populations of one species from procreating with each other for a long time.
The secret ballot will be enough to prevent speciation from happening.
Yes, speciation almost always happens where there is a geographical separation. Often caused by some sort of climate change. And it takes a long, long, long time. The Asian populations who crossed the Bering straits to the Americas were separated from other humans for around 10,000 years, I think? (Including, ISTR, 1000 years for which they were marooned in an area the size of half a Canadian province which was surrounded by solid ice. That must have been one of pre-history's grimmer periods.) But this wasn't nearly enough for them to evolve into a separate species. Even the 40-60,000 years for which Australian aborigines were separated from the rest of humanity wasn't enough (though there, there was probably some contact between aborigines and melanesians).
Geographical separation is the textbook explanation, but it's a bit lacking in many respects. How does it explain speciation in the oceans, or among birds, where geographically splitting a previously homogenous population will be much harder to achieve?
I think there's some very interesting science to be done to work it out.
Totally O/T, I see Glyn Razzell has had his parole request turned down under Helen's Law as he would not identify where he buried his wife's body as he continues to plead his innocence and states he does not know where she is.
This is truly one of the oddest cases in legal history as there is no evidence that his wife is in fact dead. The only thing that convicted him was that police found her blood in a car he was using, but only found it on their third look. They had it for four days on the 2nd time they looked and returned the car to the owner, who then had it valetted due to the state the police left it in with fingerprint powder everywhere. When they took it in for the third time they found a few bloodspots that was visible to the naked eye in the boot. There is no explanation as to how the police missed these in their first 2 looks. No other DNA from his wife was found.
No one saw him abduct her from a busy Swindon street, none of the 25 CCTV cameras videoed his vehicle on his drive to the abduction site, and none videoed him on his drive to whereever he buried her. His neighbour confirmed that the vehicle was on Razell's driveway just 45 minutes after the alleged abduction.
Razzell also provided a decent alibi to the police. He claimed to have walked by a police station at the time of the abduction which had numerous CCTV cameras that would have videoed him. All were out of order (which Razzell would not have known).
If he gave up the place he buried his wife he would probably be realeased by now as he has been a model prisoner.
Just imagine if he has not killed her, he will not know where her body is and therefore will probably never be released.
Juries have their own dynamic but I suspect there was more to the story than you have just laid out otherwise I don’t think there would have been a conviction
This is a thought process we are all guilty of - ah, it is probably more complicated than it looks, lets move on. Juries are not infallible, there are lots of dodgy convictions.
There are positives and negatives to this. On the one hand, the law will motivate murderers to reveal what actually happened after they have given up on appealing their convictions, but this is at the expense of the genuinely innocent who get a defacto whole life sentence, unless they give a false confession or make up a story about where the body is in order to eventually get out of jail.
I would argue that the negatives outweigh the positives, but it was clearly a politically irresistable law. There will be lots of perverse and unfair outcomes.
It's the sort of law our politicians are supposed to resist calls for.
Yeah but the fact is that the people we have elected have rolled out reams and reams of bad law in recent decades. And you can guarantee that there is more on the way.
Morning all, that's shocking data in the header, isn't it? Or maybe not, because I recall something similar on evolution. Lots of Republicans in the US don't believe in that either. And speaking of evolution, I think there may lie the answer.
In my (new) quest to become more generally knowledgeable (not hard given my startpoint) I was brushing up yesterday on how we humans came to be. Turns out it was a longish process, about 10 million years, soup to nuts, where the earliest uprights were the soup and we are the nuts. This is how it read to me anyway. We have Got Evolution Done. That the process is ongoing, that we are still evolving, didn't seem to feature, but I'd have thought we are. Or at least we might be.
In which case, why should there not be a repeat of something that has happened before and which was key to us being what we are today? I refer to the Big Fork, when our lineage split into 2 streams, one (I forget the exact name) went with bigger jaws and the other with bigger brains, the latter further evolving over deep time into us, the former into something else. We then achieved dominance due to that "choice". It was the brains wot won it. Hard to credit, looking at much of what goes on, but there you go. Still true.
So, what I'm wondering, seeing these bizarre (to me) mindsets on climate change, is whether we might be seeing the very first inklings of such a seismic event taking place now and, like the financial crisis, like most things, starting in America. If this is the case, the schism between these 2 "tribes", Democrats and Republicans, takes on a much deeper significance than just its potential impact on next year's midterms and the betting implications thereof.
At some point, millions of years ago, a few pieces of stinking slime crawled from the Sea and shouted to the Heavens "I am Man!"
Much more recently than that. And wasn't it "...Trump !" ?
A couple of years ago, a friend of mine went to a Republican barbecue in Texas, thinking it would be much the same as a Conservative barbecue in this country.
Wrong! He said that almost every conversation he had with them was completely outlandish.
Large elements of the party are in danger of becoming an American Taliban.
The poll from the nonpartisan Public Religion Research Institute paints a troubling portrait of a growing segment of the public that is increasingly unmoored from reality as it embraces conspiracy theories about child abduction and stolen elections.
It found a deep divide between those who trust right-wing media outlets and the rest of the nation — and even a divide between those who trust Fox News and those who trust outlets like One America Network and Newsmax.
The poll found about three in ten Americans, 31 percent, believe the 2020 elections were stolen from Trump, including two-thirds of Republicans and a whopping 82 percent of those who trust Fox News more than any other media outlet.
Among those who trust far-right outlets like One America Network and Newsmax, 97 percent say they believe the election — which even Trump’s own cybersecurity and election security officials agreed was the safest and most secure ever conducted in the United States — was stolen.
One in five Americans believe in the core tenet of the QAnon conspiracy that “there is a storm coming soon,” while one in six believe the United States government is controlled by a group of Satan-worshipping pedophiles who run a global child sex-trafficking ring.
The same share, 18 percent, say they agree with the statement that America has gotten so far off track that “true American patriots may have to resort to violence in order to save our country.”...
On isolation: there's a fascinating and now rare whistling language developed by one group or other in what today (I think) is South Africa.
Language is quite an interesting topic because it's one of very few things that has no genetic influence and is solely down to environmental causes.
Tell that to the poor dolphins who struggle without success to learn human language, but don't have the right genetic material to grow a larynx of the required shape...
To be fair, they have gathered in Scotland. He just happens to be in a different bit of it.
Edit to add: to Americans the 40 or so miles that he is out by might seem trivial.
Our own Philip Thompson would not understand. Great Scottish Central Desert separating the two (and admittedly, what is much worse, what sauce to put on chips if any).
I am about as much of an east coaster as you can get but I absolutely draw the line at putting sauce on your chips. C3COOH is the way for all civilised people.
I wouldn't agree - not least because that chemical looks very unstable on a first glance. CH3COOH, now, that's proper Weegie juice.
I’m now reporting from Edinburgh in Scotland where 20,000 world leaders and delegates have gathered for the COP26 Climate Summit. COP, by the way, stands for “Conference of the Parties.” It’s the 26th time they have gathered to discuss and take action on this critical issue.
Morning all, that's shocking data in the header, isn't it? Or maybe not, because I recall something similar on evolution. Lots of Republicans in the US don't believe in that either. And speaking of evolution, I think there may lie the answer.
In my (new) quest to become more generally knowledgeable (not hard given my startpoint) I was brushing up yesterday on how we humans came to be. Turns out it was a longish process, about 10 million years, soup to nuts, where the earliest uprights were the soup and we are the nuts. This is how it read to me anyway. We have Got Evolution Done. That the process is ongoing, that we are still evolving, didn't seem to feature, but I'd have thought we are. Or at least we might be.
In which case, why should there not be a repeat of something that has happened before and which was key to us being what we are today? I refer to the Big Fork, when our lineage split into 2 streams, one (I forget the exact name) went with bigger jaws and the other with bigger brains, the latter further evolving over deep time into us, the former into something else. We then achieved dominance due to that "choice". It was the brains wot won it. Hard to credit, looking at much of what goes on, but there you go. Still true.
So, what I'm wondering, seeing these bizarre (to me) mindsets on climate change, is whether we might be seeing the very first inklings of such a seismic event taking place now and, like the financial crisis, like most things, starting in America. If this is the case, the schism between these 2 "tribes", Democrats and Republicans, takes on a much deeper significance than just its potential impact on next year's midterms and the betting implications thereof.
At some point, millions of years ago, a few pieces of stinking slime crawled from the Sea and shouted to the Heavens "I am Man!"
Much more recently than that. And wasn't it "...Trump !" ?
A couple of years ago, a friend of mine went to a Republican barbecue in Texas, thinking it would be much the same as a Conservative barbecue in this country.
Wrong! He said that almost every conversation he had with them was completely outlandish.
Large elements of the party are in danger of becoming an American Taliban.
The poll from the nonpartisan Public Religion Research Institute paints a troubling portrait of a growing segment of the public that is increasingly unmoored from reality as it embraces conspiracy theories about child abduction and stolen elections.
It found a deep divide between those who trust right-wing media outlets and the rest of the nation — and even a divide between those who trust Fox News and those who trust outlets like One America Network and Newsmax.
The poll found about three in ten Americans, 31 percent, believe the 2020 elections were stolen from Trump, including two-thirds of Republicans and a whopping 82 percent of those who trust Fox News more than any other media outlet.
Among those who trust far-right outlets like One America Network and Newsmax, 97 percent say they believe the election — which even Trump’s own cybersecurity and election security officials agreed was the safest and most secure ever conducted in the United States — was stolen.
One in five Americans believe in the core tenet of the QAnon conspiracy that “there is a storm coming soon,” while one in six believe the United States government is controlled by a group of Satan-worshipping pedophiles who run a global child sex-trafficking ring.
The same share, 18 percent, say they agree with the statement that America has gotten so far off track that “true American patriots may have to resort to violence in order to save our country.”...
And it's all evangelicals too. Once you start believing in stuff without evidence, you can be fed any lie. Despite the US being founded on Enlightenment principles, the rationalist spirit of the Enlightenment never took deep root in the US population as it did in Western Europe.
To be fair, they have gathered in Scotland. He just happens to be in a different bit of it.
Edit to add: to Americans the 40 or so miles that he is out by might seem trivial.
I wonder how many delegates are staying in Edinburgh? Must be tempting.
Quite a lot. Not enough accommodation in Glasgow.
I am supposed to be doing a proof in Glasgow for the next 2 days. I was quoted around £1000 for 2 nights so its an early train journey for me.
I'm debating going to a gig in Glasgow tomorrow night. Would stay over but every hotel in the central belt is full of COPpers.
I honestly wouldn't. It looks like there are going to be streets shut off and lots of self important people posturing everywhere.
Not just streets but whole areas. And huge pressure on trains in and out (lots of people are staying outside Glasgow - I'd suspect as far as Stirling certainly , perhaps Perth too).
I’m now reporting from Edinburgh in Scotland where 20,000 world leaders and delegates have gathered for the COP26 Climate Summit. COP, by the way, stands for “Conference of the Parties.” It’s the 26th time they have gathered to discuss and take action on this critical issue.
Tottenham Hotspur are in advanced talks with Antonio Conte with a view to appointing the Italian as their new head coach after sacking Nuno Espírito Santo.
Conte, 52, is on his way to London for discussions with Spurs over an 18-month deal to replace Nuno, who was dismissed only four months and ten Premier League games after being appointed.
The club’s board held talks yesterday about the Portuguese’s future but were reluctant to dismiss him until they had a replacement lined up. However, the club are increasingly confident about convincing Conte to take over.
Nuno arrived at Tottenham’s training ground this morning and was in line to take today’s session but positive talks with Conte, the former Chelsea manager, have accelerated his dismissal.
Becoming a centre offshore wind is good - and there's still loads of opportunity around Scotland.
And I think it's time that we developed an idea about long-term oil requirements, which are not going away completely any time soon.
I do not see Electric Eurofighters being a thing...
I have no problem with this new oilfield being opened up providing that it is accompanied by big investments into renewables and hydrogen. The problem is that we look set to get more oil, very little for anything else and no CCS at St Fergus again. At which point I expect local Tories will try and claim their Westminster government is investing in the NE.
Morning all, that's shocking data in the header, isn't it? Or maybe not, because I recall something similar on evolution. Lots of Republicans in the US don't believe in that either. And speaking of evolution, I think there may lie the answer.
In my (new) quest to become more generally knowledgeable (not hard given my startpoint) I was brushing up yesterday on how we humans came to be. Turns out it was a longish process, about 10 million years, soup to nuts, where the earliest uprights were the soup and we are the nuts. This is how it read to me anyway. We have Got Evolution Done. That the process is ongoing, that we are still evolving, didn't seem to feature, but I'd have thought we are. Or at least we might be.
In which case, why should there not be a repeat of something that has happened before and which was key to us being what we are today? I refer to the Big Fork, when our lineage split into 2 streams, one (I forget the exact name) went with bigger jaws and the other with bigger brains, the latter further evolving over deep time into us, the former into something else. We then achieved dominance due to that "choice". It was the brains wot won it. Hard to credit, looking at much of what goes on, but there you go. Still true.
So, what I'm wondering, seeing these bizarre (to me) mindsets on climate change, is whether we might be seeing the very first inklings of such a seismic event taking place now and, like the financial crisis, like most things, starting in America. If this is the case, the schism between these 2 "tribes", Democrats and Republicans, takes on a much deeper significance than just its potential impact on next year's midterms and the betting implications thereof.
At some point, millions of years ago, a few pieces of stinking slime crawled from the Sea and shouted to the Heavens "I am Man!"
Much more recently than that. And wasn't it "...Trump !" ?
A couple of years ago, a friend of mine went to a Republican barbecue in Texas, thinking it would be much the same as a Conservative barbecue in this country.
Wrong! He said that almost every conversation he had with them was completely outlandish.
Large elements of the party are in danger of becoming an American Taliban.
The poll from the nonpartisan Public Religion Research Institute paints a troubling portrait of a growing segment of the public that is increasingly unmoored from reality as it embraces conspiracy theories about child abduction and stolen elections.
It found a deep divide between those who trust right-wing media outlets and the rest of the nation — and even a divide between those who trust Fox News and those who trust outlets like One America Network and Newsmax.
The poll found about three in ten Americans, 31 percent, believe the 2020 elections were stolen from Trump, including two-thirds of Republicans and a whopping 82 percent of those who trust Fox News more than any other media outlet.
Among those who trust far-right outlets like One America Network and Newsmax, 97 percent say they believe the election — which even Trump’s own cybersecurity and election security officials agreed was the safest and most secure ever conducted in the United States — was stolen.
One in five Americans believe in the core tenet of the QAnon conspiracy that “there is a storm coming soon,” while one in six believe the United States government is controlled by a group of Satan-worshipping pedophiles who run a global child sex-trafficking ring.
The same share, 18 percent, say they agree with the statement that America has gotten so far off track that “true American patriots may have to resort to violence in order to save our country.”...
The ones to really worry about are those who tell you that The Day of the Rope is coming.
To be fair, they have gathered in Scotland. He just happens to be in a different bit of it.
Edit to add: to Americans the 40 or so miles that he is out by might seem trivial.
I wonder how many delegates are staying in Edinburgh? Must be tempting.
Quite a lot. Not enough accommodation in Glasgow.
I am supposed to be doing a proof in Glasgow for the next 2 days. I was quoted around £1000 for 2 nights so its an early train journey for me.
I'm debating going to a gig in Glasgow tomorrow night. Would stay over but every hotel in the central belt is full of COPpers.
I honestly wouldn't. It looks like there are going to be streets shut off and lots of self important people posturing everywhere.
Would need to be a clear night. Was bad enough driving the 50 minutes back from Aberdeen last night racing Noah in his Ark. Wouldn't do the drive back from Glasgow in torrential rain...
Morning all, that's shocking data in the header, isn't it? Or maybe not, because I recall something similar on evolution. Lots of Republicans in the US don't believe in that either. And speaking of evolution, I think there may lie the answer.
In my (new) quest to become more generally knowledgeable (not hard given my startpoint) I was brushing up yesterday on how we humans came to be. Turns out it was a longish process, about 10 million years, soup to nuts, where the earliest uprights were the soup and we are the nuts. This is how it read to me anyway. We have Got Evolution Done. That the process is ongoing, that we are still evolving, didn't seem to feature, but I'd have thought we are. Or at least we might be.
In which case, why should there not be a repeat of something that has happened before and which was key to us being what we are today? I refer to the Big Fork, when our lineage split into 2 streams, one (I forget the exact name) went with bigger jaws and the other with bigger brains, the latter further evolving over deep time into us, the former into something else. We then achieved dominance due to that "choice". It was the brains wot won it. Hard to credit, looking at much of what goes on, but there you go. Still true.
So, what I'm wondering, seeing these bizarre (to me) mindsets on climate change, is whether we might be seeing the very first inklings of such a seismic event taking place now and, like the financial crisis, like most things, starting in America. If this is the case, the schism between these 2 "tribes", Democrats and Republicans, takes on a much deeper significance than just its potential impact on next year's midterms and the betting implications thereof.
At some point, millions of years ago, a few pieces of stinking slime crawled from the Sea and shouted to the Heavens "I am Man!"
Much more recently than that. And wasn't it "...Trump !" ?
A couple of years ago, a friend of mine went to a Republican barbecue in Texas, thinking it would be much the same as a Conservative barbecue in this country.
Wrong! He said that almost every conversation he had with them was completely outlandish.
Large elements of the party are in danger of becoming an American Taliban.
The poll from the nonpartisan Public Religion Research Institute paints a troubling portrait of a growing segment of the public that is increasingly unmoored from reality as it embraces conspiracy theories about child abduction and stolen elections.
It found a deep divide between those who trust right-wing media outlets and the rest of the nation — and even a divide between those who trust Fox News and those who trust outlets like One America Network and Newsmax.
The poll found about three in ten Americans, 31 percent, believe the 2020 elections were stolen from Trump, including two-thirds of Republicans and a whopping 82 percent of those who trust Fox News more than any other media outlet.
Among those who trust far-right outlets like One America Network and Newsmax, 97 percent say they believe the election — which even Trump’s own cybersecurity and election security officials agreed was the safest and most secure ever conducted in the United States — was stolen.
One in five Americans believe in the core tenet of the QAnon conspiracy that “there is a storm coming soon,” while one in six believe the United States government is controlled by a group of Satan-worshipping pedophiles who run a global child sex-trafficking ring.
The same share, 18 percent, say they agree with the statement that America has gotten so far off track that “true American patriots may have to resort to violence in order to save our country.”...
And it's all evangelicals too. Once you start believing in stuff without evidence, you can be fed any lie. Despite the US being founded on Enlightenment principles, the rationalist spirit of the Enlightenment never took deep root in the US population as it did in Western Europe.
See also the denial of biological reality apparent on the left; the willingness to embrace the idea that everything is socially constructed; and which is at the root of much woke thinking. It really isn't all that different.
To be fair, they have gathered in Scotland. He just happens to be in a different bit of it.
Edit to add: to Americans the 40 or so miles that he is out by might seem trivial.
I wonder how many delegates are staying in Edinburgh? Must be tempting.
Quite a lot. Not enough accommodation in Glasgow.
I am supposed to be doing a proof in Glasgow for the next 2 days. I was quoted around £1000 for 2 nights so its an early train journey for me.
I'm debating going to a gig in Glasgow tomorrow night. Would stay over but every hotel in the central belt is full of COPpers.
I honestly wouldn't. It looks like there are going to be streets shut off and lots of self important people posturing everywhere.
Not just streets but whole areas. And huge pressure on trains in and out (lots of people are staying outside Glasgow - I'd suspect as far as Stirling certainly , perhaps Perth too).
I believe the whole Armadillo/SECC area is officially UN territory for the duration. How many divisions of neds does the UN have is what I want to know.
Morning all, that's shocking data in the header, isn't it? Or maybe not, because I recall something similar on evolution. Lots of Republicans in the US don't believe in that either. And speaking of evolution, I think there may lie the answer.
In my (new) quest to become more generally knowledgeable (not hard given my startpoint) I was brushing up yesterday on how we humans came to be. Turns out it was a longish process, about 10 million years, soup to nuts, where the earliest uprights were the soup and we are the nuts. This is how it read to me anyway. We have Got Evolution Done. That the process is ongoing, that we are still evolving, didn't seem to feature, but I'd have thought we are. Or at least we might be.
In which case, why should there not be a repeat of something that has happened before and which was key to us being what we are today? I refer to the Big Fork, when our lineage split into 2 streams, one (I forget the exact name) went with bigger jaws and the other with bigger brains, the latter further evolving over deep time into us, the former into something else. We then achieved dominance due to that "choice". It was the brains wot won it. Hard to credit, looking at much of what goes on, but there you go. Still true.
So, what I'm wondering, seeing these bizarre (to me) mindsets on climate change, is whether we might be seeing the very first inklings of such a seismic event taking place now and, like the financial crisis, like most things, starting in America. If this is the case, the schism between these 2 "tribes", Democrats and Republicans, takes on a much deeper significance than just its potential impact on next year's midterms and the betting implications thereof.
At some point, millions of years ago, a few pieces of stinking slime crawled from the Sea and shouted to the Heavens "I am Man!"
Much more recently than that. And wasn't it "...Trump !" ?
A couple of years ago, a friend of mine went to a Republican barbecue in Texas, thinking it would be much the same as a Conservative barbecue in this country.
Wrong! He said that almost every conversation he had with them was completely outlandish.
Large elements of the party are in danger of becoming an American Taliban.
The poll from the nonpartisan Public Religion Research Institute paints a troubling portrait of a growing segment of the public that is increasingly unmoored from reality as it embraces conspiracy theories about child abduction and stolen elections.
It found a deep divide between those who trust right-wing media outlets and the rest of the nation — and even a divide between those who trust Fox News and those who trust outlets like One America Network and Newsmax.
The poll found about three in ten Americans, 31 percent, believe the 2020 elections were stolen from Trump, including two-thirds of Republicans and a whopping 82 percent of those who trust Fox News more than any other media outlet.
Among those who trust far-right outlets like One America Network and Newsmax, 97 percent say they believe the election — which even Trump’s own cybersecurity and election security officials agreed was the safest and most secure ever conducted in the United States — was stolen.
One in five Americans believe in the core tenet of the QAnon conspiracy that “there is a storm coming soon,” while one in six believe the United States government is controlled by a group of Satan-worshipping pedophiles who run a global child sex-trafficking ring.
The same share, 18 percent, say they agree with the statement that America has gotten so far off track that “true American patriots may have to resort to violence in order to save our country.”...
Totally O/T, I see Glyn Razzell has had his parole request turned down under Helen's Law as he would not identify where he buried his wife's body as he continues to plead his innocence and states he does not know where she is.
This is truly one of the oddest cases in legal history as there is no evidence that his wife is in fact dead. The only thing that convicted him was that police found her blood in a car he was using, but only found it on their third look. They had it for four days on the 2nd time they looked and returned the car to the owner, who then had it valetted due to the state the police left it in with fingerprint powder everywhere. When they took it in for the third time they found a few bloodspots that was visible to the naked eye in the boot. There is no explanation as to how the police missed these in their first 2 looks. No other DNA from his wife was found.
No one saw him abduct her from a busy Swindon street, none of the 25 CCTV cameras videoed his vehicle on his drive to the abduction site, and none videoed him on his drive to whereever he buried her. His neighbour confirmed that the vehicle was on Razell's driveway just 45 minutes after the alleged abduction.
Razzell also provided a decent alibi to the police. He claimed to have walked by a police station at the time of the abduction which had numerous CCTV cameras that would have videoed him. All were out of order (which Razzell would not have known).
If he gave up the place he buried his wife he would probably be realeased by now as he has been a model prisoner.
Just imagine if he has not killed her, he will not know where her body is and therefore will probably never be released.
Juries have their own dynamic but I suspect there was more to the story than you have just laid out otherwise I don’t think there would have been a conviction
This is a thought process we are all guilty of - ah, it is probably more complicated than it looks, lets move on. Juries are not infallible, there are lots of dodgy convictions.
There are positives and negatives to this. On the one hand, the law will motivate murderers to reveal what actually happened after they have given up on appealing their convictions, but this is at the expense of the genuinely innocent who get a defacto whole life sentence, unless they give a false confession or make up a story about where the body is in order to eventually get out of jail.
I would argue that the negatives outweigh the positives, but it was clearly a politically irresistable law. There will be lots of perverse and unfair outcomes.
Making up a story about where the body is would be hard as I’m fairly certain someone would check.
Indeed, but there's presumably an out if you describe something that cannot be verified, such as dumped at sea, fed to the local crocodiles etc.
Of course, if the person subsequently turns up alive, would you then be liable for something? Perjury, possibly? (not sure of the legal weight of such a statement). Providing false information?
Would really suck to be wrongly imprisoned for murder, then imprisoned again for lying about where the body was when it turned out the person was in fact alive!
I expect you would get away with time served.
Anyway, must get back to staff training…
Quite possibly. Make you wonder whether you could also get away with that for topping the newly discovered alive person who had set you up, particularly given the mitigating circumstances. "Yes, your honour, I did kill the deceased, but I would like to point out that I've already done the time; now I have simply done the crime"
Morning all, that's shocking data in the header, isn't it? Or maybe not, because I recall something similar on evolution. Lots of Republicans in the US don't believe in that either. And speaking of evolution, I think there may lie the answer.
In my (new) quest to become more generally knowledgeable (not hard given my startpoint) I was brushing up yesterday on how we humans came to be. Turns out it was a longish process, about 10 million years, soup to nuts, where the earliest uprights were the soup and we are the nuts. This is how it read to me anyway. We have Got Evolution Done. That the process is ongoing, that we are still evolving, didn't seem to feature, but I'd have thought we are. Or at least we might be.
In which case, why should there not be a repeat of something that has happened before and which was key to us being what we are today? I refer to the Big Fork, when our lineage split into 2 streams, one (I forget the exact name) went with bigger jaws and the other with bigger brains, the latter further evolving over deep time into us, the former into something else. We then achieved dominance due to that "choice". It was the brains wot won it. Hard to credit, looking at much of what goes on, but there you go. Still true.
So, what I'm wondering, seeing these bizarre (to me) mindsets on climate change, is whether we might be seeing the very first inklings of such a seismic event taking place now and, like the financial crisis, like most things, starting in America. If this is the case, the schism between these 2 "tribes", Democrats and Republicans, takes on a much deeper significance than just its potential impact on next year's midterms and the betting implications thereof.
At some point, millions of years ago, a few pieces of stinking slime crawled from the Sea and shouted to the Heavens "I am Man!"
Morning all, that's shocking data in the header, isn't it? Or maybe not, because I recall something similar on evolution. Lots of Republicans in the US don't believe in that either. And speaking of evolution, I think there may lie the answer.
In my (new) quest to become more generally knowledgeable (not hard given my startpoint) I was brushing up yesterday on how we humans came to be. Turns out it was a longish process, about 10 million years, soup to nuts, where the earliest uprights were the soup and we are the nuts. This is how it read to me anyway. We have Got Evolution Done. That the process is ongoing, that we are still evolving, didn't seem to feature, but I'd have thought we are. Or at least we might be.
In which case, why should there not be a repeat of something that has happened before and which was key to us being what we are today? I refer to the Big Fork, when our lineage split into 2 streams, one (I forget the exact name) went with bigger jaws and the other with bigger brains, the latter further evolving over deep time into us, the former into something else. We then achieved dominance due to that "choice". It was the brains wot won it. Hard to credit, looking at much of what goes on, but there you go. Still true.
So, what I'm wondering, seeing these bizarre (to me) mindsets on climate change, is whether we might be seeing the very first inklings of such a seismic event taking place now and, like the financial crisis, like most things, starting in America. If this is the case, the schism between these 2 "tribes", Democrats and Republicans, takes on a much deeper significance than just its potential impact on next year's midterms and the betting implications thereof.
At some point, millions of years ago, a few pieces of stinking slime crawled from the Sea and shouted to the Heavens "I am Man!"
Much more recently than that. And wasn't it "...Trump !" ?
A couple of years ago, a friend of mine went to a Republican barbecue in Texas, thinking it would be much the same as a Conservative barbecue in this country.
Wrong! He said that almost every conversation he had with them was completely outlandish.
Large elements of the party are in danger of becoming an American Taliban.
The poll from the nonpartisan Public Religion Research Institute paints a troubling portrait of a growing segment of the public that is increasingly unmoored from reality as it embraces conspiracy theories about child abduction and stolen elections.
It found a deep divide between those who trust right-wing media outlets and the rest of the nation — and even a divide between those who trust Fox News and those who trust outlets like One America Network and Newsmax.
The poll found about three in ten Americans, 31 percent, believe the 2020 elections were stolen from Trump, including two-thirds of Republicans and a whopping 82 percent of those who trust Fox News more than any other media outlet.
Among those who trust far-right outlets like One America Network and Newsmax, 97 percent say they believe the election — which even Trump’s own cybersecurity and election security officials agreed was the safest and most secure ever conducted in the United States — was stolen.
One in five Americans believe in the core tenet of the QAnon conspiracy that “there is a storm coming soon,” while one in six believe the United States government is controlled by a group of Satan-worshipping pedophiles who run a global child sex-trafficking ring.
The same share, 18 percent, say they agree with the statement that America has gotten so far off track that “true American patriots may have to resort to violence in order to save our country.”...
And it's all evangelicals too. Once you start believing in stuff without evidence, you can be fed any lie. Despite the US being founded on Enlightenment principles, the rationalist spirit of the Enlightenment never took deep root in the US population as it did in Western Europe.
Not all evangelicals are QAnon though and indeed plenty of black evangelicals will have voted for Biden-Harris.
To be fair, they have gathered in Scotland. He just happens to be in a different bit of it.
Edit to add: to Americans the 40 or so miles that he is out by might seem trivial.
I wonder how many delegates are staying in Edinburgh? Must be tempting.
Quite a lot. Not enough accommodation in Glasgow.
I am supposed to be doing a proof in Glasgow for the next 2 days. I was quoted around £1000 for 2 nights so its an early train journey for me.
I'm debating going to a gig in Glasgow tomorrow night. Would stay over but every hotel in the central belt is full of COPpers.
I honestly wouldn't. It looks like there are going to be streets shut off and lots of self important people posturing everywhere.
Not just streets but whole areas. And huge pressure on trains in and out (lots of people are staying outside Glasgow - I'd suspect as far as Stirling certainly , perhaps Perth too).
I believe the whole Armadillo/SECC area is officially UN territory for the duration. How many divisions of neds does the UN have is what I want to know.
Well it isn't just that America has a massive partisan divide on CC. They have a massive partisan divide on pretty much everything.
As I've said before they look like a country in serious trouble to me although the one thing they have going for them is the Constitution which dealt with Trump remarkably well and seems to be coping with Biden too.
Morning all, that's shocking data in the header, isn't it? Or maybe not, because I recall something similar on evolution. Lots of Republicans in the US don't believe in that either. And speaking of evolution, I think there may lie the answer.
In my (new) quest to become more generally knowledgeable (not hard given my startpoint) I was brushing up yesterday on how we humans came to be. Turns out it was a longish process, about 10 million years, soup to nuts, where the earliest uprights were the soup and we are the nuts. This is how it read to me anyway. We have Got Evolution Done. That the process is ongoing, that we are still evolving, didn't seem to feature, but I'd have thought we are. Or at least we might be.
In which case, why should there not be a repeat of something that has happened before and which was key to us being what we are today? I refer to the Big Fork, when our lineage split into 2 streams, one (I forget the exact name) went with bigger jaws and the other with bigger brains, the latter further evolving over deep time into us, the former into something else. We then achieved dominance due to that "choice". It was the brains wot won it. Hard to credit, looking at much of what goes on, but there you go. Still true.
So, what I'm wondering, seeing these bizarre (to me) mindsets on climate change, is whether we might be seeing the very first inklings of such a seismic event taking place now and, like the financial crisis, like most things, starting in America. If this is the case, the schism between these 2 "tribes", Democrats and Republicans, takes on a much deeper significance than just its potential impact on next year's midterms and the betting implications thereof.
At some point, millions of years ago, a few pieces of stinking slime crawled from the Sea and shouted to the Heavens "I am Man!"
Much more recently than that. And wasn't it "...Trump !" ?
A couple of years ago, a friend of mine went to a Republican barbecue in Texas, thinking it would be much the same as a Conservative barbecue in this country.
Wrong! He said that almost every conversation he had with them was completely outlandish.
Large elements of the party are in danger of becoming an American Taliban.
The poll from the nonpartisan Public Religion Research Institute paints a troubling portrait of a growing segment of the public that is increasingly unmoored from reality as it embraces conspiracy theories about child abduction and stolen elections.
It found a deep divide between those who trust right-wing media outlets and the rest of the nation — and even a divide between those who trust Fox News and those who trust outlets like One America Network and Newsmax.
The poll found about three in ten Americans, 31 percent, believe the 2020 elections were stolen from Trump, including two-thirds of Republicans and a whopping 82 percent of those who trust Fox News more than any other media outlet.
Among those who trust far-right outlets like One America Network and Newsmax, 97 percent say they believe the election — which even Trump’s own cybersecurity and election security officials agreed was the safest and most secure ever conducted in the United States — was stolen.
One in five Americans believe in the core tenet of the QAnon conspiracy that “there is a storm coming soon,” while one in six believe the United States government is controlled by a group of Satan-worshipping pedophiles who run a global child sex-trafficking ring.
The same share, 18 percent, say they agree with the statement that America has gotten so far off track that “true American patriots may have to resort to violence in order to save our country.”...
And it's all evangelicals too. Once you start believing in stuff without evidence, you can be fed any lie. Despite the US being founded on Enlightenment principles, the rationalist spirit of the Enlightenment never took deep root in the US population as it did in Western Europe.
Not all evangelicals are QAnon though and indeed plenty of black evangelicals will have voted for Biden-Harris.
Morning all, that's shocking data in the header, isn't it? Or maybe not, because I recall something similar on evolution. Lots of Republicans in the US don't believe in that either. And speaking of evolution, I think there may lie the answer.
In my (new) quest to become more generally knowledgeable (not hard given my startpoint) I was brushing up yesterday on how we humans came to be. Turns out it was a longish process, about 10 million years, soup to nuts, where the earliest uprights were the soup and we are the nuts. This is how it read to me anyway. We have Got Evolution Done. That the process is ongoing, that we are still evolving, didn't seem to feature, but I'd have thought we are. Or at least we might be.
In which case, why should there not be a repeat of something that has happened before and which was key to us being what we are today? I refer to the Big Fork, when our lineage split into 2 streams, one (I forget the exact name) went with bigger jaws and the other with bigger brains, the latter further evolving over deep time into us, the former into something else. We then achieved dominance due to that "choice". It was the brains wot won it. Hard to credit, looking at much of what goes on, but there you go. Still true.
So, what I'm wondering, seeing these bizarre (to me) mindsets on climate change, is whether we might be seeing the very first inklings of such a seismic event taking place now and, like the financial crisis, like most things, starting in America. If this is the case, the schism between these 2 "tribes", Democrats and Republicans, takes on a much deeper significance than just its potential impact on next year's midterms and the betting implications thereof.
At some point, millions of years ago, a few pieces of stinking slime crawled from the Sea and shouted to the Heavens "I am Man!"
Much more recently than that. And wasn't it "...Trump !" ?
A couple of years ago, a friend of mine went to a Republican barbecue in Texas, thinking it would be much the same as a Conservative barbecue in this country.
Wrong! He said that almost every conversation he had with them was completely outlandish.
Large elements of the party are in danger of becoming an American Taliban.
The poll from the nonpartisan Public Religion Research Institute paints a troubling portrait of a growing segment of the public that is increasingly unmoored from reality as it embraces conspiracy theories about child abduction and stolen elections.
It found a deep divide between those who trust right-wing media outlets and the rest of the nation — and even a divide between those who trust Fox News and those who trust outlets like One America Network and Newsmax.
The poll found about three in ten Americans, 31 percent, believe the 2020 elections were stolen from Trump, including two-thirds of Republicans and a whopping 82 percent of those who trust Fox News more than any other media outlet.
Among those who trust far-right outlets like One America Network and Newsmax, 97 percent say they believe the election — which even Trump’s own cybersecurity and election security officials agreed was the safest and most secure ever conducted in the United States — was stolen.
One in five Americans believe in the core tenet of the QAnon conspiracy that “there is a storm coming soon,” while one in six believe the United States government is controlled by a group of Satan-worshipping pedophiles who run a global child sex-trafficking ring.
The same share, 18 percent, say they agree with the statement that America has gotten so far off track that “true American patriots may have to resort to violence in order to save our country.”...
And it's all evangelicals too. Once you start believing in stuff without evidence, you can be fed any lie. Despite the US being founded on Enlightenment principles, the rationalist spirit of the Enlightenment never took deep root in the US population as it did in Western Europe.
Not all evangelicals are QAnon though and indeed plenty of black evangelicals will have voted for Biden-Harris.
Morning all, that's shocking data in the header, isn't it? Or maybe not, because I recall something similar on evolution. Lots of Republicans in the US don't believe in that either. And speaking of evolution, I think there may lie the answer.
In my (new) quest to become more generally knowledgeable (not hard given my startpoint) I was brushing up yesterday on how we humans came to be. Turns out it was a longish process, about 10 million years, soup to nuts, where the earliest uprights were the soup and we are the nuts. This is how it read to me anyway. We have Got Evolution Done. That the process is ongoing, that we are still evolving, didn't seem to feature, but I'd have thought we are. Or at least we might be.
In which case, why should there not be a repeat of something that has happened before and which was key to us being what we are today? I refer to the Big Fork, when our lineage split into 2 streams, one (I forget the exact name) went with bigger jaws and the other with bigger brains, the latter further evolving over deep time into us, the former into something else. We then achieved dominance due to that "choice". It was the brains wot won it. Hard to credit, looking at much of what goes on, but there you go. Still true.
So, what I'm wondering, seeing these bizarre (to me) mindsets on climate change, is whether we might be seeing the very first inklings of such a seismic event taking place now and, like the financial crisis, like most things, starting in America. If this is the case, the schism between these 2 "tribes", Democrats and Republicans, takes on a much deeper significance than just its potential impact on next year's midterms and the betting implications thereof.
Speciation is one of the hardest parts of evolutionary theory to explain, because to survive a species has to procreate a lot, but to split into two species you have to prevent two populations of one species from procreating with each other for a long time.
The secret ballot will be enough to prevent speciation from happening.
Yep, although there is the oft quoted stat about brainy young women refusing to date a Trumper. It's pretty fascinating, our origins, when you get into it. Eg apparently there was plenty of dating between early humans and late neanderthals. The Kinks were wrong on this one. They made a flawed (and arguably offensive) assumption.
Morning all, that's shocking data in the header, isn't it? Or maybe not, because I recall something similar on evolution. Lots of Republicans in the US don't believe in that either. And speaking of evolution, I think there may lie the answer.
In my (new) quest to become more generally knowledgeable (not hard given my startpoint) I was brushing up yesterday on how we humans came to be. Turns out it was a longish process, about 10 million years, soup to nuts, where the earliest uprights were the soup and we are the nuts. This is how it read to me anyway. We have Got Evolution Done. That the process is ongoing, that we are still evolving, didn't seem to feature, but I'd have thought we are. Or at least we might be.
In which case, why should there not be a repeat of something that has happened before and which was key to us being what we are today? I refer to the Big Fork, when our lineage split into 2 streams, one (I forget the exact name) went with bigger jaws and the other with bigger brains, the latter further evolving over deep time into us, the former into something else. We then achieved dominance due to that "choice". It was the brains wot won it. Hard to credit, looking at much of what goes on, but there you go. Still true.
So, what I'm wondering, seeing these bizarre (to me) mindsets on climate change, is whether we might be seeing the very first inklings of such a seismic event taking place now and, like the financial crisis, like most things, starting in America. If this is the case, the schism between these 2 "tribes", Democrats and Republicans, takes on a much deeper significance than just its potential impact on next year's midterms and the betting implications thereof.
At some point, millions of years ago, a few pieces of stinking slime crawled from the Sea and shouted to the Heavens "I am Man!"
Much more recently than that. And wasn't it "...Trump !" ?
A couple of years ago, a friend of mine went to a Republican barbecue in Texas, thinking it would be much the same as a Conservative barbecue in this country.
Wrong! He said that almost every conversation he had with them was completely outlandish.
Large elements of the party are in danger of becoming an American Taliban.
The poll from the nonpartisan Public Religion Research Institute paints a troubling portrait of a growing segment of the public that is increasingly unmoored from reality as it embraces conspiracy theories about child abduction and stolen elections.
It found a deep divide between those who trust right-wing media outlets and the rest of the nation — and even a divide between those who trust Fox News and those who trust outlets like One America Network and Newsmax.
The poll found about three in ten Americans, 31 percent, believe the 2020 elections were stolen from Trump, including two-thirds of Republicans and a whopping 82 percent of those who trust Fox News more than any other media outlet.
Among those who trust far-right outlets like One America Network and Newsmax, 97 percent say they believe the election — which even Trump’s own cybersecurity and election security officials agreed was the safest and most secure ever conducted in the United States — was stolen.
One in five Americans believe in the core tenet of the QAnon conspiracy that “there is a storm coming soon,” while one in six believe the United States government is controlled by a group of Satan-worshipping pedophiles who run a global child sex-trafficking ring.
The same share, 18 percent, say they agree with the statement that America has gotten so far off track that “true American patriots may have to resort to violence in order to save our country.”...
And it's all evangelicals too. Once you start believing in stuff without evidence, you can be fed any lie. Despite the US being founded on Enlightenment principles, the rationalist spirit of the Enlightenment never took deep root in the US population as it did in Western Europe.
Not all evangelicals are QAnon though and indeed plenty of black evangelicals will have voted for Biden-Harris.
Either the switching of cars was part of a very cunning plan, or the police stitched him up good and proper.
It is completely bizarre, he managed to drive past 25 CCTV cameras both ways and was never caught on any of them.
He managed to abduct his wife from a busy walkway at 9 a.m. on a workday morning with no one seeing him or the car before, after or during the abduction.
If he was as cunning as they say then he would have made sure there was no blood left and would never have abducted her in his friends car (he owned up to the police staright away that he had borrowed his friends car on the day of the abduction)
And police scientists took three attempts to find blood that was easily seen with the naked eye in a car that had been valetted after the police's first two attempts to find stuff had yielded nothing.
And yet the BBC researcher who examined the case later expressed herself satisfied. I certainly feel that there's more than was reported in the piece you posted.
There is more but nothing that benefits the prosecution case. If he did do it he pulled off an incredible series of events.
Morning all, that's shocking data in the header, isn't it? Or maybe not, because I recall something similar on evolution. Lots of Republicans in the US don't believe in that either. And speaking of evolution, I think there may lie the answer.
In my (new) quest to become more generally knowledgeable (not hard given my startpoint) I was brushing up yesterday on how we humans came to be. Turns out it was a longish process, about 10 million years, soup to nuts, where the earliest uprights were the soup and we are the nuts. This is how it read to me anyway. We have Got Evolution Done. That the process is ongoing, that we are still evolving, didn't seem to feature, but I'd have thought we are. Or at least we might be.
In which case, why should there not be a repeat of something that has happened before and which was key to us being what we are today? I refer to the Big Fork, when our lineage split into 2 streams, one (I forget the exact name) went with bigger jaws and the other with bigger brains, the latter further evolving over deep time into us, the former into something else. We then achieved dominance due to that "choice". It was the brains wot won it. Hard to credit, looking at much of what goes on, but there you go. Still true.
So, what I'm wondering, seeing these bizarre (to me) mindsets on climate change, is whether we might be seeing the very first inklings of such a seismic event taking place now and, like the financial crisis, like most things, starting in America. If this is the case, the schism between these 2 "tribes", Democrats and Republicans, takes on a much deeper significance than just its potential impact on next year's midterms and the betting implications thereof.
At some point, millions of years ago, a few pieces of stinking slime crawled from the Sea and shouted to the Heavens "I am Man!"
Much more recently than that. And wasn't it "...Trump !" ?
A couple of years ago, a friend of mine went to a Republican barbecue in Texas, thinking it would be much the same as a Conservative barbecue in this country.
Wrong! He said that almost every conversation he had with them was completely outlandish.
Large elements of the party are in danger of becoming an American Taliban.
The poll from the nonpartisan Public Religion Research Institute paints a troubling portrait of a growing segment of the public that is increasingly unmoored from reality as it embraces conspiracy theories about child abduction and stolen elections.
It found a deep divide between those who trust right-wing media outlets and the rest of the nation — and even a divide between those who trust Fox News and those who trust outlets like One America Network and Newsmax.
The poll found about three in ten Americans, 31 percent, believe the 2020 elections were stolen from Trump, including two-thirds of Republicans and a whopping 82 percent of those who trust Fox News more than any other media outlet.
Among those who trust far-right outlets like One America Network and Newsmax, 97 percent say they believe the election — which even Trump’s own cybersecurity and election security officials agreed was the safest and most secure ever conducted in the United States — was stolen.
One in five Americans believe in the core tenet of the QAnon conspiracy that “there is a storm coming soon,” while one in six believe the United States government is controlled by a group of Satan-worshipping pedophiles who run a global child sex-trafficking ring.
The same share, 18 percent, say they agree with the statement that America has gotten so far off track that “true American patriots may have to resort to violence in order to save our country.”...
And it's all evangelicals too. Once you start believing in stuff without evidence, you can be fed any lie. Despite the US being founded on Enlightenment principles, the rationalist spirit of the Enlightenment never took deep root in the US population as it did in Western Europe.
Not all evangelicals are QAnon though and indeed plenty of black evangelicals will have voted for Biden-Harris.
While an authoritarian like yourself may regard a fifth of a group willing to use violence as small, that is a crazy high number to those of us that value democracy. It is getting up towards numbers in the Muslim world.
That may not be quite what it seems as the French were complaining about 75 licences being refused alongside the 66 that were previously granted. It's not clear whether the 49 temporary licences are from that group of 75 or another set of applications.
Totally O/T, I see Glyn Razzell has had his parole request turned down under Helen's Law as he would not identify where he buried his wife's body as he continues to plead his innocence and states he does not know where she is.
This is truly one of the oddest cases in legal history as there is no evidence that his wife is in fact dead. The only thing that convicted him was that police found her blood in a car he was using, but only found it on their third look. They had it for four days on the 2nd time they looked and returned the car to the owner, who then had it valetted due to the state the police left it in with fingerprint powder everywhere. When they took it in for the third time they found a few bloodspots that was visible to the naked eye in the boot. There is no explanation as to how the police missed these in their first 2 looks. No other DNA from his wife was found.
No one saw him abduct her from a busy Swindon street, none of the 25 CCTV cameras videoed his vehicle on his drive to the abduction site, and none videoed him on his drive to whereever he buried her. His neighbour confirmed that the vehicle was on Razell's driveway just 45 minutes after the alleged abduction.
Razzell also provided a decent alibi to the police. He claimed to have walked by a police station at the time of the abduction which had numerous CCTV cameras that would have videoed him. All were out of order (which Razzell would not have known).
If he gave up the place he buried his wife he would probably be realeased by now as he has been a model prisoner.
Just imagine if he has not killed her, he will not know where her body is and therefore will probably never be released.
Juries have their own dynamic but I suspect there was more to the story than you have just laid out otherwise I don’t think there would have been a conviction
This is a thought process we are all guilty of - ah, it is probably more complicated than it looks, lets move on. Juries are not infallible, there are lots of dodgy convictions.
There are positives and negatives to this. On the one hand, the law will motivate murderers to reveal what actually happened after they have given up on appealing their convictions, but this is at the expense of the genuinely innocent who get a defacto whole life sentence, unless they give a false confession or make up a story about where the body is in order to eventually get out of jail.
I would argue that the negatives outweigh the positives, but it was clearly a politically irresistable law. There will be lots of perverse and unfair outcomes.
We had a case locally where the police failed to notice the body chopped up in the bath whilst searching a 1 bedroom flat. It was only when the bits had been taken out of the bath and put in black plastic bags for collection on the curb that someone else noted that there was something rather odd about them. So missing blood stains in the boot is maybe not that surprising.
I was once asked by the police to carry bags of evidence down from a crime scene to their van.
Either the switching of cars was part of a very cunning plan, or the police stitched him up good and proper.
It is completely bizarre, he managed to drive past 25 CCTV cameras both ways and was never caught on any of them.
He managed to abduct his wife from a busy walkway at 9 a.m. on a workday morning with no one seeing him or the car before, after or during the abduction.
If he was as cunning as they say then he would have made sure there was no blood left and would never have abducted her in his friends car (he owned up to the police staright away that he had borrowed his friends car on the day of the abduction)
And police scientists took three attempts to find blood that was easily seen with the naked eye in a car that had been valetted after the police's first two attempts to find stuff had yielded nothing.
And yet the BBC researcher who examined the case later expressed herself satisfied. I certainly feel that there's more than was reported in the piece you posted.
There is more but nothing that benefits the prosecution case. If he did do it he pulled off an incredible series of events.
Case as stated, agreed. And, to be fair, even offered the chance of release, he's said he can't help.
Morning all, that's shocking data in the header, isn't it? Or maybe not, because I recall something similar on evolution. Lots of Republicans in the US don't believe in that either. And speaking of evolution, I think there may lie the answer.
In my (new) quest to become more generally knowledgeable (not hard given my startpoint) I was brushing up yesterday on how we humans came to be. Turns out it was a longish process, about 10 million years, soup to nuts, where the earliest uprights were the soup and we are the nuts. This is how it read to me anyway. We have Got Evolution Done. That the process is ongoing, that we are still evolving, didn't seem to feature, but I'd have thought we are. Or at least we might be.
In which case, why should there not be a repeat of something that has happened before and which was key to us being what we are today? I refer to the Big Fork, when our lineage split into 2 streams, one (I forget the exact name) went with bigger jaws and the other with bigger brains, the latter further evolving over deep time into us, the former into something else. We then achieved dominance due to that "choice". It was the brains wot won it. Hard to credit, looking at much of what goes on, but there you go. Still true.
So, what I'm wondering, seeing these bizarre (to me) mindsets on climate change, is whether we might be seeing the very first inklings of such a seismic event taking place now and, like the financial crisis, like most things, starting in America. If this is the case, the schism between these 2 "tribes", Democrats and Republicans, takes on a much deeper significance than just its potential impact on next year's midterms and the betting implications thereof.
Speciation is one of the hardest parts of evolutionary theory to explain, because to survive a species has to procreate a lot, but to split into two species you have to prevent two populations of one species from procreating with each other for a long time.
The secret ballot will be enough to prevent speciation from happening.
Yep, although there is the oft quoted stat about brainy young women refusing to date a Trumper. It's pretty fascinating, our origins, when you get into it. Eg apparently there was plenty of dating between early humans and late neanderthals. The Kinks were wrong on this one. They made a flawed (and arguably offensive) assumption.
As another example, we have been here before: plenty of religious monomaniacs throughout history will have refused to breed with someone from another creed. And yet, Catholics and Protestants, Muslims and Christians, all remain the same species.
Either the switching of cars was part of a very cunning plan, or the police stitched him up good and proper.
It is completely bizarre, he managed to drive past 25 CCTV cameras both ways and was never caught on any of them.
He managed to abduct his wife from a busy walkway at 9 a.m. on a workday morning with no one seeing him or the car before, after or during the abduction.
If he was as cunning as they say then he would have made sure there was no blood left and would never have abducted her in his friends car (he owned up to the police staright away that he had borrowed his friends car on the day of the abduction)
And police scientists took three attempts to find blood that was easily seen with the naked eye in a car that had been valetted after the police's first two attempts to find stuff had yielded nothing.
And yet the BBC researcher who examined the case later expressed herself satisfied. I certainly feel that there's more than was reported in the piece you posted.
There is more but nothing that benefits the prosecution case. If he did do it he pulled off an incredible series of events.
One of the reports said he was jailed for "a minimum of 16 years". Will he ever get out if he doesn't say where the body is? Surely there is a defined jail term isn't there?
Morning all, that's shocking data in the header, isn't it? Or maybe not, because I recall something similar on evolution. Lots of Republicans in the US don't believe in that either. And speaking of evolution, I think there may lie the answer.
In my (new) quest to become more generally knowledgeable (not hard given my startpoint) I was brushing up yesterday on how we humans came to be. Turns out it was a longish process, about 10 million years, soup to nuts, where the earliest uprights were the soup and we are the nuts. This is how it read to me anyway. We have Got Evolution Done. That the process is ongoing, that we are still evolving, didn't seem to feature, but I'd have thought we are. Or at least we might be.
In which case, why should there not be a repeat of something that has happened before and which was key to us being what we are today? I refer to the Big Fork, when our lineage split into 2 streams, one (I forget the exact name) went with bigger jaws and the other with bigger brains, the latter further evolving over deep time into us, the former into something else. We then achieved dominance due to that "choice". It was the brains wot won it. Hard to credit, looking at much of what goes on, but there you go. Still true.
So, what I'm wondering, seeing these bizarre (to me) mindsets on climate change, is whether we might be seeing the very first inklings of such a seismic event taking place now and, like the financial crisis, like most things, starting in America. If this is the case, the schism between these 2 "tribes", Democrats and Republicans, takes on a much deeper significance than just its potential impact on next year's midterms and the betting implications thereof.
Speciation is one of the hardest parts of evolutionary theory to explain, because to survive a species has to procreate a lot, but to split into two species you have to prevent two populations of one species from procreating with each other for a long time.
The secret ballot will be enough to prevent speciation from happening.
Yes, speciation almost always happens where there is a geographical separation. Often caused by some sort of climate change. And it takes a long, long, long time. The Asian populations who crossed the Bering straits to the Americas were separated from other humans for around 10,000 years, I think? (Including, ISTR, 1000 years for which they were marooned in an area the size of half a Canadian province which was surrounded by solid ice. That must have been one of pre-history's grimmer periods.) But this wasn't nearly enough for them to evolve into a separate species. Even the 40-60,000 years for which Australian aborigines were separated from the rest of humanity wasn't enough (though there, there was probably some contact between aborigines and melanesians).
Geographical separation is the textbook explanation, but it's a bit lacking in many respects. How does it explain speciation in the oceans, or among birds, where geographically splitting a previously homogenous population will be much harder to achieve?
I think there's some very interesting science to be done to work it out.
There was a theory - now maybe too Unwoke to be spoken - that the Khoisan, aka the Bushmen of the Kalahari, are sufficiently genetically different from all their neighbours as to constitute a separate human species
Morning all, that's shocking data in the header, isn't it? Or maybe not, because I recall something similar on evolution. Lots of Republicans in the US don't believe in that either. And speaking of evolution, I think there may lie the answer.
In my (new) quest to become more generally knowledgeable (not hard given my startpoint) I was brushing up yesterday on how we humans came to be. Turns out it was a longish process, about 10 million years, soup to nuts, where the earliest uprights were the soup and we are the nuts. This is how it read to me anyway. We have Got Evolution Done. That the process is ongoing, that we are still evolving, didn't seem to feature, but I'd have thought we are. Or at least we might be.
In which case, why should there not be a repeat of something that has happened before and which was key to us being what we are today? I refer to the Big Fork, when our lineage split into 2 streams, one (I forget the exact name) went with bigger jaws and the other with bigger brains, the latter further evolving over deep time into us, the former into something else. We then achieved dominance due to that "choice". It was the brains wot won it. Hard to credit, looking at much of what goes on, but there you go. Still true.
So, what I'm wondering, seeing these bizarre (to me) mindsets on climate change, is whether we might be seeing the very first inklings of such a seismic event taking place now and, like the financial crisis, like most things, starting in America. If this is the case, the schism between these 2 "tribes", Democrats and Republicans, takes on a much deeper significance than just its potential impact on next year's midterms and the betting implications thereof.
Speciation is one of the hardest parts of evolutionary theory to explain, because to survive a species has to procreate a lot, but to split into two species you have to prevent two populations of one species from procreating with each other for a long time.
The secret ballot will be enough to prevent speciation from happening.
Yes, speciation almost always happens where there is a geographical separation. Often caused by some sort of climate change. And it takes a long, long, long time. The Asian populations who crossed the Bering straits to the Americas were separated from other humans for around 10,000 years, I think? (Including, ISTR, 1000 years for which they were marooned in an area the size of half a Canadian province which was surrounded by solid ice. That must have been one of pre-history's grimmer periods.) But this wasn't nearly enough for them to evolve into a separate species. Even the 40-60,000 years for which Australian aborigines were separated from the rest of humanity wasn't enough (though there, there was probably some contact between aborigines and melanesians).
Geographical separation is the textbook explanation, but it's a bit lacking in many respects. How does it explain speciation in the oceans, or among birds, where geographically splitting a previously homogenous population will be much harder to achieve?
I think there's some very interesting science to be done to work it out.
There was a theory - now maybe too Unwoke to be spoken - that the Khoisan, aka the Bushmen of the Kalahari, are sufficiently genetically different from all their neighbours as to constitute a separate human species
Well that opens a whole scientific can of worms as to how you define two species as being distinct. Imposing a dividing line on a continuous process will necessarily involve a degree of arbitrariness.
Morning all, that's shocking data in the header, isn't it? Or maybe not, because I recall something similar on evolution. Lots of Republicans in the US don't believe in that either. And speaking of evolution, I think there may lie the answer.
In my (new) quest to become more generally knowledgeable (not hard given my startpoint) I was brushing up yesterday on how we humans came to be. Turns out it was a longish process, about 10 million years, soup to nuts, where the earliest uprights were the soup and we are the nuts. This is how it read to me anyway. We have Got Evolution Done. That the process is ongoing, that we are still evolving, didn't seem to feature, but I'd have thought we are. Or at least we might be.
In which case, why should there not be a repeat of something that has happened before and which was key to us being what we are today? I refer to the Big Fork, when our lineage split into 2 streams, one (I forget the exact name) went with bigger jaws and the other with bigger brains, the latter further evolving over deep time into us, the former into something else. We then achieved dominance due to that "choice". It was the brains wot won it. Hard to credit, looking at much of what goes on, but there you go. Still true.
So, what I'm wondering, seeing these bizarre (to me) mindsets on climate change, is whether we might be seeing the very first inklings of such a seismic event taking place now and, like the financial crisis, like most things, starting in America. If this is the case, the schism between these 2 "tribes", Democrats and Republicans, takes on a much deeper significance than just its potential impact on next year's midterms and the betting implications thereof.
Speciation is one of the hardest parts of evolutionary theory to explain, because to survive a species has to procreate a lot, but to split into two species you have to prevent two populations of one species from procreating with each other for a long time.
The secret ballot will be enough to prevent speciation from happening.
Yes, speciation almost always happens where there is a geographical separation. Often caused by some sort of climate change. And it takes a long, long, long time. The Asian populations who crossed the Bering straits to the Americas were separated from other humans for around 10,000 years, I think? (Including, ISTR, 1000 years for which they were marooned in an area the size of half a Canadian province which was surrounded by solid ice. That must have been one of pre-history's grimmer periods.) But this wasn't nearly enough for them to evolve into a separate species. Even the 40-60,000 years for which Australian aborigines were separated from the rest of humanity wasn't enough (though there, there was probably some contact between aborigines and melanesians).
Geographical separation is the textbook explanation, but it's a bit lacking in many respects. How does it explain speciation in the oceans, or among birds, where geographically splitting a previously homogenous population will be much harder to achieve?
I think there's some very interesting science to be done to work it out.
There was a theory - now maybe too Unwoke to be spoken - that the Khoisan, aka the Bushmen of the Kalahari, are sufficiently genetically different from all their neighbours as to constitute a separate human species
Well that opens a whole scientific can of worms as to how you define two species as being distinct. Imposing a dividing line on a continuous process will necessarily involve a degree of arbitrariness.
I had always understood the definition for separate species to be "so different they cannot mate and create fertile offspring". So donkeys and horses are separate species, but chihuahuas and German shepherds are not.
Morning all, that's shocking data in the header, isn't it? Or maybe not, because I recall something similar on evolution. Lots of Republicans in the US don't believe in that either. And speaking of evolution, I think there may lie the answer.
In my (new) quest to become more generally knowledgeable (not hard given my startpoint) I was brushing up yesterday on how we humans came to be. Turns out it was a longish process, about 10 million years, soup to nuts, where the earliest uprights were the soup and we are the nuts. This is how it read to me anyway. We have Got Evolution Done. That the process is ongoing, that we are still evolving, didn't seem to feature, but I'd have thought we are. Or at least we might be.
In which case, why should there not be a repeat of something that has happened before and which was key to us being what we are today? I refer to the Big Fork, when our lineage split into 2 streams, one (I forget the exact name) went with bigger jaws and the other with bigger brains, the latter further evolving over deep time into us, the former into something else. We then achieved dominance due to that "choice". It was the brains wot won it. Hard to credit, looking at much of what goes on, but there you go. Still true.
So, what I'm wondering, seeing these bizarre (to me) mindsets on climate change, is whether we might be seeing the very first inklings of such a seismic event taking place now and, like the financial crisis, like most things, starting in America. If this is the case, the schism between these 2 "tribes", Democrats and Republicans, takes on a much deeper significance than just its potential impact on next year's midterms and the betting implications thereof.
Speciation is one of the hardest parts of evolutionary theory to explain, because to survive a species has to procreate a lot, but to split into two species you have to prevent two populations of one species from procreating with each other for a long time.
The secret ballot will be enough to prevent speciation from happening.
Yes, speciation almost always happens where there is a geographical separation. Often caused by some sort of climate change. And it takes a long, long, long time. The Asian populations who crossed the Bering straits to the Americas were separated from other humans for around 10,000 years, I think? (Including, ISTR, 1000 years for which they were marooned in an area the size of half a Canadian province which was surrounded by solid ice. That must have been one of pre-history's grimmer periods.) But this wasn't nearly enough for them to evolve into a separate species. Even the 40-60,000 years for which Australian aborigines were separated from the rest of humanity wasn't enough (though there, there was probably some contact between aborigines and melanesians).
Geographical separation is the textbook explanation, but it's a bit lacking in many respects. How does it explain speciation in the oceans, or among birds, where geographically splitting a previously homogenous population will be much harder to achieve?
I think there's some very interesting science to be done to work it out.
There was a theory - now maybe too Unwoke to be spoken - that the Khoisan, aka the Bushmen of the Kalahari, are sufficiently genetically different from all their neighbours as to constitute a separate human species
Well that opens a whole scientific can of worms as to how you define two species as being distinct. Imposing a dividing line on a continuous process will necessarily involve a degree of arbitrariness.
Yes. Speciation is fascinatingly complex
I believe there is a bird species (the tern?) which changes gradually as you go around the world, it is black or grey or orange or whatever in California, then slightly less orange in Texas, then orange with blue in Bermuda, and so on, until, when you reach China it is red and purple with no orange and it is an entirely different species. Unable to breed with the tern back in California
But at what point does the new species actually begin or end?
To be fair, they have gathered in Scotland. He just happens to be in a different bit of it.
Edit to add: to Americans the 40 or so miles that he is out by might seem trivial.
I wonder how many delegates are staying in Edinburgh? Must be tempting.
Quite a lot. Not enough accommodation in Glasgow.
I am supposed to be doing a proof in Glasgow for the next 2 days. I was quoted around £1000 for 2 nights so its an early train journey for me.
I'm debating going to a gig in Glasgow tomorrow night. Would stay over but every hotel in the central belt is full of COPpers.
I honestly wouldn't. It looks like there are going to be streets shut off and lots of self important people posturing everywhere.
Not just streets but whole areas. And huge pressure on trains in and out (lots of people are staying outside Glasgow - I'd suspect as far as Stirling certainly , perhaps Perth too).
I believe the whole Armadillo/SECC area is officially UN territory for the duration. How many divisions of neds does the UN have is what I want to know.
No, the other way round, is my understanding (Blue/Green). We have a stand in the (internal) Blue Zone, and have been dealing with the company to whom the UN outsourced the arrangements. To give an illustration of how well-organised they are, they sent me a demand for payment for our stand at 1 am yesterday (Sunday) morning, with a deadline of last night - their invoice had arrived on Tuesday, with no mention of a deadline, and we were planning payment today. (I reasoned with them and they've relented)
Morning all, that's shocking data in the header, isn't it? Or maybe not, because I recall something similar on evolution. Lots of Republicans in the US don't believe in that either. And speaking of evolution, I think there may lie the answer.
In my (new) quest to become more generally knowledgeable (not hard given my startpoint) I was brushing up yesterday on how we humans came to be. Turns out it was a longish process, about 10 million years, soup to nuts, where the earliest uprights were the soup and we are the nuts. This is how it read to me anyway. We have Got Evolution Done. That the process is ongoing, that we are still evolving, didn't seem to feature, but I'd have thought we are. Or at least we might be.
In which case, why should there not be a repeat of something that has happened before and which was key to us being what we are today? I refer to the Big Fork, when our lineage split into 2 streams, one (I forget the exact name) went with bigger jaws and the other with bigger brains, the latter further evolving over deep time into us, the former into something else. We then achieved dominance due to that "choice". It was the brains wot won it. Hard to credit, looking at much of what goes on, but there you go. Still true.
So, what I'm wondering, seeing these bizarre (to me) mindsets on climate change, is whether we might be seeing the very first inklings of such a seismic event taking place now and, like the financial crisis, like most things, starting in America. If this is the case, the schism between these 2 "tribes", Democrats and Republicans, takes on a much deeper significance than just its potential impact on next year's midterms and the betting implications thereof.
Evolution is a ruthlessly eugenic process; it is more the differential extermination of the unfit than the survival of the fit. Characteristics are preserved and transmitted only by individuals who survive to adulthood, and breed. We all survive to adulthood these days because Our Wonderful NHS so that filter goes out of the window. That leaves breeding, so if we are evolving at all it should be in the direction of being sexier, more prolific etc. Even that doesn't work very well because there is no marked imbalance of the sexes, here at any rate.
Still I do like the idea of us in the future becoming creatures who will look back at us and go, "aw sweet". Such an interesting topic, evolution. My sense is it's one of those understood by relatively few but often kind of misrepresented because many more than those few are also interested - since it IS so interesting - and think they have the gist of it when they haven't, quite. (Don't mean you, btw, I mean everyone). I really am tempted to devote some proper time to it rather than using a 10 minute skim surf to write a sideways PB post. If I devote some proper time to it, I reckon I can get to a point where I think I've got the gist of it and almost certainly haven't, quite.
I agree. If the royals can't stay out of politics, we might as well have an elected president instead.
I disagree, there is nothing wrong with the royals speaking on matters where there is general agreement, like tackling climate change.
Indeed Prince Charles has been campaigning for the environment for decades, even before it was fashionable.
I have no problem with Charles speaking out a bit more on issues than his mother did when he takes the throne, Parliament still decides and makes the laws but no reason the Head of State cannot make remarks on issues like climate change.
The difference with an elected Head of State like the French or US President however is they directly propose legislation to their legislature and send troops to war and in the US of course the President can veto and amend legislation passed by Congress, even popular bills.
The monarch in the UK has not done that since the English civil war and glorious revolution
Morning all, that's shocking data in the header, isn't it? Or maybe not, because I recall something similar on evolution. Lots of Republicans in the US don't believe in that either. And speaking of evolution, I think there may lie the answer.
In my (new) quest to become more generally knowledgeable (not hard given my startpoint) I was brushing up yesterday on how we humans came to be. Turns out it was a longish process, about 10 million years, soup to nuts, where the earliest uprights were the soup and we are the nuts. This is how it read to me anyway. We have Got Evolution Done. That the process is ongoing, that we are still evolving, didn't seem to feature, but I'd have thought we are. Or at least we might be.
In which case, why should there not be a repeat of something that has happened before and which was key to us being what we are today? I refer to the Big Fork, when our lineage split into 2 streams, one (I forget the exact name) went with bigger jaws and the other with bigger brains, the latter further evolving over deep time into us, the former into something else. We then achieved dominance due to that "choice". It was the brains wot won it. Hard to credit, looking at much of what goes on, but there you go. Still true.
So, what I'm wondering, seeing these bizarre (to me) mindsets on climate change, is whether we might be seeing the very first inklings of such a seismic event taking place now and, like the financial crisis, like most things, starting in America. If this is the case, the schism between these 2 "tribes", Democrats and Republicans, takes on a much deeper significance than just its potential impact on next year's midterms and the betting implications thereof.
Like it. A basket of Neanderthals*; they're racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic – you name it.
*though I get that they have received a very bad 'winners' press
Now there's a killer line for Harris when she battles Trump for WH24!
Can Bozo deliver a speech to COP without being an embarrassment to the nation?
After "The Saudi Arabia of wind" and being in Downing Street in 2060, I'm going with no.
Oh you are a bore aren't you?
What on earth is wrong with saying the Saudi Arabia of wind. Its quite an appropriate thing to say.
Does anyone really want to aspire to be the Saudi Arabia of anything?
Definitely, yes.
Saudi Arabia has been the world's leading energy provider for the past half a century.
Saying that we can generate our own energy, via spinning turbines, instead of having to import from Saudi Arabia, is very impressive and even without environmental concerns would be a sensible thing for us to do!
Morning all, that's shocking data in the header, isn't it? Or maybe not, because I recall something similar on evolution. Lots of Republicans in the US don't believe in that either. And speaking of evolution, I think there may lie the answer.
In my (new) quest to become more generally knowledgeable (not hard given my startpoint) I was brushing up yesterday on how we humans came to be. Turns out it was a longish process, about 10 million years, soup to nuts, where the earliest uprights were the soup and we are the nuts. This is how it read to me anyway. We have Got Evolution Done. That the process is ongoing, that we are still evolving, didn't seem to feature, but I'd have thought we are. Or at least we might be.
In which case, why should there not be a repeat of something that has happened before and which was key to us being what we are today? I refer to the Big Fork, when our lineage split into 2 streams, one (I forget the exact name) went with bigger jaws and the other with bigger brains, the latter further evolving over deep time into us, the former into something else. We then achieved dominance due to that "choice". It was the brains wot won it. Hard to credit, looking at much of what goes on, but there you go. Still true.
So, what I'm wondering, seeing these bizarre (to me) mindsets on climate change, is whether we might be seeing the very first inklings of such a seismic event taking place now and, like the financial crisis, like most things, starting in America. If this is the case, the schism between these 2 "tribes", Democrats and Republicans, takes on a much deeper significance than just its potential impact on next year's midterms and the betting implications thereof.
Like it. A basket of Neanderthals*; they're racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic – you name it.
*though I get that they have received a very bad 'winners' press
Now there's a killer line for Harris when she battles Trump for WH24!
Of course it worked so well for Hillary in 2016, she is now in her second term!
Morning all, that's shocking data in the header, isn't it? Or maybe not, because I recall something similar on evolution. Lots of Republicans in the US don't believe in that either. And speaking of evolution, I think there may lie the answer.
In my (new) quest to become more generally knowledgeable (not hard given my startpoint) I was brushing up yesterday on how we humans came to be. Turns out it was a longish process, about 10 million years, soup to nuts, where the earliest uprights were the soup and we are the nuts. This is how it read to me anyway. We have Got Evolution Done. That the process is ongoing, that we are still evolving, didn't seem to feature, but I'd have thought we are. Or at least we might be.
In which case, why should there not be a repeat of something that has happened before and which was key to us being what we are today? I refer to the Big Fork, when our lineage split into 2 streams, one (I forget the exact name) went with bigger jaws and the other with bigger brains, the latter further evolving over deep time into us, the former into something else. We then achieved dominance due to that "choice". It was the brains wot won it. Hard to credit, looking at much of what goes on, but there you go. Still true.
So, what I'm wondering, seeing these bizarre (to me) mindsets on climate change, is whether we might be seeing the very first inklings of such a seismic event taking place now and, like the financial crisis, like most things, starting in America. If this is the case, the schism between these 2 "tribes", Democrats and Republicans, takes on a much deeper significance than just its potential impact on next year's midterms and the betting implications thereof.
Speciation is one of the hardest parts of evolutionary theory to explain, because to survive a species has to procreate a lot, but to split into two species you have to prevent two populations of one species from procreating with each other for a long time.
The secret ballot will be enough to prevent speciation from happening.
Yes, speciation almost always happens where there is a geographical separation. Often caused by some sort of climate change. And it takes a long, long, long time. The Asian populations who crossed the Bering straits to the Americas were separated from other humans for around 10,000 years, I think? (Including, ISTR, 1000 years for which they were marooned in an area the size of half a Canadian province which was surrounded by solid ice. That must have been one of pre-history's grimmer periods.) But this wasn't nearly enough for them to evolve into a separate species. Even the 40-60,000 years for which Australian aborigines were separated from the rest of humanity wasn't enough (though there, there was probably some contact between aborigines and melanesians).
Geographical separation is the textbook explanation, but it's a bit lacking in many respects. How does it explain speciation in the oceans, or among birds, where geographically splitting a previously homogenous population will be much harder to achieve?
I think there's some very interesting science to be done to work it out.
There was a theory - now maybe too Unwoke to be spoken - that the Khoisan, aka the Bushmen of the Kalahari, are sufficiently genetically different from all their neighbours as to constitute a separate human species
Well that opens a whole scientific can of worms as to how you define two species as being distinct. Imposing a dividing line on a continuous process will necessarily involve a degree of arbitrariness.
I had always understood the definition for separate species to be "so different they cannot mate and create fertile offspring". So donkeys and horses are separate species, but chihuahuas and German shepherds are not.
That is one of the classic definitions of ‘different species’ but it is not always the case. Successful hybridization is known in nature. It almost certainly happened in our own past when homo sapiens successfully bred with Neanderthals
I agree. If the royals can't stay out of politics, we might as well have an elected president instead.
I disagree, there is nothing wrong with the royals speaking on matters where there is general agreement, like tackling climate change.
Indeed Prince Charles has been campaigning for the environment for decades, even before it was fashionable.
I have no problem with Charles speaking out a bit more on issues than his mother did when he takes the throne, Parliament still decides and makes the laws but no reason the Head of State cannot make remarks on issues like climate change.
The difference with an elected Head of State like the French or US President however is they directly propose legislation to their legislature and send troops to war and in the US of course the President can veto and amend legislation passed by Congress, even popular bills.
The monarch in the UK has not done that since the English civil war and glorious revolution
Yes, I broadly agree, but the difficluty is in identifying issues where there is general agreement. When I was an MP I wrote to Charles to express concern about his reported opposition to a hunting ban, which was then a very controversial issue. I had a nice two-page reply from his political secretary, which said very much as you do that he tries to avoid controversial issues, and I'd note that he'd not referred to hunting recently since it has become a hot issue.
Perhaps an issue one which the main parties agreed could be the test of "general agreement"? That would still leave some issues where a small minority felt very differently - climate change being an example.
Comments
The Asian populations who crossed the Bering straits to the Americas were separated from other humans for around 10,000 years, I think? (Including, ISTR, 1000 years for which they were marooned in an area the size of half a Canadian province which was surrounded by solid ice. That must have been one of pre-history's grimmer periods.) But this wasn't nearly enough for them to evolve into a separate species. Even the 40-60,000 years for which Australian aborigines were separated from the rest of humanity wasn't enough (though there, there was probably some contact between aborigines and melanesians).
https://www.flightradar24.com/N122GB/29b4fbc1
Are you a transpenninine train driver? No, I'm cis.
He managed to abduct his wife from a busy walkway at 9 a.m. on a workday morning with no one seeing him or the car before, after or during the abduction.
If he was as cunning as they say then he would have made sure there was no blood left and would never have abducted her in his friends car (he owned up to the police staright away that he had borrowed his friends car on the day of the abduction)
And police scientists took three attempts to find blood that was easily seen with the naked eye in a car that had been valetted after the police's first two attempts to find stuff had yielded nothing.
Wrong! He said that almost every conversation he had with them was completely outlandish.
Environmental pressures can be push factors towards encouraging populations to move - but there are also pull factors (i.e. economic opportunities).
Language is quite an interesting topic because it's one of very few things that has no genetic influence and is solely down to environmental causes.
A TERF-themed bonfire night.
"The proposals also take into account instances where, for example, a murderer may genuinely not know the location of a victim’s body if it has been moved."
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/helen-s-law-receives-royal-assent
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/nov/01/the-road-to-net-zero-aberdeen-looks-to-a-future-without-oil
Becoming a centre offshore wind is good - and there's still loads of opportunity around Scotland.
And I think it's time that we developed an idea about long-term oil requirements, which are not going away completely any time soon.
I do not see Electric Eurofighters being a thing...
I think there's some very interesting science to be done to work it out.
Stunning survey gives grim view of flourishing anti-democratic opinions
https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/579160-stunning-survey-gives-grim-view-of-flourishing-anti-democratic-opinions
Those who buy into former President Trump’s lies over the 2020 election and those who watch the far-right channels that amplify his rhetoric are increasingly embracing anti-democratic opinions and even contemplating political violence, according to a new poll.
The poll from the nonpartisan Public Religion Research Institute paints a troubling portrait of a growing segment of the public that is increasingly unmoored from reality as it embraces conspiracy theories about child abduction and stolen elections.
It found a deep divide between those who trust right-wing media outlets and the rest of the nation — and even a divide between those who trust Fox News and those who trust outlets like One America Network and Newsmax.
The poll found about three in ten Americans, 31 percent, believe the 2020 elections were stolen from Trump, including two-thirds of Republicans and a whopping 82 percent of those who trust Fox News more than any other media outlet.
Among those who trust far-right outlets like One America Network and Newsmax, 97 percent say they believe the election — which even Trump’s own cybersecurity and election security officials agreed was the safest and most secure ever conducted in the United States — was stolen.
One in five Americans believe in the core tenet of the QAnon conspiracy that “there is a storm coming soon,” while one in six believe the United States government is controlled by a group of Satan-worshipping pedophiles who run a global child sex-trafficking ring.
The same share, 18 percent, say they agree with the statement that America has gotten so far off track that “true American patriots may have to resort to violence in order to save our country.”...
https://www.politico.eu/article/eu-norway-arctic-fishing-post-brexit-rights/
https://twitter.com/wolfblitzer/status/1455118286736134149?s=20
Conte, 52, is on his way to London for discussions with Spurs over an 18-month deal to replace Nuno, who was dismissed only four months and ten Premier League games after being appointed.
The club’s board held talks yesterday about the Portuguese’s future but were reluctant to dismiss him until they had a replacement lined up. However, the club are increasingly confident about convincing Conte to take over.
Nuno arrived at Tottenham’s training ground this morning and was in line to take today’s session but positive talks with Conte, the former Chelsea manager, have accelerated his dismissal.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/tottenham-in-talks-with-antonio-conte-after-sacking-nuno-esp-rito-santo-bcj6qqdrz
Edit - The Telegraph have the story as well.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2021/11/01/tottenham-open-talks-antonio-conte-replacement-sacked-nuno-espirito/
https://twitter.com/MarkerJParker/status/1455140691647029249
How many divisions of neds does the UN have is what I want to know.
Which they did. Oh yes.
30-35% of the US population are evangelical Christians ie about a third, only 20% believe in QAnon theories and 18% believe in potential use of violence based on the above
https://web.archive.org/web/20160130062242/http://www.wheaton.edu/ISAE/Defining-Evangelicalism/How-Many-Are-There
has a map. I think the Blue Zone is UKG but the Green Zone is Scottish Gmt. Certainly in origina,l planning.
Edit: more maps here
https://www.scotsman.com/news/transport/cop26-road-closures-congestion-maps-show-how-glasgow-travel-will-be-significantly-impacted-3384625
As I've said before they look like a country in serious trouble to me although the one thing they have going for them is the Constitution which dealt with Trump remarkably well and seems to be coping with Biden too.
And nearly all of the 20% would take up arms!
That's, quite frankly, terrifying.
"Give us temporary permits to get to the other side of my re-election and then we will drop it."
https://twitter.com/henrymance/status/1455111323403042816
OK another 3 month extension in January to get through to the election and then its over is my prediction.
"This was announced on 28 Oct. Doesn't affect the current dispute"
https://twitter.com/Mij_Europe/status/1455148164080717831
If nothing else, denying a license only after x number of extensions*, requests for evidence etc etc would go down well in any arbitration scenario.
*It has been stated that for the licenses in question, there have already been a number of extensions, while waiting for supporting evidence.
But parking the issue for 3 months should suit the UK just fine, because for the moment we have bigger fish to fry in NI.
Would much rather prefer war with France if I'm honest.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rupert_Read
As much of a nut job as the climate change deniers. Unfortunately, the running on this subject is made by the loony left.
The drops they put in my eyes sting like a mofo.
What on earth is wrong with saying the Saudi Arabia of wind. Its quite an appropriate thing to say.
I believe there is a bird species (the tern?) which changes gradually as you go around the world, it is black or grey or orange or whatever in California, then slightly less orange in Texas, then orange with blue in Bermuda, and so on, until, when you reach China it is red and purple with no orange and it is an entirely different species. Unable to breed with the tern back in California
But at what point does the new species actually begin or end?
Humanity is probably like that
Indeed Prince Charles has been campaigning for the environment for decades, even before it was fashionable.
I have no problem with Charles speaking out a bit more on issues than his mother did when he takes the throne, Parliament still decides and makes the laws but no reason the Head of State cannot make remarks on issues like climate change.
The difference with an elected Head of State like the French or US President however is they directly propose legislation to their legislature and send troops to war and in the US of course the President can veto and amend legislation passed by Congress, even popular bills.
The monarch in the UK has not done that since the English civil war and glorious revolution
Saudi Arabia has been the world's leading energy provider for the past half a century.
Saying that we can generate our own energy, via spinning turbines, instead of having to import from Saudi Arabia, is very impressive and even without environmental concerns would be a sensible thing for us to do!
Perhaps an issue one which the main parties agreed could be the test of "general agreement"? That would still leave some issues where a small minority felt very differently - climate change being an example.