Talking of Planning, there's an interesting little complicated issue brewing.
74 local authorities have restricted Plannign Apps - in some cases simly freezing a *lot* - because English Heritage have advised that there is a requirement to show that developments do not increase *nitrate* pollution.
Follows an ECJ ruling on a Dutch case from 2018. I have no idea what this has to do with UK housebuilding now. 60k houses delayed so far, it is estimated.
Local Planning Authorities seem to have their heads spinning. Affected areas:
English Heritage? Surely not. Environment Agency / Natural England?
I'd have thought building on agricultural fields would reduce nitrate pollution in most cases.
I could of see how digging up a bunch of fields might induce a one-off uptick in nitrates, already in the soil, entering water courses etc.
Is that the issue here? Tried googling around and didn't get a clear answer.
The issue I think is nitrogen in wastewater (ie sewage). Agriculatural land leaches nitrogen into the environment at a given rate (you can google the calculations somewhere), and depending on the density of the development, water usage, and method of sewage treatment, a housing development can result in increased discharge of nitrates into the environment.
Some things are quite sensitive to the amount of available nitrogen. Bluebells, for example, do well in nutrient poor areas.
3 blasts in Shi'ite neighborhood of Dasht-e-Barchi of Kabul, Afghanistan this morning. First blast targeted a private education center & two others target Abdurahim Shahid High School. Initial reports suggest over 20 deaths. Developing. https://twitter.com/Natsecjeff/status/1516330269128671235
S'OK they're brown. We have changed the socio-economic profile of those people we care about.
No, it's not OK. We left because the occupation was untenable. How we deal with a fundamentalist and repressive Taliban government is a hard question, but ignoring the country's fate is wrong.
Oh I'm sorry did you miss the modus operandi of the West over the past two decades.
tl;dr the policies? They fucked Afghan with it. And Iraq. They invaded, then lost the wars in Afghan and Iraq. Think Vietnam if you want a handy guide.
So on the assumption you don't want to re-invade, how else would you suggest we don't ignore the country's fate.
Food aid, for a start. Unless you prefer we just leave them alone to starve ?
Vietnam is a crap comparison, and a whole different set of mistakes.
We are very creative at inventing new mistakes on each of our in/excursions.
What is food aid going to do and how would it be delivered and to whom and by whom.
"As I said, I have no idea whether Trump’s endorsement of Vance will matter. What I do know is that the G.O.P. as a whole has turned to hate-based politics. And if you aren’t afraid, you aren’t paying attention."
Will Scholz be more relenting than Merkel? A lot will hinge on how "communitaire" the Germans really are prepared to be.
"Macron’s bid for a second term can be seen as the last gasp of French centre-left pro-Europeanism" - of course, the winners are actually the losers. This kind of contrarianism should be confined to Oxbridge undergraduates and blokes hawking subscriptions to their newsletters.
I do understand where they're coming from but it's not the last gasp even if he wins. That would be akin to saying Hilary's run in 2016 was the last gasp of American democrat centrism. What this election does solidify is the new political dividing line between liberal multilateralism and - depending on country - nationalist or far-left populism. With a third Green wing slowly building up support. It's not Macron as his ilk that may disappear if Le Pen wins, it's the traditional conservatives and socialists who have already disappeared. Le Pen's next rival if she stands again next time (as incumbent or challenger) will be another liberal internationalist.
I agree with others who say this is not a must-win for the Tories. That's not to say there is no pressure. I would judge it as:
- Swing back to Labour well in excess of the 2019 Tory swing = bad news for Boris - Swing back in line with 2019 and a Labour win = OK for Starmer but a little underwhelming - Little change or slight swing to Labour but Tories retain = bad news for Starmer - Swing to Tories = highly unlikely
My apologies everyone for this, but really @HYUFD who complains about me continuing arguments has posted a reply to me a full hour after the new thread opened. Talk about pot and kettle. So I'm not letting him off the hook.
@hyufd seems to think that because he posts something from the internet it is correct. Quote: 'No my facts were absolutely right. I posted the IQ data.' Yes you did BUT as everyone has been telling you it is not meaningful to compare countries because of other variables without taking them into account.
He also said: You quite clearly do have an ideological objection to raw IQ test results as you have spent most of this thread whinging about them. Again no I am not as I have made clear over and over again. I only object to the misuse of the data which is what you always do because you are as thick as a plank.
You also said 'The difference between the average Japanese and Mali test results as I have already shown you is far to big to be bridged even with preparation and coaching'. Again I have explained this to you. My reference to coaching was in the UK/USA context of improving individual IQ results. The reason Mali results are so low is because of other variables primarily the complete lack of education compared to Japan. That is not the same as coaching, we are talking about a completely different society, 3rd world compared to 1st world.
OK so finally I will ask you for the umpteenth time do you really believe that the average Nepal IQ is really 43 and the average Mali IQ is really 59 because that is at the level of not being able to tie your shoe laces. Or is it because of other factors like lack of education.
If the latter then all of what you have posted is bollocks isn't it?
If the former then you are a racist if you think Africans are really this stupid.
My apologies everyone for this, but really @HYUFD who complains about me continuing arguments has posted a reply to me a full hour after the new thread opened. Talk about pot and kettle. So I'm not letting him off the hook.
@hyufd seems to think that because he posts something from the internet it is correct. Quote: 'No my facts were absolutely right. I posted the IQ data.' Yes you did BUT as everyone has been telling you it is not meaningful to compare countries because of other variables without taking them into account.
He also said: You quite clearly do have an ideological objection to raw IQ test results as you have spent most of this thread whinging about them. Again no I am not as I have made clear over and over again. I only object to the misuse of the data which is what you always do because you are as thick as a plank.
You also said 'The difference between the average Japanese and Mali test results as I have already shown you is far to big to be bridged even with preparation and coaching'. Again I have explained this to you. My reference to coaching was in the UK/USA context of improving individual IQ results. The reason Mali results are so low is because of other variables primarily the complete lack of education compared to Japan. That is not the same as coaching, we are talking about a completely different society, 3rd world compared to 1st world.
OK so finally I will ask you for the umpteenth time do you really believe that the average Nepal IQ is really 43 and the average Mali IQ is really 59 because that is at the level of not being able to tie your shoe laces. Or is it because of other factors like lack of education.
If the latter then all of what you have posted is bollocks isn't it?
If the former then you are a racist if you think Africans are really this stupid.
I posted on the OLD thread not the new one, you have yet again decided to carry your post over to disrupt the new thread so here we go.
You have an ideological objection to IQ tests, hence you completely dismiss the fact that East Asian countries are over 50 IQ points higher than the lowest IQ nations (and also indeed higher than us). That is just a fact, instead all you can do is rant and rave in your usual pompous manner throwing accusations of racism about and accusing me of being thick because I do not agree with your ideological agenda which is that there is no such thing as raw IQ.
You also need to ask why some nations are 3rd world and some nations are very advanced 1st world like Japan? The answer may well be in part due to raw IQ but no again that has to be dismissed by you with a rant about racism.
There are schools in Nepal and Mali as much as there are schools in Japan after all!
Ex Kremlin official and Gazprombank vice president is found dead 'with gun in his hand' in his luxury Moscow apartment beside bodies of his wife and daughter, 13
My apologies everyone for this, but really @HYUFD who complains about me continuing arguments has posted a reply to me a full hour after the new thread opened. Talk about pot and kettle. So I'm not letting him off the hook.
@hyufd seems to think that because he posts something from the internet it is correct. Quote: 'No my facts were absolutely right. I posted the IQ data.' Yes you did BUT as everyone has been telling you it is not meaningful to compare countries because of other variables without taking them into account.
He also said: You quite clearly do have an ideological objection to raw IQ test results as you have spent most of this thread whinging about them. Again no I am not as I have made clear over and over again. I only object to the misuse of the data which is what you always do because you are as thick as a plank.
You also said 'The difference between the average Japanese and Mali test results as I have already shown you is far to big to be bridged even with preparation and coaching'. Again I have explained this to you. My reference to coaching was in the UK/USA context of improving individual IQ results. The reason Mali results are so low is because of other variables primarily the complete lack of education compared to Japan. That is not the same as coaching, we are talking about a completely different society, 3rd world compared to 1st world.
OK so finally I will ask you for the umpteenth time do you really believe that the average Nepal IQ is really 43 and the average Mali IQ is really 59 because that is at the level of not being able to tie your shoe laces. Or is it because of other factors like lack of education.
If the latter then all of what you have posted is bollocks isn't it?
If the former then you are a racist if you think Africans are really this stupid.
The only way you will get him to agree with you is to conduct a poll and find that 63% of Japanese agree with your argument whereas 59% of Malians agree with his.
Ex Kremlin official and Gazprombank vice president is found dead 'with gun in his hand' in his luxury Moscow apartment beside bodies of his wife and daughter, 13
4) Give the Ukranian Armed Forces money: Come Back Alive Come Back Alive (Povertaysya Zhyvym) is a Kyiv-based charity working for the military in Ukraine. It provides defensive equipment (reconnaisance drones, body armor, thermal imagers, laptops, etc) Web: https://www.comebackalive.in.ua/ By paypal, card, bank transfer etc: https://www.comebackalive.in.ua/donate
(I'll post this again tonight to catch the late-night crowd)
There is this one which I have recommended several times, apologies if this is regarded as spamming. Supplying dried food and sleeping bags to the volunteer fighters.
3 blasts in Shi'ite neighborhood of Dasht-e-Barchi of Kabul, Afghanistan this morning. First blast targeted a private education center & two others target Abdurahim Shahid High School. Initial reports suggest over 20 deaths. Developing. https://twitter.com/Natsecjeff/status/1516330269128671235
S'OK they're brown. We have changed the socio-economic profile of those people we care about.
No, it's not OK. We left because the occupation was untenable. How we deal with a fundamentalist and repressive Taliban government is a hard question, but ignoring the country's fate is wrong.
Oh I'm sorry did you miss the modus operandi of the West over the past two decades.
tl;dr the policies? They fucked Afghan with it. And Iraq. They invaded, then lost the wars in Afghan and Iraq. Think Vietnam if you want a handy guide.
So on the assumption you don't want to re-invade, how else would you suggest we don't ignore the country's fate.
Food aid, for a start. Unless you prefer we just leave them alone to starve ?
Vietnam is a crap comparison, and a whole different set of mistakes.
We are very creative at inventing new mistakes on each of our in/excursions.
What is food aid going to do and how would it be delivered and to whom and by whom.
That, and paying some attention to what's going on in the country. Which is what seems to have irritated you with my original post.
Rubbish. You said that "ignoring a country's fate is wrong". My point is that that is exactly what we are doing, give or take some meaningless aid pledge, and that it is not necessarily wrong.
You are hand-wringing in which case that aid pledge (delivered by whom to whom, I might ask again) should delight you and make your "ignoring a country's fate is wrong" comment misjudged.
Your original post irritated me because it was a logic fail.
Talking of Planning, there's an interesting little complicated issue brewing.
74 local authorities have restricted Plannign Apps - in some cases simly freezing a *lot* - because English Heritage have advised that there is a requirement to show that developments do not increase *nitrate* pollution.
Follows an ECJ ruling on a Dutch case from 2018. I have no idea what this has to do with UK housebuilding now. 60k houses delayed so far, it is estimated.
Local Planning Authorities seem to have their heads spinning. Affected areas:
English Heritage? Surely not. Environment Agency / Natural England?
I'd have thought building on agricultural fields would reduce nitrate pollution in most cases.
I could of see how digging up a bunch of fields might induce a one-off uptick in nitrates, already in the soil, entering water courses etc.
Is that the issue here? Tried googling around and didn't get a clear answer.
The issue I think is nitrogen in wastewater (ie sewage). Agriculatural land leaches nitrogen into the environment at a given rate (you can google the calculations somewhere), and depending on the density of the development, water usage, and method of sewage treatment, a housing development can result in increased discharge of nitrates into the environment.
Some things are quite sensitive to the amount of available nitrogen. Bluebells, for example, do well in nutrient poor areas.
Depends on which nutrients...
But overly rich soils are indeed bad for biodiversity if you don't want to end up with just nettles. There's a reason limestone areas have lots of interesting plants.
There's issues with poor livestock practice too, not just fertiliser, where direct run off into streams causes significant problems, including nitrification.
So the main thing causing trouble here is sewage not being treated fully because there are too many houses being built without the infrastructure being added to go with them? Just another service that the developers (and often the planners) don't care about to go along with all the others.
If you went to Nepal and tried really really hard, you might just be able to find someone whose IQ truly is as low as 43. The idea that 50%+ of the population are at that level or lower is a risible fiction.
Those bloody sneaky French. They've only gone and added us, their arch foe, to their Green travel list, moving us from Orange when no one was looking. Does our centuries-old enmity mean nothing any more?
If you went to Nepal and tried really really hard, you might just be able to find someone whose IQ truly is as low as 43. The idea that 50%+ of the population are at that level or lower is a risible fiction.
I'd like to see HYUFD score more than about 1 on this test: and no googling allowed.
Con 47.0 Lab 42.2 LD (2 wards) 1.1 Grn 7.0 Others (5 candidates, 3 wards, no LD overlap) 2.5
YP gained 6.3% in the ward they stood.
Thoughts: - This hadn't swung any more Tory from GE19 to LE21, in contrast to Batley & Spen. - Best Green performance was in Wakefield Rural, so don't read across all that 7% to Labour - Although not quite as good a read across as B&S in terms of a full slate of candidates, this isn't a bad extra data point for the by-election (3 in 4 metropolitans tend to be better for this - and 2022 data set still to come) - The start point for any by-election, even had it been held back in 2021, was therefore a bit tighter than GE19. If Labour could hope to compete then, they are easily justified favourites now.
Betting: - Honest opinion, Labour activists will get a degree of colly wobbles during the campaign, so I'd wonder about a hedge type approach here, albeit running the risk of partygate flaring up again.
If you went to Nepal and tried really really hard, you might just be able to find someone whose IQ truly is as low as 43. The idea that 50%+ of the population are at that level or lower is a risible fiction.
Slightly irrelevant to the underlying conversation but the average measured IQ in Nepal from a quick google seems to be around 78 not 43. Which is very different!
Is Steve Baker going to run for the leadership do we reckon? In the absence of a firm fave, 70-1 feels a bit long to me.
He's at least loyal to his boss bordering on the ridiculous.
Well… he was quite critical of him before Xmas but said he wasn’t interested in being the organiser in chief again. Begs the question whether he fancies a shot at the job.
What is it that distinguishes SKS’s takeaway and beers with party staff in Durham from BJ’s “birthday party”?
Nothing! In fact that's brilliant! Someone should go out and make that argument quick! Guaranteed to turn the heads of all the people across the country who are sick of the government and make every man Jack of them run out and vote Tory. Huzzah.
Talking of Planning, there's an interesting little complicated issue brewing.
74 local authorities have restricted Plannign Apps - in some cases simly freezing a *lot* - because English Heritage have advised that there is a requirement to show that developments do not increase *nitrate* pollution.
Follows an ECJ ruling on a Dutch case from 2018. I have no idea what this has to do with UK housebuilding now. 60k houses delayed so far, it is estimated.
Local Planning Authorities seem to have their heads spinning. Affected areas:
English Heritage? Surely not. Environment Agency / Natural England?
I'd have thought building on agricultural fields would reduce nitrate pollution in most cases.
I could of see how digging up a bunch of fields might induce a one-off uptick in nitrates, already in the soil, entering water courses etc.
Is that the issue here? Tried googling around and didn't get a clear answer.
The issue I think is nitrogen in wastewater (ie sewage). Agriculatural land leaches nitrogen into the environment at a given rate (you can google the calculations somewhere), and depending on the density of the development, water usage, and method of sewage treatment, a housing development can result in increased discharge of nitrates into the environment.
Some things are quite sensitive to the amount of available nitrogen. Bluebells, for example, do well in nutrient poor areas.
Depends on which nutrients...
But overly rich soils are indeed bad for biodiversity if you don't want to end up with just nettles. There's a reason limestone areas have lots of interesting plants.
There's issues with poor livestock practice too, not just fertiliser, where direct run off into streams causes significant problems, including nitrification.
So the main thing causing trouble here is sewage not being treated fully because there are too many houses being built without the infrastructure being added to go with them? Just another service that the developers (and often the planners) don't care about to go along with all the others.
Blame the councillors as well. Not always too strict about insisting on planning gain moneys or extracting it in sufficiently quick time.
Is Steve Baker going to run for the leadership do we reckon? In the absence of a firm fave, 70-1 feels a bit long to me.
He's at least loyal to his boss bordering on the ridiculous.
Well… he was quite critical of him before Xmas but said he wasn’t interested in being the organiser in chief again. Begs the question whether he fancies a shot at the job.
What is it that distinguishes SKS’s takeaway and beers with party staff in Durham from BJ’s “birthday party”?
Nothing! In fact that's brilliant! Someone should go out and make that argument quick! Guaranteed to turn the heads of all the people across the country who are sick of the government and make every man Jack of them run out and vote Tory. Huzzah.
My apologies everyone for this, but really @HYUFD who complains about me continuing arguments has posted a reply to me a full hour after the new thread opened. Talk about pot and kettle. So I'm not letting him off the hook.
@hyufd seems to think that because he posts something from the internet it is correct. Quote: 'No my facts were absolutely right. I posted the IQ data.' Yes you did BUT as everyone has been telling you it is not meaningful to compare countries because of other variables without taking them into account.
He also said: You quite clearly do have an ideological objection to raw IQ test results as you have spent most of this thread whinging about them. Again no I am not as I have made clear over and over again. I only object to the misuse of the data which is what you always do because you are as thick as a plank.
You also said 'The difference between the average Japanese and Mali test results as I have already shown you is far to big to be bridged even with preparation and coaching'. Again I have explained this to you. My reference to coaching was in the UK/USA context of improving individual IQ results. The reason Mali results are so low is because of other variables primarily the complete lack of education compared to Japan. That is not the same as coaching, we are talking about a completely different society, 3rd world compared to 1st world.
OK so finally I will ask you for the umpteenth time do you really believe that the average Nepal IQ is really 43 and the average Mali IQ is really 59 because that is at the level of not being able to tie your shoe laces. Or is it because of other factors like lack of education.
If the latter then all of what you have posted is bollocks isn't it?
If the former then you are a racist if you think Africans are really this stupid.
I posted on the OLD thread not the new one, you have yet again decided to carry your post over to disrupt the new thread so here we go.
You have an ideological objection to IQ tests, hence you completely dismiss the fact that East Asian countries are over 50 IQ points higher than the lowest IQ nations (and also indeed higher than us). That is just a fact, instead all you can do is rant and rave in your usual pompous manner throwing accusations of racism about and accusing me of being thick because I do not agree with your ideological agenda which is that there is no such thing as raw IQ.
You also need to ask why some nations are 3rd world and some nations are very advanced 1st world like Japan? The answer may well be in part due to raw IQ but no again that has to be dismissed by you with a rant about racism.
There are schools in Nepal and Mali as much as there are schools in Japan after all!
a) You kept it going not me but I am stopping now because I know how it annoys everyone.
b) You said: 'There are schools in Nepal and Mali as much as there are schools in Japan after all!' You really are deluded aren't you. How on earth can you compare Mali and Nepal education with Japan?
c) You keep saying I have an ideological objection to IQ tests yet ignore the fact that I clearly don't and that they were integral to my work for many years and I used them repeated and was involved in their production. You are just bonkers.
d) So re your last paragraph you really DO think Africans are stupid so therefore you are a racist. I mean what other conclusion can one come to. Go on admit it you think black people are thick. Again I ask why do you think African Americans perform better than Africans if that is the case. They are after all the same people. Africans who suffer poverty do not do so because they are thick, and when rescued from poverty why do they suddenly perform better if you are correct.
It really is offensive if you think Africans are thick.
Also do you have any comprehension of what a score of 43 is? I wouldn't want someone with that IQ level taking me up Everest. But guess what people from Nepal aren't as stupid as you think.
What is it that distinguishes SKS’s takeaway and beers with party staff in Durham from BJ’s “birthday party”?
Boris is the Prime Minister and the one who took away our Civil Liberties.
Starmer unquestioningly voted with him, which is bad, and wanted to keep the restrictions for longer which is even worse - but he wasn't the one who introduced the rules, that was Boris.
What is it that distinguishes SKS’s takeaway and beers with party staff in Durham from BJ’s “birthday party”?
Nothing! In fact that's brilliant! Someone should go out and make that argument quick! Guaranteed to turn the heads of all the people across the country who are sick of the government and make every man Jack of them run out and vote Tory. Huzzah.
So you don’t know?
I’m aware that one event got multiple FPNs, the other cleared of any wrongdoing. But why?
What is it that distinguishes SKS’s takeaway and beers with party staff in Durham from BJ’s “birthday party”?
Hmm...
Maybe that Boris was responsible for the drafting and passage of these laws? Maybe that he was the PM and used government buildings for his lawbreaking? Maybe that he was the one who lied to the HoC about it when he had the duty of candour at the dispatch box?
I am sure I could come up with one or two more if you like.
What is it that distinguishes SKS’s takeaway and beers with party staff in Durham from BJ’s “birthday party”?
Boris is the Prime Minister and the one who took away our Civil Liberties.
Starmer unquestioningly voted with him, which is bad, and wanted to keep the restrictions for longer which is even worse - but he wasn't the one who introduced the rules, that was Boris.
That shouldn’t lead to FPNs for one event and not the other, surely?
What is it that distinguishes SKS’s takeaway and beers with party staff in Durham from BJ’s “birthday party”?
Hmm...
Maybe that Boris was responsible for the drafting and passage of these laws? Maybe that he was the PM and used government buildings for his lawbreaking? Maybe that he was the one who lied to the HoC about it when he had the duty of candour at the dispatch box?
I am sure I could come up with one or two more if you like.
What is it that distinguishes SKS’s takeaway and beers with party staff in Durham from BJ’s “birthday party”?
Boris is the Prime Minister and the one who took away our Civil Liberties.
Starmer unquestioningly voted with him, which is bad, and wanted to keep the restrictions for longer which is even worse - but he wasn't the one who introduced the rules, that was Boris.
That shouldn’t lead to FPNs for one event and not the other, surely?
Yes it does, the fact that Downing Street introduced the rules is an aggravating factor as to why this has been investigated and fines issued.
Had this been a random person it would never have been. Downing Street is rightly expected to be held to a higher standard.
What is it that distinguishes SKS’s takeaway and beers with party staff in Durham from BJ’s “birthday party”?
Boris is the Prime Minister and the one who took away our Civil Liberties.
Starmer unquestioningly voted with him, which is bad, and wanted to keep the restrictions for longer which is even worse - but he wasn't the one who introduced the rules, that was Boris.
That shouldn’t lead to FPNs for one event and not the other, surely?
Starmer doing this was bad. What Boris did was worse.
The plan is to lock all the MPs in that meeting room until 2024. No letters will be permitted out of the room.
Would that not have an adverse effect on the legislative program? Not to mention VONCs.
Boris has to win back his MPs and its not going to be easy, especially when many hundred councillors lose their positions in just over 2 weeks time.
Maybe they are going to reinstate remote votes as per lockdown. This is "STAY HOME [or locked in a house of commons meeting room], STAY SAFE, PROTECT BIG DOG"
What is it that distinguishes SKS’s takeaway and beers with party staff in Durham from BJ’s “birthday party”?
Boris is the Prime Minister and the one who took away our Civil Liberties.
Starmer unquestioningly voted with him, which is bad, and wanted to keep the restrictions for longer which is even worse - but he wasn't the one who introduced the rules, that was Boris.
That shouldn’t lead to FPNs for one event and not the other, surely?
Yes it does, the fact that Downing Street introduced the rules is an aggravating factor as to why this has been investigated and fines issued.
Had this been a random person it would never have been. Downing Street is rightly expected to be held to a higher standard.
Hmm. A random person who happens to be LoTo and voted, as you say, for the very same measure.
What is it that distinguishes SKS’s takeaway and beers with party staff in Durham from BJ’s “birthday party”?
Boris is the Prime Minister and the one who took away our Civil Liberties.
Starmer unquestioningly voted with him, which is bad, and wanted to keep the restrictions for longer which is even worse - but he wasn't the one who introduced the rules, that was Boris.
That shouldn’t lead to FPNs for one event and not the other, surely?
Starmer doing this was bad. What Boris did was worse.
What Boris did was nothing serious which shouldn't have even drawn any attention whatsoever, except for the fact he passed a law so draconian the rest of country couldn't do anything at all and then he didn't follow his own law.
Had he not introduced lockdown, then there'd have been no laws for him to violate. He did, his fault, karmic justice.
What is it that distinguishes SKS’s takeaway and beers with party staff in Durham from BJ’s “birthday party”?
Boris is the Prime Minister and the one who took away our Civil Liberties.
Starmer unquestioningly voted with him, which is bad, and wanted to keep the restrictions for longer which is even worse - but he wasn't the one who introduced the rules, that was Boris.
That shouldn’t lead to FPNs for one event and not the other, surely?
Yes it does, the fact that Downing Street introduced the rules is an aggravating factor as to why this has been investigated and fines issued.
Had this been a random person it would never have been. Downing Street is rightly expected to be held to a higher standard.
Hmm. A random person who happens to be LoTo and voted, as you say, for the very same measure.
What is it that distinguishes SKS’s takeaway and beers with party staff in Durham from BJ’s “birthday party”?
Boris is the Prime Minister and the one who took away our Civil Liberties.
Starmer unquestioningly voted with him, which is bad, and wanted to keep the restrictions for longer which is even worse - but he wasn't the one who introduced the rules, that was Boris.
That shouldn’t lead to FPNs for one event and not the other, surely?
Yes it does, the fact that Downing Street introduced the rules is an aggravating factor as to why this has been investigated and fines issued.
Had this been a random person it would never have been. Downing Street is rightly expected to be held to a higher standard.
Hmm. A random person who happens to be LoTo and voted, as you say, for the very same measure.
At the very least, doesn’t it make it rather rich for SKS to demand his resignation over it? Can’t BJ just say “Well, I am held to higher standards than the LoTo”
3 blasts in Shi'ite neighborhood of Dasht-e-Barchi of Kabul, Afghanistan this morning. First blast targeted a private education center & two others target Abdurahim Shahid High School. Initial reports suggest over 20 deaths. Developing. https://twitter.com/Natsecjeff/status/1516330269128671235
S'OK they're brown. We have changed the socio-economic profile of those people we care about.
No, it's not OK. We left because the occupation was untenable. How we deal with a fundamentalist and repressive Taliban government is a hard question, but ignoring the country's fate is wrong.
Oh I'm sorry did you miss the modus operandi of the West over the past two decades.
tl;dr the policies? They fucked Afghan with it. And Iraq. They invaded, then lost the wars in Afghan and Iraq. Think Vietnam if you want a handy guide.
So on the assumption you don't want to re-invade, how else would you suggest we don't ignore the country's fate.
Food aid, for a start. Unless you prefer we just leave them alone to starve ?
Vietnam is a crap comparison, and a whole different set of mistakes.
We are very creative at inventing new mistakes on each of our in/excursions.
What is food aid going to do and how would it be delivered and to whom and by whom.
That, and paying some attention to what's going on in the country. Which is what seems to have irritated you with my original post.
Rubbish. You said that "ignoring a country's fate is wrong". My point is that that is exactly what we are doing, give or take some meaningless aid pledge, and that it is not necessarily wrong.
You are hand-wringing in which case that aid pledge (delivered by whom to whom, I might ask again) should delight you and make your "ignoring a country's fate is wrong" comment misjudged.
Your original post irritated me because it was a logic fail.
There were widespread attacks on schools under our occupation; they continue. It wasn't a great insight, but there you go.
My apologies everyone for this, but really @HYUFD who complains about me continuing arguments has posted a reply to me a full hour after the new thread opened. Talk about pot and kettle. So I'm not letting him off the hook.
@hyufd seems to think that because he posts something from the internet it is correct. Quote: 'No my facts were absolutely right. I posted the IQ data.' Yes you did BUT as everyone has been telling you it is not meaningful to compare countries because of other variables without taking them into account.
He also said: You quite clearly do have an ideological objection to raw IQ test results as you have spent most of this thread whinging about them. Again no I am not as I have made clear over and over again. I only object to the misuse of the data which is what you always do because you are as thick as a plank.
You also said 'The difference between the average Japanese and Mali test results as I have already shown you is far to big to be bridged even with preparation and coaching'. Again I have explained this to you. My reference to coaching was in the UK/USA context of improving individual IQ results. The reason Mali results are so low is because of other variables primarily the complete lack of education compared to Japan. That is not the same as coaching, we are talking about a completely different society, 3rd world compared to 1st world.
OK so finally I will ask you for the umpteenth time do you really believe that the average Nepal IQ is really 43 and the average Mali IQ is really 59 because that is at the level of not being able to tie your shoe laces. Or is it because of other factors like lack of education.
If the latter then all of what you have posted is bollocks isn't it?
If the former then you are a racist if you think Africans are really this stupid.
I posted on the OLD thread not the new one, you have yet again decided to carry your post over to disrupt the new thread so here we go.
You have an ideological objection to IQ tests, hence you completely dismiss the fact that East Asian countries are over 50 IQ points higher than the lowest IQ nations (and also indeed higher than us). That is just a fact, instead all you can do is rant and rave in your usual pompous manner throwing accusations of racism about and accusing me of being thick because I do not agree with your ideological agenda which is that there is no such thing as raw IQ.
You also need to ask why some nations are 3rd world and some nations are very advanced 1st world like Japan? The answer may well be in part due to raw IQ but no again that has to be dismissed by you with a rant about racism.
There are schools in Nepal and Mali as much as there are schools in Japan after all!
a) You kept it going not me but I am stopping now because I know how it annoys everyone.
b) You said: 'There are schools in Nepal and Mali as much as there are schools in Japan after all!' You really are deluded aren't you. How on earth can you compare Mali and Nepal education with Japan?
c) You keep saying I have an ideological objection to IQ tests yet ignore the fact that I clearly don't and that they were integral to my work for many years and I used them repeated and was involved in their production. You are just bonkers.
d) So re your last paragraph you really DO think Africans are stupid so therefore you are a racist. I mean what other conclusion can one come to. Go on admit it you think black people are thick. Again I ask why do you think African Americans perform better than Africans if that is the case. They are after all the same people. Africans who suffer poverty do not do so because they are thick, and when rescued from poverty why do they suddenly perform better if you are correct.
It really is offensive if you think Africans are thick.
Also do you have any comprehension of what a score of 43 is? I wouldn't want someone with that IQ level taking me up Everest. But guess what people from Nepal aren't as stupid as you think.
One does wonder what your IQ level is.
And yet, everyone accepts that races vary by height, weight, athleticism, skin colour, hair colour, stoutness, susceptibility to certain diseases (cf Sickle Cell in Africa, and Cystic Fibrosis in Celtic northwest Europe); heck, they even vary by penis size and maybe personality.
It seems odd that we accept that every single evolved human attribute varies a little or a lot between (and within) races, apart from just ONE - intelligence, which is uniquely the same for all races, and any IQ test that says it isn't equal - which they all do - is racist and must be ignored
What is it that distinguishes SKS’s takeaway and beers with party staff in Durham from BJ’s “birthday party”?
Boris is the Prime Minister and the one who took away our Civil Liberties.
Starmer unquestioningly voted with him, which is bad, and wanted to keep the restrictions for longer which is even worse - but he wasn't the one who introduced the rules, that was Boris.
That shouldn’t lead to FPNs for one event and not the other, surely?
Yes it does, the fact that Downing Street introduced the rules is an aggravating factor as to why this has been investigated and fines issued.
Had this been a random person it would never have been. Downing Street is rightly expected to be held to a higher standard.
Hmm. A random person who happens to be LoTo and voted, as you say, for the very same measure.
My apologies everyone for this, but really @HYUFD who complains about me continuing arguments has posted a reply to me a full hour after the new thread opened. Talk about pot and kettle. So I'm not letting him off the hook.
@hyufd seems to think that because he posts something from the internet it is correct. Quote: 'No my facts were absolutely right. I posted the IQ data.' Yes you did BUT as everyone has been telling you it is not meaningful to compare countries because of other variables without taking them into account.
He also said: You quite clearly do have an ideological objection to raw IQ test results as you have spent most of this thread whinging about them. Again no I am not as I have made clear over and over again. I only object to the misuse of the data which is what you always do because you are as thick as a plank.
You also said 'The difference between the average Japanese and Mali test results as I have already shown you is far to big to be bridged even with preparation and coaching'. Again I have explained this to you. My reference to coaching was in the UK/USA context of improving individual IQ results. The reason Mali results are so low is because of other variables primarily the complete lack of education compared to Japan. That is not the same as coaching, we are talking about a completely different society, 3rd world compared to 1st world.
OK so finally I will ask you for the umpteenth time do you really believe that the average Nepal IQ is really 43 and the average Mali IQ is really 59 because that is at the level of not being able to tie your shoe laces. Or is it because of other factors like lack of education.
If the latter then all of what you have posted is bollocks isn't it?
If the former then you are a racist if you think Africans are really this stupid.
I posted on the OLD thread not the new one, you have yet again decided to carry your post over to disrupt the new thread so here we go.
You have an ideological objection to IQ tests, hence you completely dismiss the fact that East Asian countries are over 50 IQ points higher than the lowest IQ nations (and also indeed higher than us). That is just a fact, instead all you can do is rant and rave in your usual pompous manner throwing accusations of racism about and accusing me of being thick because I do not agree with your ideological agenda which is that there is no such thing as raw IQ.
You also need to ask why some nations are 3rd world and some nations are very advanced 1st world like Japan? The answer may well be in part due to raw IQ but no again that has to be dismissed by you with a rant about racism.
There are schools in Nepal and Mali as much as there are schools in Japan after all!
a) You kept it going not me but I am stopping now because I know how it annoys everyone.
b) You said: 'There are schools in Nepal and Mali as much as there are schools in Japan after all!' You really are deluded aren't you. How on earth can you compare Mali and Nepal education with Japan?
c) You keep saying I have an ideological objection to IQ tests yet ignore the fact that I clearly don't and that they were integral to my work for many years and I used them repeated and was involved in their production. You are just bonkers.
d) So re your last paragraph you really DO think Africans are stupid so therefore you are a racist. I mean what other conclusion can one come to. Go on admit it you think black people are thick. Again I ask why do you think African Americans perform better than Africans if that is the case. They are after all the same people. Africans who suffer poverty do not do so because they are thick, and when rescued from poverty why do they suddenly perform better if you are correct.
It really is offensive if you think Africans are thick.
Also do you have any comprehension of what a score of 43 is? I wouldn't want someone with that IQ level taking me up Everest. But guess what people from Nepal aren't as stupid as you think.
One does wonder what your IQ level is.
a) You replied again on the previous thread, so I replied to you again. You then continued it onto this new thread rather than the old one.
b) Very easily. They both have schools which give pupils the opportunity to learn, I would not expect Malian and Nepali schools to be so crap in relation to Japanese schools as to be the sole reason for Japan's very high average IQ score in relation to them.
c) Clearly you do have an ideological objection to any notion of raw IQ, otherwise you would not have made umpteen posts saying how raw IQ measures are racist.
d) You just prove my point. Rather than look at the facts you just throw out accusations of racism. Even in developed nations we know full well East Asians get the best exam results when all racial backgrounds are on an equal footing.
It is you saying Africans are thick not me, saying Japan has a higher average IQ than African nations is not the same thing at all (you could equally say African nations produce more long distance Olympic gold medallists than Japan).
I have never pretended to be genius level IQ but what my IQ is is irrelevant to a discussion of a comparison of raw IQ scores between nations and ethnicities
My apologies everyone for this, but really @HYUFD who complains about me continuing arguments has posted a reply to me a full hour after the new thread opened. Talk about pot and kettle. So I'm not letting him off the hook.
@hyufd seems to think that because he posts something from the internet it is correct. Quote: 'No my facts were absolutely right. I posted the IQ data.' Yes you did BUT as everyone has been telling you it is not meaningful to compare countries because of other variables without taking them into account.
He also said: You quite clearly do have an ideological objection to raw IQ test results as you have spent most of this thread whinging about them. Again no I am not as I have made clear over and over again. I only object to the misuse of the data which is what you always do because you are as thick as a plank.
You also said 'The difference between the average Japanese and Mali test results as I have already shown you is far to big to be bridged even with preparation and coaching'. Again I have explained this to you. My reference to coaching was in the UK/USA context of improving individual IQ results. The reason Mali results are so low is because of other variables primarily the complete lack of education compared to Japan. That is not the same as coaching, we are talking about a completely different society, 3rd world compared to 1st world.
OK so finally I will ask you for the umpteenth time do you really believe that the average Nepal IQ is really 43 and the average Mali IQ is really 59 because that is at the level of not being able to tie your shoe laces. Or is it because of other factors like lack of education.
If the latter then all of what you have posted is bollocks isn't it?
If the former then you are a racist if you think Africans are really this stupid.
I posted on the OLD thread not the new one, you have yet again decided to carry your post over to disrupt the new thread so here we go.
You have an ideological objection to IQ tests, hence you completely dismiss the fact that East Asian countries are over 50 IQ points higher than the lowest IQ nations (and also indeed higher than us). That is just a fact, instead all you can do is rant and rave in your usual pompous manner throwing accusations of racism about and accusing me of being thick because I do not agree with your ideological agenda which is that there is no such thing as raw IQ.
You also need to ask why some nations are 3rd world and some nations are very advanced 1st world like Japan? The answer may well be in part due to raw IQ but no again that has to be dismissed by you with a rant about racism.
There are schools in Nepal and Mali as much as there are schools in Japan after all!
a) You kept it going not me but I am stopping now because I know how it annoys everyone.
b) You said: 'There are schools in Nepal and Mali as much as there are schools in Japan after all!' You really are deluded aren't you. How on earth can you compare Mali and Nepal education with Japan?
c) You keep saying I have an ideological objection to IQ tests yet ignore the fact that I clearly don't and that they were integral to my work for many years and I used them repeated and was involved in their production. You are just bonkers.
d) So re your last paragraph you really DO think Africans are stupid so therefore you are a racist. I mean what other conclusion can one come to. Go on admit it you think black people are thick. Again I ask why do you think African Americans perform better than Africans if that is the case. They are after all the same people. Africans who suffer poverty do not do so because they are thick, and when rescued from poverty why do they suddenly perform better if you are correct.
It really is offensive if you think Africans are thick.
Also do you have any comprehension of what a score of 43 is? I wouldn't want someone with that IQ level taking me up Everest. But guess what people from Nepal aren't as stupid as you think.
One does wonder what your IQ level is.
And yet, everyone accepts that races vary by height, weight, athleticism, skin colour, hair colour, stoutness, susceptibility to certain diseases (cf Sickle Cell in Africa, and Cystic Fibrosis in Celtic northwest Europe); heck, they even vary by penis size and maybe personality.
It seems odd that we accept that every single evolved human attribute varies a little or a lot between (and within) races, apart from just ONE - intelligence, which is uniquely the same for all races, and any IQ test that says it isn't equal - which they all do - is racist and must be ignored
Confusing
Because an IQ test is not a test of intelligence, its a test of intelligence within an educational paradigm.
IQ tests are fundamentally flawed comparing across nations, anyone who understands anything about them understands that.
Height, weight etc can be objectively measured, intelligence can't.
Is Steve Baker going to run for the leadership do we reckon? In the absence of a firm fave, 70-1 feels a bit long to me.
He's at least loyal to his boss bordering on the ridiculous.
Well… he was quite critical of him before Xmas but said he wasn’t interested in being the organiser in chief again. Begs the question whether he fancies a shot at the job.
I see your point.
It's quite entertaining though seeing all these cabinet ministers and others defending the indefensible.
What is it that distinguishes SKS’s takeaway and beers with party staff in Durham from BJ’s “birthday party”?
Hmm...
Maybe that Boris was responsible for the drafting and passage of these laws? Maybe that he was the PM and used government buildings for his lawbreaking? Maybe that he was the one who lied to the HoC about it when he had the duty of candour at the dispatch box?
I am sure I could come up with one or two more if you like.
Ditto my response to BR
I briefly wondered if you had some long running issue with ticketing on trains but I got there, These rules were frankly ridiculous. The policy of the police was not to waste expensive time investigating breaches after the fact but to impose fines when someone was "caught in the act" or otherwise causing a public nuisance.
In this case the police have been bullied into breaching that entirely sensible approach and to impose retrospective fines. The recipients have, for understandable reasons, chosen not to challenge this on the variety of grounds available to them.
There was no public nuisance, there was no health threat, there is no point to these FPNs, other than to embarrass the government and to drag our police further into politics, a highly undesirable state of affairs.
But our PM is a persistent and inveterate liar. And that is unacceptable. I find it deeply frustrating how often our politics gets bogged down in trivia instead of actually addressing the substantive point.
What is it that distinguishes SKS’s takeaway and beers with party staff in Durham from BJ’s “birthday party”?
Boris is the Prime Minister and the one who took away our Civil Liberties.
Starmer unquestioningly voted with him, which is bad, and wanted to keep the restrictions for longer which is even worse - but he wasn't the one who introduced the rules, that was Boris.
That shouldn’t lead to FPNs for one event and not the other, surely?
Yes it does, the fact that Downing Street introduced the rules is an aggravating factor as to why this has been investigated and fines issued.
Had this been a random person it would never have been. Downing Street is rightly expected to be held to a higher standard.
Hmm. A random person who happens to be LoTo and voted, as you say, for the very same measure.
At the very least, doesn’t it make it rather rich for SKS to demand his resignation over it? Can’t BJ just say “Well, I am held to higher standards than the LoTo”
"We do not believe an offence has been established in relation to the legislation and guidance in place at that time and will therefore take no further action in relation to this matter."
What is it that distinguishes SKS’s takeaway and beers with party staff in Durham from BJ’s “birthday party”?
Hmm...
Maybe that Boris was responsible for the drafting and passage of these laws? Maybe that he was the PM and used government buildings for his lawbreaking? Maybe that he was the one who lied to the HoC about it when he had the duty of candour at the dispatch box?
I am sure I could come up with one or two more if you like.
Ditto my response to BR
I briefly wondered if you had some long running issue with ticketing on trains but I got there, These rules were frankly ridiculous. The policy of the police was not to waste expensive time investigating breaches after the fact but to impose fines when someone was "caught in the act" or otherwise causing a public nuisance.
In this case the police have been bullied into breaching that entirely sensible approach and to impose retrospective fines. The recipients have, for understandable reasons, chosen not to challenge this on the variety of grounds available to them.
There was no public nuisance, there was no health threat, there is no point to these FPNs, other than to embarrass the government and to drag our police further into politics, a highly undesirable state of affairs.
But our PM is a persistent and inveterate liar. And that is unacceptable. I find it deeply frustrating how often our politics gets bogged down in trivia instead of actually addressing the substantive point.
The police were present at the events......other police were watching them on cctv.....
What is it that distinguishes SKS’s takeaway and beers with party staff in Durham from BJ’s “birthday party”?
Boris is the Prime Minister and the one who took away our Civil Liberties.
Starmer unquestioningly voted with him, which is bad, and wanted to keep the restrictions for longer which is even worse - but he wasn't the one who introduced the rules, that was Boris.
That shouldn’t lead to FPNs for one event and not the other, surely?
Yes it does, the fact that Downing Street introduced the rules is an aggravating factor as to why this has been investigated and fines issued.
Had this been a random person it would never have been. Downing Street is rightly expected to be held to a higher standard.
Hmm. A random person who happens to be LoTo and voted, as you say, for the very same measure.
Yes.
LOTO is not Prime Minister.
He’s not a fucking random off the street though!
As far as the Police are concerned he pretty much is.
The Police were reluctant to investigate the breaches in Downing Street and it is only the fact this was Downing Street and they'd introduced the rules that made them eventually do so. That aggravating factor isn't there for Starmer, so no investigation, no FPNs.
My apologies everyone for this, but really @HYUFD who complains about me continuing arguments has posted a reply to me a full hour after the new thread opened. Talk about pot and kettle. So I'm not letting him off the hook.
@hyufd seems to think that because he posts something from the internet it is correct. Quote: 'No my facts were absolutely right. I posted the IQ data.' Yes you did BUT as everyone has been telling you it is not meaningful to compare countries because of other variables without taking them into account.
He also said: You quite clearly do have an ideological objection to raw IQ test results as you have spent most of this thread whinging about them. Again no I am not as I have made clear over and over again. I only object to the misuse of the data which is what you always do because you are as thick as a plank.
You also said 'The difference between the average Japanese and Mali test results as I have already shown you is far to big to be bridged even with preparation and coaching'. Again I have explained this to you. My reference to coaching was in the UK/USA context of improving individual IQ results. The reason Mali results are so low is because of other variables primarily the complete lack of education compared to Japan. That is not the same as coaching, we are talking about a completely different society, 3rd world compared to 1st world.
OK so finally I will ask you for the umpteenth time do you really believe that the average Nepal IQ is really 43 and the average Mali IQ is really 59 because that is at the level of not being able to tie your shoe laces. Or is it because of other factors like lack of education.
If the latter then all of what you have posted is bollocks isn't it?
If the former then you are a racist if you think Africans are really this stupid.
I posted on the OLD thread not the new one, you have yet again decided to carry your post over to disrupt the new thread so here we go.
You have an ideological objection to IQ tests, hence you completely dismiss the fact that East Asian countries are over 50 IQ points higher than the lowest IQ nations (and also indeed higher than us). That is just a fact, instead all you can do is rant and rave in your usual pompous manner throwing accusations of racism about and accusing me of being thick because I do not agree with your ideological agenda which is that there is no such thing as raw IQ.
You also need to ask why some nations are 3rd world and some nations are very advanced 1st world like Japan? The answer may well be in part due to raw IQ but no again that has to be dismissed by you with a rant about racism.
There are schools in Nepal and Mali as much as there are schools in Japan after all!
a) You kept it going not me but I am stopping now because I know how it annoys everyone.
b) You said: 'There are schools in Nepal and Mali as much as there are schools in Japan after all!' You really are deluded aren't you. How on earth can you compare Mali and Nepal education with Japan?
c) You keep saying I have an ideological objection to IQ tests yet ignore the fact that I clearly don't and that they were integral to my work for many years and I used them repeated and was involved in their production. You are just bonkers.
d) So re your last paragraph you really DO think Africans are stupid so therefore you are a racist. I mean what other conclusion can one come to. Go on admit it you think black people are thick. Again I ask why do you think African Americans perform better than Africans if that is the case. They are after all the same people. Africans who suffer poverty do not do so because they are thick, and when rescued from poverty why do they suddenly perform better if you are correct.
It really is offensive if you think Africans are thick.
Also do you have any comprehension of what a score of 43 is? I wouldn't want someone with that IQ level taking me up Everest. But guess what people from Nepal aren't as stupid as you think.
One does wonder what your IQ level is.
And yet, everyone accepts that races vary by height, weight, athleticism, skin colour, hair colour, stoutness, susceptibility to certain diseases (cf Sickle Cell in Africa, and Cystic Fibrosis in Celtic northwest Europe); heck, they even vary by penis size and maybe personality.
It seems odd that we accept that every single evolved human attribute varies a little or a lot between (and within) races, apart from just ONE - intelligence, which is uniquely the same for all races, and any IQ test that says it isn't equal - which they all do - is racist and must be ignored
Confusing
Because an IQ test is not a test of intelligence, its a test of intelligence within an educational paradigm.
IQ tests are fundamentally flawed comparing across nations, anyone who understands anything about them understands that.
Height, weight etc can be objectively measured, intelligence can't.
'Height, weight etc can be objectively measured, intelligence can't.'
My apologies everyone for this, but really @HYUFD who complains about me continuing arguments has posted a reply to me a full hour after the new thread opened. Talk about pot and kettle. So I'm not letting him off the hook.
@hyufd seems to think that because he posts something from the internet it is correct. Quote: 'No my facts were absolutely right. I posted the IQ data.' Yes you did BUT as everyone has been telling you it is not meaningful to compare countries because of other variables without taking them into account.
He also said: You quite clearly do have an ideological objection to raw IQ test results as you have spent most of this thread whinging about them. Again no I am not as I have made clear over and over again. I only object to the misuse of the data which is what you always do because you are as thick as a plank.
You also said 'The difference between the average Japanese and Mali test results as I have already shown you is far to big to be bridged even with preparation and coaching'. Again I have explained this to you. My reference to coaching was in the UK/USA context of improving individual IQ results. The reason Mali results are so low is because of other variables primarily the complete lack of education compared to Japan. That is not the same as coaching, we are talking about a completely different society, 3rd world compared to 1st world.
OK so finally I will ask you for the umpteenth time do you really believe that the average Nepal IQ is really 43 and the average Mali IQ is really 59 because that is at the level of not being able to tie your shoe laces. Or is it because of other factors like lack of education.
If the latter then all of what you have posted is bollocks isn't it?
If the former then you are a racist if you think Africans are really this stupid.
I posted on the OLD thread not the new one, you have yet again decided to carry your post over to disrupt the new thread so here we go.
You have an ideological objection to IQ tests, hence you completely dismiss the fact that East Asian countries are over 50 IQ points higher than the lowest IQ nations (and also indeed higher than us). That is just a fact, instead all you can do is rant and rave in your usual pompous manner throwing accusations of racism about and accusing me of being thick because I do not agree with your ideological agenda which is that there is no such thing as raw IQ.
You also need to ask why some nations are 3rd world and some nations are very advanced 1st world like Japan? The answer may well be in part due to raw IQ but no again that has to be dismissed by you with a rant about racism.
There are schools in Nepal and Mali as much as there are schools in Japan after all!
a) You kept it going not me but I am stopping now because I know how it annoys everyone.
b) You said: 'There are schools in Nepal and Mali as much as there are schools in Japan after all!' You really are deluded aren't you. How on earth can you compare Mali and Nepal education with Japan?
c) You keep saying I have an ideological objection to IQ tests yet ignore the fact that I clearly don't and that they were integral to my work for many years and I used them repeated and was involved in their production. You are just bonkers.
d) So re your last paragraph you really DO think Africans are stupid so therefore you are a racist. I mean what other conclusion can one come to. Go on admit it you think black people are thick. Again I ask why do you think African Americans perform better than Africans if that is the case. They are after all the same people. Africans who suffer poverty do not do so because they are thick, and when rescued from poverty why do they suddenly perform better if you are correct.
It really is offensive if you think Africans are thick.
Also do you have any comprehension of what a score of 43 is? I wouldn't want someone with that IQ level taking me up Everest. But guess what people from Nepal aren't as stupid as you think.
One does wonder what your IQ level is.
And yet, everyone accepts that races vary by height, weight, athleticism, skin colour, hair colour, stoutness, susceptibility to certain diseases (cf Sickle Cell in Africa, and Cystic Fibrosis in Celtic northwest Europe); heck, they even vary by penis size and maybe personality.
It seems odd that we accept that every single evolved human attribute varies a little or a lot between (and within) races, apart from just ONE - intelligence, which is uniquely the same for all races, and any IQ test that says it isn't equal - which they all do - is racist and must be ignored
Confusing
Because an IQ test is not a test of intelligence, its a test of intelligence within an educational paradigm.
IQ tests are fundamentally flawed comparing across nations, anyone who understands anything about them understands that.
Height, weight etc can be objectively measured, intelligence can't.
I should agree with your post, but am troubled. Before your arrival on pb, there was an infamous spat between two posters over the height and weight of the PM......
On topic: Frankly preposterous. It's must win for SKS and for SKS only.
And he will.
It’s not amazingly prosperous to analyse the boosterism Boris would get with a win. It’s a balanced header in what a win does to each side finishing on what punters, presumably Applicant, thinks will happen.
Another bit of analyse you a probably not going to like, all sorts of seats go on mid term by elections, but then switch back at the actual election. So what will the Labour win here really tell us? Even a whopper of a win does not change Starmer’s inherent vices in Charisma and Unlikability going into the actual general election.
What is it that distinguishes SKS’s takeaway and beers with party staff in Durham from BJ’s “birthday party”?
Boris is the Prime Minister and the one who took away our Civil Liberties.
Starmer unquestioningly voted with him, which is bad, and wanted to keep the restrictions for longer which is even worse - but he wasn't the one who introduced the rules, that was Boris.
That shouldn’t lead to FPNs for one event and not the other, surely?
Yes it does, the fact that Downing Street introduced the rules is an aggravating factor as to why this has been investigated and fines issued.
Had this been a random person it would never have been. Downing Street is rightly expected to be held to a higher standard.
Is that the case in law?
Not much precedent I would imagine but any lawyers care to comment?
What is it that distinguishes SKS’s takeaway and beers with party staff in Durham from BJ’s “birthday party”?
Boris is the Prime Minister and the one who took away our Civil Liberties.
Starmer unquestioningly voted with him, which is bad, and wanted to keep the restrictions for longer which is even worse - but he wasn't the one who introduced the rules, that was Boris.
That shouldn’t lead to FPNs for one event and not the other, surely?
Yes it does, the fact that Downing Street introduced the rules is an aggravating factor as to why this has been investigated and fines issued.
Had this been a random person it would never have been. Downing Street is rightly expected to be held to a higher standard.
Is that the case in law?
Not much precedent I would imagine but any lawyers care to comment?
My apologies everyone for this, but really @HYUFD who complains about me continuing arguments has posted a reply to me a full hour after the new thread opened. Talk about pot and kettle. So I'm not letting him off the hook.
@hyufd seems to think that because he posts something from the internet it is correct. Quote: 'No my facts were absolutely right. I posted the IQ data.' Yes you did BUT as everyone has been telling you it is not meaningful to compare countries because of other variables without taking them into account.
He also said: You quite clearly do have an ideological objection to raw IQ test results as you have spent most of this thread whinging about them. Again no I am not as I have made clear over and over again. I only object to the misuse of the data which is what you always do because you are as thick as a plank.
You also said 'The difference between the average Japanese and Mali test results as I have already shown you is far to big to be bridged even with preparation and coaching'. Again I have explained this to you. My reference to coaching was in the UK/USA context of improving individual IQ results. The reason Mali results are so low is because of other variables primarily the complete lack of education compared to Japan. That is not the same as coaching, we are talking about a completely different society, 3rd world compared to 1st world.
OK so finally I will ask you for the umpteenth time do you really believe that the average Nepal IQ is really 43 and the average Mali IQ is really 59 because that is at the level of not being able to tie your shoe laces. Or is it because of other factors like lack of education.
If the latter then all of what you have posted is bollocks isn't it?
If the former then you are a racist if you think Africans are really this stupid.
I posted on the OLD thread not the new one, you have yet again decided to carry your post over to disrupt the new thread so here we go.
You have an ideological objection to IQ tests, hence you completely dismiss the fact that East Asian countries are over 50 IQ points higher than the lowest IQ nations (and also indeed higher than us). That is just a fact, instead all you can do is rant and rave in your usual pompous manner throwing accusations of racism about and accusing me of being thick because I do not agree with your ideological agenda which is that there is no such thing as raw IQ.
You also need to ask why some nations are 3rd world and some nations are very advanced 1st world like Japan? The answer may well be in part due to raw IQ but no again that has to be dismissed by you with a rant about racism.
There are schools in Nepal and Mali as much as there are schools in Japan after all!
a) You kept it going not me but I am stopping now because I know how it annoys everyone.
b) You said: 'There are schools in Nepal and Mali as much as there are schools in Japan after all!' You really are deluded aren't you. How on earth can you compare Mali and Nepal education with Japan?
c) You keep saying I have an ideological objection to IQ tests yet ignore the fact that I clearly don't and that they were integral to my work for many years and I used them repeated and was involved in their production. You are just bonkers.
d) So re your last paragraph you really DO think Africans are stupid so therefore you are a racist. I mean what other conclusion can one come to. Go on admit it you think black people are thick. Again I ask why do you think African Americans perform better than Africans if that is the case. They are after all the same people. Africans who suffer poverty do not do so because they are thick, and when rescued from poverty why do they suddenly perform better if you are correct.
It really is offensive if you think Africans are thick.
Also do you have any comprehension of what a score of 43 is? I wouldn't want someone with that IQ level taking me up Everest. But guess what people from Nepal aren't as stupid as you think.
One does wonder what your IQ level is.
And yet, everyone accepts that races vary by height, weight, athleticism, skin colour, hair colour, stoutness, susceptibility to certain diseases (cf Sickle Cell in Africa, and Cystic Fibrosis in Celtic northwest Europe); heck, they even vary by penis size and maybe personality.
It seems odd that we accept that every single evolved human attribute varies a little or a lot between (and within) races, apart from just ONE - intelligence, which is uniquely the same for all races, and any IQ test that says it isn't equal - which they all do - is racist and must be ignored
Confusing
Because an IQ test is not a test of intelligence, its a test of intelligence within an educational paradigm.
IQ tests are fundamentally flawed comparing across nations, anyone who understands anything about them understands that.
Height, weight etc can be objectively measured, intelligence can't.
'Height, weight etc can be objectively measured, intelligence can't.'
So we may as well scrap exams then
Why?
Exams are not a measure of intelligence, nor are they intended to be. That's not what they're there for.
Anyone who thought an exam was an objective measurement of intelligence is pretty damned ignorant.
My apologies everyone for this, but really @HYUFD who complains about me continuing arguments has posted a reply to me a full hour after the new thread opened. Talk about pot and kettle. So I'm not letting him off the hook.
@hyufd seems to think that because he posts something from the internet it is correct. Quote: 'No my facts were absolutely right. I posted the IQ data.' Yes you did BUT as everyone has been telling you it is not meaningful to compare countries because of other variables without taking them into account.
He also said: You quite clearly do have an ideological objection to raw IQ test results as you have spent most of this thread whinging about them. Again no I am not as I have made clear over and over again. I only object to the misuse of the data which is what you always do because you are as thick as a plank.
You also said 'The difference between the average Japanese and Mali test results as I have already shown you is far to big to be bridged even with preparation and coaching'. Again I have explained this to you. My reference to coaching was in the UK/USA context of improving individual IQ results. The reason Mali results are so low is because of other variables primarily the complete lack of education compared to Japan. That is not the same as coaching, we are talking about a completely different society, 3rd world compared to 1st world.
OK so finally I will ask you for the umpteenth time do you really believe that the average Nepal IQ is really 43 and the average Mali IQ is really 59 because that is at the level of not being able to tie your shoe laces. Or is it because of other factors like lack of education.
If the latter then all of what you have posted is bollocks isn't it?
If the former then you are a racist if you think Africans are really this stupid.
I posted on the OLD thread not the new one, you have yet again decided to carry your post over to disrupt the new thread so here we go.
You have an ideological objection to IQ tests, hence you completely dismiss the fact that East Asian countries are over 50 IQ points higher than the lowest IQ nations (and also indeed higher than us). That is just a fact, instead all you can do is rant and rave in your usual pompous manner throwing accusations of racism about and accusing me of being thick because I do not agree with your ideological agenda which is that there is no such thing as raw IQ.
You also need to ask why some nations are 3rd world and some nations are very advanced 1st world like Japan? The answer may well be in part due to raw IQ but no again that has to be dismissed by you with a rant about racism.
There are schools in Nepal and Mali as much as there are schools in Japan after all!
a) You kept it going not me but I am stopping now because I know how it annoys everyone.
b) You said: 'There are schools in Nepal and Mali as much as there are schools in Japan after all!' You really are deluded aren't you. How on earth can you compare Mali and Nepal education with Japan?
c) You keep saying I have an ideological objection to IQ tests yet ignore the fact that I clearly don't and that they were integral to my work for many years and I used them repeated and was involved in their production. You are just bonkers.
d) So re your last paragraph you really DO think Africans are stupid so therefore you are a racist. I mean what other conclusion can one come to. Go on admit it you think black people are thick. Again I ask why do you think African Americans perform better than Africans if that is the case. They are after all the same people. Africans who suffer poverty do not do so because they are thick, and when rescued from poverty why do they suddenly perform better if you are correct.
It really is offensive if you think Africans are thick.
Also do you have any comprehension of what a score of 43 is? I wouldn't want someone with that IQ level taking me up Everest. But guess what people from Nepal aren't as stupid as you think.
One does wonder what your IQ level is.
And yet, everyone accepts that races vary by height, weight, athleticism, skin colour, hair colour, stoutness, susceptibility to certain diseases (cf Sickle Cell in Africa, and Cystic Fibrosis in Celtic northwest Europe); heck, they even vary by penis size and maybe personality.
It seems odd that we accept that every single evolved human attribute varies a little or a lot between (and within) races, apart from just ONE - intelligence, which is uniquely the same for all races, and any IQ test that says it isn't equal - which they all do - is racist and must be ignored
Confusing
Because an IQ test is not a test of intelligence, its a test of intelligence within an educational paradigm.
IQ tests are fundamentally flawed comparing across nations, anyone who understands anything about them understands that.
Height, weight etc can be objectively measured, intelligence can't.
Well put. Devising a culture-free intelligence test to make international comparisons is even more difficult than, for example, devising a test to objectively measure which country/culture has the finest cuisine. And as pointless.
My apologies everyone for this, but really @HYUFD who complains about me continuing arguments has posted a reply to me a full hour after the new thread opened. Talk about pot and kettle. So I'm not letting him off the hook.
@hyufd seems to think that because he posts something from the internet it is correct. Quote: 'No my facts were absolutely right. I posted the IQ data.' Yes you did BUT as everyone has been telling you it is not meaningful to compare countries because of other variables without taking them into account.
He also said: You quite clearly do have an ideological objection to raw IQ test results as you have spent most of this thread whinging about them. Again no I am not as I have made clear over and over again. I only object to the misuse of the data which is what you always do because you are as thick as a plank.
You also said 'The difference between the average Japanese and Mali test results as I have already shown you is far to big to be bridged even with preparation and coaching'. Again I have explained this to you. My reference to coaching was in the UK/USA context of improving individual IQ results. The reason Mali results are so low is because of other variables primarily the complete lack of education compared to Japan. That is not the same as coaching, we are talking about a completely different society, 3rd world compared to 1st world.
OK so finally I will ask you for the umpteenth time do you really believe that the average Nepal IQ is really 43 and the average Mali IQ is really 59 because that is at the level of not being able to tie your shoe laces. Or is it because of other factors like lack of education.
If the latter then all of what you have posted is bollocks isn't it?
If the former then you are a racist if you think Africans are really this stupid.
I posted on the OLD thread not the new one, you have yet again decided to carry your post over to disrupt the new thread so here we go.
You have an ideological objection to IQ tests, hence you completely dismiss the fact that East Asian countries are over 50 IQ points higher than the lowest IQ nations (and also indeed higher than us). That is just a fact, instead all you can do is rant and rave in your usual pompous manner throwing accusations of racism about and accusing me of being thick because I do not agree with your ideological agenda which is that there is no such thing as raw IQ.
You also need to ask why some nations are 3rd world and some nations are very advanced 1st world like Japan? The answer may well be in part due to raw IQ but no again that has to be dismissed by you with a rant about racism.
There are schools in Nepal and Mali as much as there are schools in Japan after all!
a) You kept it going not me but I am stopping now because I know how it annoys everyone.
b) You said: 'There are schools in Nepal and Mali as much as there are schools in Japan after all!' You really are deluded aren't you. How on earth can you compare Mali and Nepal education with Japan?
c) You keep saying I have an ideological objection to IQ tests yet ignore the fact that I clearly don't and that they were integral to my work for many years and I used them repeated and was involved in their production. You are just bonkers.
d) So re your last paragraph you really DO think Africans are stupid so therefore you are a racist. I mean what other conclusion can one come to. Go on admit it you think black people are thick. Again I ask why do you think African Americans perform better than Africans if that is the case. They are after all the same people. Africans who suffer poverty do not do so because they are thick, and when rescued from poverty why do they suddenly perform better if you are correct.
It really is offensive if you think Africans are thick.
Also do you have any comprehension of what a score of 43 is? I wouldn't want someone with that IQ level taking me up Everest. But guess what people from Nepal aren't as stupid as you think.
One does wonder what your IQ level is.
And yet, everyone accepts that races vary by height, weight, athleticism, skin colour, hair colour, stoutness, susceptibility to certain diseases (cf Sickle Cell in Africa, and Cystic Fibrosis in Celtic northwest Europe); heck, they even vary by penis size and maybe personality.
It seems odd that we accept that every single evolved human attribute varies a little or a lot between (and within) races, apart from just ONE - intelligence, which is uniquely the same for all races, and any IQ test that says it isn't equal - which they all do - is racist and must be ignored
Confusing
Because an IQ test is not a test of intelligence, its a test of intelligence within an educational paradigm.
IQ tests are fundamentally flawed comparing across nations, anyone who understands anything about them understands that.
Height, weight etc can be objectively measured, intelligence can't.
And yet American universities have been using a form of IQ tests for decades - SATS - and the best US unis are the best in the world. So clearly IQ tests do measure SOMETHING which is of use in education and work
My apologies everyone for this, but really @HYUFD who complains about me continuing arguments has posted a reply to me a full hour after the new thread opened. Talk about pot and kettle. So I'm not letting him off the hook.
@hyufd seems to think that because he posts something from the internet it is correct. Quote: 'No my facts were absolutely right. I posted the IQ data.' Yes you did BUT as everyone has been telling you it is not meaningful to compare countries because of other variables without taking them into account.
He also said: You quite clearly do have an ideological objection to raw IQ test results as you have spent most of this thread whinging about them. Again no I am not as I have made clear over and over again. I only object to the misuse of the data which is what you always do because you are as thick as a plank.
You also said 'The difference between the average Japanese and Mali test results as I have already shown you is far to big to be bridged even with preparation and coaching'. Again I have explained this to you. My reference to coaching was in the UK/USA context of improving individual IQ results. The reason Mali results are so low is because of other variables primarily the complete lack of education compared to Japan. That is not the same as coaching, we are talking about a completely different society, 3rd world compared to 1st world.
OK so finally I will ask you for the umpteenth time do you really believe that the average Nepal IQ is really 43 and the average Mali IQ is really 59 because that is at the level of not being able to tie your shoe laces. Or is it because of other factors like lack of education.
If the latter then all of what you have posted is bollocks isn't it?
If the former then you are a racist if you think Africans are really this stupid.
I posted on the OLD thread not the new one, you have yet again decided to carry your post over to disrupt the new thread so here we go.
You have an ideological objection to IQ tests, hence you completely dismiss the fact that East Asian countries are over 50 IQ points higher than the lowest IQ nations (and also indeed higher than us). That is just a fact, instead all you can do is rant and rave in your usual pompous manner throwing accusations of racism about and accusing me of being thick because I do not agree with your ideological agenda which is that there is no such thing as raw IQ.
You also need to ask why some nations are 3rd world and some nations are very advanced 1st world like Japan? The answer may well be in part due to raw IQ but no again that has to be dismissed by you with a rant about racism.
There are schools in Nepal and Mali as much as there are schools in Japan after all!
a) You kept it going not me but I am stopping now because I know how it annoys everyone.
b) You said: 'There are schools in Nepal and Mali as much as there are schools in Japan after all!' You really are deluded aren't you. How on earth can you compare Mali and Nepal education with Japan?
c) You keep saying I have an ideological objection to IQ tests yet ignore the fact that I clearly don't and that they were integral to my work for many years and I used them repeated and was involved in their production. You are just bonkers.
d) So re your last paragraph you really DO think Africans are stupid so therefore you are a racist. I mean what other conclusion can one come to. Go on admit it you think black people are thick. Again I ask why do you think African Americans perform better than Africans if that is the case. They are after all the same people. Africans who suffer poverty do not do so because they are thick, and when rescued from poverty why do they suddenly perform better if you are correct.
It really is offensive if you think Africans are thick.
Also do you have any comprehension of what a score of 43 is? I wouldn't want someone with that IQ level taking me up Everest. But guess what people from Nepal aren't as stupid as you think.
One does wonder what your IQ level is.
And yet, everyone accepts that races vary by height, weight, athleticism, skin colour, hair colour, stoutness, susceptibility to certain diseases (cf Sickle Cell in Africa, and Cystic Fibrosis in Celtic northwest Europe); heck, they even vary by penis size and maybe personality.
It seems odd that we accept that every single evolved human attribute varies a little or a lot between (and within) races, apart from just ONE - intelligence, which is uniquely the same for all races, and any IQ test that says it isn't equal - which they all do - is racist and must be ignored
What is it that distinguishes SKS’s takeaway and beers with party staff in Durham from BJ’s “birthday party”?
Hmm...
Maybe that Boris was responsible for the drafting and passage of these laws? Maybe that he was the PM and used government buildings for his lawbreaking? Maybe that he was the one who lied to the HoC about it when he had the duty of candour at the dispatch box?
I am sure I could come up with one or two more if you like.
Ditto my response to BR
I briefly wondered if you had some long running issue with ticketing on trains but I got there, These rules were frankly ridiculous. The policy of the police was not to waste expensive time investigating breaches after the fact but to impose fines when someone was "caught in the act" or otherwise causing a public nuisance.
In this case the police have been bullied into breaching that entirely sensible approach and to impose retrospective fines. The recipients have, for understandable reasons, chosen not to challenge this on the variety of grounds available to them.
There was no public nuisance, there was no health threat, there is no point to these FPNs, other than to embarrass the government and to drag our police further into politics, a highly undesirable state of affairs.
But our PM is a persistent and inveterate liar. And that is unacceptable. I find it deeply frustrating how often our politics gets bogged down in trivia instead of actually addressing the substantive point.
The police were present at the events......other police were watching them on cctv.....
Which is why a plea of timebar could have been taken. They were also, in many cases, reported in the media without comment at the time. And now we are shocked! Shocked! It's frankly embarrassing.
My apologies everyone for this, but really @HYUFD who complains about me continuing arguments has posted a reply to me a full hour after the new thread opened. Talk about pot and kettle. So I'm not letting him off the hook.
@hyufd seems to think that because he posts something from the internet it is correct. Quote: 'No my facts were absolutely right. I posted the IQ data.' Yes you did BUT as everyone has been telling you it is not meaningful to compare countries because of other variables without taking them into account.
He also said: You quite clearly do have an ideological objection to raw IQ test results as you have spent most of this thread whinging about them. Again no I am not as I have made clear over and over again. I only object to the misuse of the data which is what you always do because you are as thick as a plank.
You also said 'The difference between the average Japanese and Mali test results as I have already shown you is far to big to be bridged even with preparation and coaching'. Again I have explained this to you. My reference to coaching was in the UK/USA context of improving individual IQ results. The reason Mali results are so low is because of other variables primarily the complete lack of education compared to Japan. That is not the same as coaching, we are talking about a completely different society, 3rd world compared to 1st world.
OK so finally I will ask you for the umpteenth time do you really believe that the average Nepal IQ is really 43 and the average Mali IQ is really 59 because that is at the level of not being able to tie your shoe laces. Or is it because of other factors like lack of education.
If the latter then all of what you have posted is bollocks isn't it?
If the former then you are a racist if you think Africans are really this stupid.
I posted on the OLD thread not the new one, you have yet again decided to carry your post over to disrupt the new thread so here we go.
You have an ideological objection to IQ tests, hence you completely dismiss the fact that East Asian countries are over 50 IQ points higher than the lowest IQ nations (and also indeed higher than us). That is just a fact, instead all you can do is rant and rave in your usual pompous manner throwing accusations of racism about and accusing me of being thick because I do not agree with your ideological agenda which is that there is no such thing as raw IQ.
You also need to ask why some nations are 3rd world and some nations are very advanced 1st world like Japan? The answer may well be in part due to raw IQ but no again that has to be dismissed by you with a rant about racism.
There are schools in Nepal and Mali as much as there are schools in Japan after all!
a) You kept it going not me but I am stopping now because I know how it annoys everyone.
b) You said: 'There are schools in Nepal and Mali as much as there are schools in Japan after all!' You really are deluded aren't you. How on earth can you compare Mali and Nepal education with Japan?
c) You keep saying I have an ideological objection to IQ tests yet ignore the fact that I clearly don't and that they were integral to my work for many years and I used them repeated and was involved in their production. You are just bonkers.
d) So re your last paragraph you really DO think Africans are stupid so therefore you are a racist. I mean what other conclusion can one come to. Go on admit it you think black people are thick. Again I ask why do you think African Americans perform better than Africans if that is the case. They are after all the same people. Africans who suffer poverty do not do so because they are thick, and when rescued from poverty why do they suddenly perform better if you are correct.
It really is offensive if you think Africans are thick.
Also do you have any comprehension of what a score of 43 is? I wouldn't want someone with that IQ level taking me up Everest. But guess what people from Nepal aren't as stupid as you think.
One does wonder what your IQ level is.
And yet, everyone accepts that races vary by height, weight, athleticism, skin colour, hair colour, stoutness, susceptibility to certain diseases (cf Sickle Cell in Africa, and Cystic Fibrosis in Celtic northwest Europe); heck, they even vary by penis size and maybe personality.
It seems odd that we accept that every single evolved human attribute varies a little or a lot between (and within) races, apart from just ONE - intelligence, which is uniquely the same for all races, and any IQ test that says it isn't equal - which they all do - is racist and must be ignored
Confusing
Because an IQ test is not a test of intelligence, its a test of intelligence within an educational paradigm.
IQ tests are fundamentally flawed comparing across nations, anyone who understands anything about them understands that.
Height, weight etc can be objectively measured, intelligence can't.
'Height, weight etc can be objectively measured, intelligence can't.'
So we may as well scrap exams then
Given that most exams are a memory test and thanks to the Internet memory isn't the be all and end all it used to be - a lot could be scrapped yes.
Talking of Planning, there's an interesting little complicated issue brewing.
74 local authorities have restricted Plannign Apps - in some cases simly freezing a *lot* - because English Heritage have advised that there is a requirement to show that developments do not increase *nitrate* pollution.
Follows an ECJ ruling on a Dutch case from 2018. I have no idea what this has to do with UK housebuilding now. 60k houses delayed so far, it is estimated.
Local Planning Authorities seem to have their heads spinning. Affected areas:
English Heritage? Surely not. Environment Agency / Natural England?
I'd have thought building on agricultural fields would reduce nitrate pollution in most cases.
@MattW The issue here is Habitats legislation derived from EU law but now transposed in to UK law. It requires a 'likely significant effect' on certain protected sites to be ruled out before 'plans and projects' can proceed. The evolution of case law on the subject has meant that this applies to very abstract situations - eg car exhaust fumes from a additional vehicular movements associated with one car on a forest 20 miles away where environmental degradation has taken place. Because the cause of the environmental degradation is uncertain, a likely significant effect cannot be ruled out, and whilst this uncertainty exists, planning permission cannot be granted. That is how the courts have applied the law, and decision makers (Council's and planning Inspectors) have to follow, even though it often feels wildly disproportionate and manifestly absurd.
I have not had direct experience of the current nitrates stuff - but I understand is rooted in various litigation against housing development where Natural Englands advice on how impacts can be mitigated was challenged in the courts, the result being that there is no way for development to go ahead. The consequence is that Natural England have effectively issued a directive against such housing development in large parts of England (about 70 local authorities) and any permissions granted against this advice could be overturned in court.
The government have told the Council's asking them to find a solution, and given them each £100k to do so. I think the idea is that, for each area, you set up some kind of mitigation plan to neutralise the impact on a case by case basis, but obviously that is going to be subject to challenge on a case by case basis. Every legal challenge brings the barristers etc in and costs big money - £100k won't go very far.
For all those arguing that IQ can't usefully be measured across countries, because IQ is overly focused on achievement within a given educational paradigm, and educational standards aren't consistent across countries: care to have a bash at explaining who set up all those school systems in the developing world, and why they seem to be "worse" than those in the developed world?
What is it that distinguishes SKS’s takeaway and beers with party staff in Durham from BJ’s “birthday party”?
Hmm...
Maybe that Boris was responsible for the drafting and passage of these laws? Maybe that he was the PM and used government buildings for his lawbreaking? Maybe that he was the one who lied to the HoC about it when he had the duty of candour at the dispatch box?
I am sure I could come up with one or two more if you like.
Ditto my response to BR
I briefly wondered if you had some long running issue with ticketing on trains but I got there, These rules were frankly ridiculous. The policy of the police was not to waste expensive time investigating breaches after the fact but to impose fines when someone was "caught in the act" or otherwise causing a public nuisance.
In this case the police have been bullied into breaching that entirely sensible approach and to impose retrospective fines. The recipients have, for understandable reasons, chosen not to challenge this on the variety of grounds available to them.
There was no public nuisance, there was no health threat, there is no point to these FPNs, other than to embarrass the government and to drag our police further into politics, a highly undesirable state of affairs.
But our PM is a persistent and inveterate liar. And that is unacceptable. I find it deeply frustrating how often our politics gets bogged down in trivia instead of actually addressing the substantive point.
The police were present at the events......other police were watching them on cctv.....
Which is why a plea of timebar could have been taken. They were also, in many cases, reported in the media without comment at the time. And now we are shocked! Shocked! It's frankly embarrassing.
My point is that Downing St are not being held to a higher standard. A different standard sure.
But Joe Bloggs inviting 50 people around for drinks, even if they all work together, and many police witnessing it, absolutely would have been stopped from carrying on the party and often fined.
My apologies everyone for this, but really @HYUFD who complains about me continuing arguments has posted a reply to me a full hour after the new thread opened. Talk about pot and kettle. So I'm not letting him off the hook.
@hyufd seems to think that because he posts something from the internet it is correct. Quote: 'No my facts were absolutely right. I posted the IQ data.' Yes you did BUT as everyone has been telling you it is not meaningful to compare countries because of other variables without taking them into account.
He also said: You quite clearly do have an ideological objection to raw IQ test results as you have spent most of this thread whinging about them. Again no I am not as I have made clear over and over again. I only object to the misuse of the data which is what you always do because you are as thick as a plank.
You also said 'The difference between the average Japanese and Mali test results as I have already shown you is far to big to be bridged even with preparation and coaching'. Again I have explained this to you. My reference to coaching was in the UK/USA context of improving individual IQ results. The reason Mali results are so low is because of other variables primarily the complete lack of education compared to Japan. That is not the same as coaching, we are talking about a completely different society, 3rd world compared to 1st world.
OK so finally I will ask you for the umpteenth time do you really believe that the average Nepal IQ is really 43 and the average Mali IQ is really 59 because that is at the level of not being able to tie your shoe laces. Or is it because of other factors like lack of education.
If the latter then all of what you have posted is bollocks isn't it?
If the former then you are a racist if you think Africans are really this stupid.
I posted on the OLD thread not the new one, you have yet again decided to carry your post over to disrupt the new thread so here we go.
You have an ideological objection to IQ tests, hence you completely dismiss the fact that East Asian countries are over 50 IQ points higher than the lowest IQ nations (and also indeed higher than us). That is just a fact, instead all you can do is rant and rave in your usual pompous manner throwing accusations of racism about and accusing me of being thick because I do not agree with your ideological agenda which is that there is no such thing as raw IQ.
You also need to ask why some nations are 3rd world and some nations are very advanced 1st world like Japan? The answer may well be in part due to raw IQ but no again that has to be dismissed by you with a rant about racism.
There are schools in Nepal and Mali as much as there are schools in Japan after all!
a) You kept it going not me but I am stopping now because I know how it annoys everyone.
b) You said: 'There are schools in Nepal and Mali as much as there are schools in Japan after all!' You really are deluded aren't you. How on earth can you compare Mali and Nepal education with Japan?
c) You keep saying I have an ideological objection to IQ tests yet ignore the fact that I clearly don't and that they were integral to my work for many years and I used them repeated and was involved in their production. You are just bonkers.
d) So re your last paragraph you really DO think Africans are stupid so therefore you are a racist. I mean what other conclusion can one come to. Go on admit it you think black people are thick. Again I ask why do you think African Americans perform better than Africans if that is the case. They are after all the same people. Africans who suffer poverty do not do so because they are thick, and when rescued from poverty why do they suddenly perform better if you are correct.
It really is offensive if you think Africans are thick.
Also do you have any comprehension of what a score of 43 is? I wouldn't want someone with that IQ level taking me up Everest. But guess what people from Nepal aren't as stupid as you think.
One does wonder what your IQ level is.
And yet, everyone accepts that races vary by height, weight, athleticism, skin colour, hair colour, stoutness, susceptibility to certain diseases (cf Sickle Cell in Africa, and Cystic Fibrosis in Celtic northwest Europe); heck, they even vary by penis size and maybe personality.
It seems odd that we accept that every single evolved human attribute varies a little or a lot between (and within) races, apart from just ONE - intelligence, which is uniquely the same for all races, and any IQ test that says it isn't equal - which they all do - is racist and must be ignored
Confusing
Because an IQ test is not a test of intelligence, its a test of intelligence within an educational paradigm.
IQ tests are fundamentally flawed comparing across nations, anyone who understands anything about them understands that.
Height, weight etc can be objectively measured, intelligence can't.
And yet American universities have been using a form of IQ tests for decades - SATS - and the best US unis are the best in the world. So clearly IQ tests do measure SOMETHING which is of use in education and work
Perhaps the Scholastic Aptitude Test measures.... scholastic aptitude?
My apologies everyone for this, but really @HYUFD who complains about me continuing arguments has posted a reply to me a full hour after the new thread opened. Talk about pot and kettle. So I'm not letting him off the hook.
@hyufd seems to think that because he posts something from the internet it is correct. Quote: 'No my facts were absolutely right. I posted the IQ data.' Yes you did BUT as everyone has been telling you it is not meaningful to compare countries because of other variables without taking them into account.
He also said: You quite clearly do have an ideological objection to raw IQ test results as you have spent most of this thread whinging about them. Again no I am not as I have made clear over and over again. I only object to the misuse of the data which is what you always do because you are as thick as a plank.
You also said 'The difference between the average Japanese and Mali test results as I have already shown you is far to big to be bridged even with preparation and coaching'. Again I have explained this to you. My reference to coaching was in the UK/USA context of improving individual IQ results. The reason Mali results are so low is because of other variables primarily the complete lack of education compared to Japan. That is not the same as coaching, we are talking about a completely different society, 3rd world compared to 1st world.
OK so finally I will ask you for the umpteenth time do you really believe that the average Nepal IQ is really 43 and the average Mali IQ is really 59 because that is at the level of not being able to tie your shoe laces. Or is it because of other factors like lack of education.
If the latter then all of what you have posted is bollocks isn't it?
If the former then you are a racist if you think Africans are really this stupid.
I posted on the OLD thread not the new one, you have yet again decided to carry your post over to disrupt the new thread so here we go.
You have an ideological objection to IQ tests, hence you completely dismiss the fact that East Asian countries are over 50 IQ points higher than the lowest IQ nations (and also indeed higher than us). That is just a fact, instead all you can do is rant and rave in your usual pompous manner throwing accusations of racism about and accusing me of being thick because I do not agree with your ideological agenda which is that there is no such thing as raw IQ.
You also need to ask why some nations are 3rd world and some nations are very advanced 1st world like Japan? The answer may well be in part due to raw IQ but no again that has to be dismissed by you with a rant about racism.
There are schools in Nepal and Mali as much as there are schools in Japan after all!
a) You kept it going not me but I am stopping now because I know how it annoys everyone.
b) You said: 'There are schools in Nepal and Mali as much as there are schools in Japan after all!' You really are deluded aren't you. How on earth can you compare Mali and Nepal education with Japan?
c) You keep saying I have an ideological objection to IQ tests yet ignore the fact that I clearly don't and that they were integral to my work for many years and I used them repeated and was involved in their production. You are just bonkers.
d) So re your last paragraph you really DO think Africans are stupid so therefore you are a racist. I mean what other conclusion can one come to. Go on admit it you think black people are thick. Again I ask why do you think African Americans perform better than Africans if that is the case. They are after all the same people. Africans who suffer poverty do not do so because they are thick, and when rescued from poverty why do they suddenly perform better if you are correct.
It really is offensive if you think Africans are thick.
Also do you have any comprehension of what a score of 43 is? I wouldn't want someone with that IQ level taking me up Everest. But guess what people from Nepal aren't as stupid as you think.
One does wonder what your IQ level is.
And yet, everyone accepts that races vary by height, weight, athleticism, skin colour, hair colour, stoutness, susceptibility to certain diseases (cf Sickle Cell in Africa, and Cystic Fibrosis in Celtic northwest Europe); heck, they even vary by penis size and maybe personality.
It seems odd that we accept that every single evolved human attribute varies a little or a lot between (and within) races, apart from just ONE - intelligence, which is uniquely the same for all races, and any IQ test that says it isn't equal - which they all do - is racist and must be ignored
Confusing
I have never denied there may be differences. I was simply pointing out the IQ results you and @hyufd were useless in identifying any differences because of so many other variables. You do realise that @HYUFD has admitted that he believes that the IQ results for much of Africa are as published on that list. That puts most Africans at the level of not being able to tie their shoe laces. Do you want to be associated with that?
Emmanuel Macron is abolishing the diplomatic corps and replacing it with a system of political appointments. Very strange timing and he's been attacked from across the political spectrum. Le Pen says she will reverse the decision.
Still way short of the Black Swan Pen needs to turn this around.
I am still a bit worried though, are we looking at widening polls but still a hidden larger than usual sack of don’t know likely abstain ready for late manoeuvres.
What this has given us on our media is more exposure to Le Pen speeches and policy, and there is a definite undercurrent of something very wrong lurking beneath them, like when the wrong sort of people were taking over the ministry of magic.
My apologies everyone for this, but really @HYUFD who complains about me continuing arguments has posted a reply to me a full hour after the new thread opened. Talk about pot and kettle. So I'm not letting him off the hook.
@hyufd seems to think that because he posts something from the internet it is correct. Quote: 'No my facts were absolutely right. I posted the IQ data.' Yes you did BUT as everyone has been telling you it is not meaningful to compare countries because of other variables without taking them into account.
He also said: You quite clearly do have an ideological objection to raw IQ test results as you have spent most of this thread whinging about them. Again no I am not as I have made clear over and over again. I only object to the misuse of the data which is what you always do because you are as thick as a plank.
You also said 'The difference between the average Japanese and Mali test results as I have already shown you is far to big to be bridged even with preparation and coaching'. Again I have explained this to you. My reference to coaching was in the UK/USA context of improving individual IQ results. The reason Mali results are so low is because of other variables primarily the complete lack of education compared to Japan. That is not the same as coaching, we are talking about a completely different society, 3rd world compared to 1st world.
OK so finally I will ask you for the umpteenth time do you really believe that the average Nepal IQ is really 43 and the average Mali IQ is really 59 because that is at the level of not being able to tie your shoe laces. Or is it because of other factors like lack of education.
If the latter then all of what you have posted is bollocks isn't it?
If the former then you are a racist if you think Africans are really this stupid.
I posted on the OLD thread not the new one, you have yet again decided to carry your post over to disrupt the new thread so here we go.
You have an ideological objection to IQ tests, hence you completely dismiss the fact that East Asian countries are over 50 IQ points higher than the lowest IQ nations (and also indeed higher than us). That is just a fact, instead all you can do is rant and rave in your usual pompous manner throwing accusations of racism about and accusing me of being thick because I do not agree with your ideological agenda which is that there is no such thing as raw IQ.
You also need to ask why some nations are 3rd world and some nations are very advanced 1st world like Japan? The answer may well be in part due to raw IQ but no again that has to be dismissed by you with a rant about racism.
There are schools in Nepal and Mali as much as there are schools in Japan after all!
a) You kept it going not me but I am stopping now because I know how it annoys everyone.
b) You said: 'There are schools in Nepal and Mali as much as there are schools in Japan after all!' You really are deluded aren't you. How on earth can you compare Mali and Nepal education with Japan?
c) You keep saying I have an ideological objection to IQ tests yet ignore the fact that I clearly don't and that they were integral to my work for many years and I used them repeated and was involved in their production. You are just bonkers.
d) So re your last paragraph you really DO think Africans are stupid so therefore you are a racist. I mean what other conclusion can one come to. Go on admit it you think black people are thick. Again I ask why do you think African Americans perform better than Africans if that is the case. They are after all the same people. Africans who suffer poverty do not do so because they are thick, and when rescued from poverty why do they suddenly perform better if you are correct.
It really is offensive if you think Africans are thick.
Also do you have any comprehension of what a score of 43 is? I wouldn't want someone with that IQ level taking me up Everest. But guess what people from Nepal aren't as stupid as you think.
One does wonder what your IQ level is.
And yet, everyone accepts that races vary by height, weight, athleticism, skin colour, hair colour, stoutness, susceptibility to certain diseases (cf Sickle Cell in Africa, and Cystic Fibrosis in Celtic northwest Europe); heck, they even vary by penis size and maybe personality.
It seems odd that we accept that every single evolved human attribute varies a little or a lot between (and within) races, apart from just ONE - intelligence, which is uniquely the same for all races, and any IQ test that says it isn't equal - which they all do - is racist and must be ignored
Confusing
Because an IQ test is not a test of intelligence, its a test of intelligence within an educational paradigm.
IQ tests are fundamentally flawed comparing across nations, anyone who understands anything about them understands that.
Height, weight etc can be objectively measured, intelligence can't.
And yet American universities have been using a form of IQ tests for decades - SATS - and the best US unis are the best in the world. So clearly IQ tests do measure SOMETHING which is of use in education and work
SATS are a test within their educational paradigm as I said.
They do measure something but they're not an objective measure of intelligence. Indeed people spend years preparing for their SATS so they can do better in them, which isn't something that would affect the results if it was an objective culture-blind and education-blind measure.
Take a random American and get them to sit a SATS-equivalent overseas without any preparation and they'll perform worse than in their own SATS they've learnt towards. Take a random non-American and get them to sit the SATS without any preparation and they'll perform worse too. Take a random American, deny them any practice and get them to sit the SATS without any preparation and they'll perform worse too.
It isn't objective and never was. Nor does it need to be to serve the purpose of what its there for, just don't abuse it for something its never intended to be there for.
My apologies everyone for this, but really @HYUFD who complains about me continuing arguments has posted a reply to me a full hour after the new thread opened. Talk about pot and kettle. So I'm not letting him off the hook.
@hyufd seems to think that because he posts something from the internet it is correct. Quote: 'No my facts were absolutely right. I posted the IQ data.' Yes you did BUT as everyone has been telling you it is not meaningful to compare countries because of other variables without taking them into account.
He also said: You quite clearly do have an ideological objection to raw IQ test results as you have spent most of this thread whinging about them. Again no I am not as I have made clear over and over again. I only object to the misuse of the data which is what you always do because you are as thick as a plank.
You also said 'The difference between the average Japanese and Mali test results as I have already shown you is far to big to be bridged even with preparation and coaching'. Again I have explained this to you. My reference to coaching was in the UK/USA context of improving individual IQ results. The reason Mali results are so low is because of other variables primarily the complete lack of education compared to Japan. That is not the same as coaching, we are talking about a completely different society, 3rd world compared to 1st world.
OK so finally I will ask you for the umpteenth time do you really believe that the average Nepal IQ is really 43 and the average Mali IQ is really 59 because that is at the level of not being able to tie your shoe laces. Or is it because of other factors like lack of education.
If the latter then all of what you have posted is bollocks isn't it?
If the former then you are a racist if you think Africans are really this stupid.
I posted on the OLD thread not the new one, you have yet again decided to carry your post over to disrupt the new thread so here we go.
You have an ideological objection to IQ tests, hence you completely dismiss the fact that East Asian countries are over 50 IQ points higher than the lowest IQ nations (and also indeed higher than us). That is just a fact, instead all you can do is rant and rave in your usual pompous manner throwing accusations of racism about and accusing me of being thick because I do not agree with your ideological agenda which is that there is no such thing as raw IQ.
You also need to ask why some nations are 3rd world and some nations are very advanced 1st world like Japan? The answer may well be in part due to raw IQ but no again that has to be dismissed by you with a rant about racism.
There are schools in Nepal and Mali as much as there are schools in Japan after all!
a) You kept it going not me but I am stopping now because I know how it annoys everyone.
b) You said: 'There are schools in Nepal and Mali as much as there are schools in Japan after all!' You really are deluded aren't you. How on earth can you compare Mali and Nepal education with Japan?
c) You keep saying I have an ideological objection to IQ tests yet ignore the fact that I clearly don't and that they were integral to my work for many years and I used them repeated and was involved in their production. You are just bonkers.
d) So re your last paragraph you really DO think Africans are stupid so therefore you are a racist. I mean what other conclusion can one come to. Go on admit it you think black people are thick. Again I ask why do you think African Americans perform better than Africans if that is the case. They are after all the same people. Africans who suffer poverty do not do so because they are thick, and when rescued from poverty why do they suddenly perform better if you are correct.
It really is offensive if you think Africans are thick.
Also do you have any comprehension of what a score of 43 is? I wouldn't want someone with that IQ level taking me up Everest. But guess what people from Nepal aren't as stupid as you think.
One does wonder what your IQ level is.
And yet, everyone accepts that races vary by height, weight, athleticism, skin colour, hair colour, stoutness, susceptibility to certain diseases (cf Sickle Cell in Africa, and Cystic Fibrosis in Celtic northwest Europe); heck, they even vary by penis size and maybe personality.
It seems odd that we accept that every single evolved human attribute varies a little or a lot between (and within) races, apart from just ONE - intelligence, which is uniquely the same for all races, and any IQ test that says it isn't equal - which they all do - is racist and must be ignored
Confusing
There's things which may be true but still better not said. If you regret having had children frinstance.
What is it that distinguishes SKS’s takeaway and beers with party staff in Durham from BJ’s “birthday party”?
One was deemed to breach the law and merit FPN's, the other wasn't.
Its such a stupid question that I decided to give it a stupid answer.
The police investigate stuff. The "AH LOOK WE GOT HIM THE HYPOCRITE!!!" argument against Starmer by the Tories / Corbynites (same difference) has been looked at with regards to the facts not the spin. And there was no case to investigate. Same as the Sturgeon in the barber shop case.
Its a dumb an argument as the other attempts to defend the indefensible. Teachers and Nurses were all on the piss as well in the staff room, and its the same as a parking ticket, and he only broke the law in a very specific and limited way etc etc etc.
Boris Johnson is to face a vote on whether he should be investigated over claims he misled the Commons about partygate, The Times has learnt.
Sir Lindsay Hoyle, the Commons Speaker, is expected to grant opposition parties’ request for a vote on Thursday on whether to refer Johnson to the privileges committee for an inquiry.
This morning a cabinet minister compared Johnson’s fine for breaking lockdown rules with a speeding ticket as the government tried to downplay the seriousness of the offence. A senior Conservative backbencher said that MPs were “waiting to see what happens” before deciding whether Johnson should remain as leader.
While the government is likely to whip MPs to oppose the motion, it will force MPs to stick by the prime minister publicly or risk an investigation by the privileges committee, led by Labour’s Chris Bryant.
My apologies everyone for this, but really @HYUFD who complains about me continuing arguments has posted a reply to me a full hour after the new thread opened. Talk about pot and kettle. So I'm not letting him off the hook.
@hyufd seems to think that because he posts something from the internet it is correct. Quote: 'No my facts were absolutely right. I posted the IQ data.' Yes you did BUT as everyone has been telling you it is not meaningful to compare countries because of other variables without taking them into account.
He also said: You quite clearly do have an ideological objection to raw IQ test results as you have spent most of this thread whinging about them. Again no I am not as I have made clear over and over again. I only object to the misuse of the data which is what you always do because you are as thick as a plank.
You also said 'The difference between the average Japanese and Mali test results as I have already shown you is far to big to be bridged even with preparation and coaching'. Again I have explained this to you. My reference to coaching was in the UK/USA context of improving individual IQ results. The reason Mali results are so low is because of other variables primarily the complete lack of education compared to Japan. That is not the same as coaching, we are talking about a completely different society, 3rd world compared to 1st world.
OK so finally I will ask you for the umpteenth time do you really believe that the average Nepal IQ is really 43 and the average Mali IQ is really 59 because that is at the level of not being able to tie your shoe laces. Or is it because of other factors like lack of education.
If the latter then all of what you have posted is bollocks isn't it?
If the former then you are a racist if you think Africans are really this stupid.
I posted on the OLD thread not the new one, you have yet again decided to carry your post over to disrupt the new thread so here we go.
You have an ideological objection to IQ tests, hence you completely dismiss the fact that East Asian countries are over 50 IQ points higher than the lowest IQ nations (and also indeed higher than us). That is just a fact, instead all you can do is rant and rave in your usual pompous manner throwing accusations of racism about and accusing me of being thick because I do not agree with your ideological agenda which is that there is no such thing as raw IQ.
You also need to ask why some nations are 3rd world and some nations are very advanced 1st world like Japan? The answer may well be in part due to raw IQ but no again that has to be dismissed by you with a rant about racism.
There are schools in Nepal and Mali as much as there are schools in Japan after all!
a) You kept it going not me but I am stopping now because I know how it annoys everyone.
b) You said: 'There are schools in Nepal and Mali as much as there are schools in Japan after all!' You really are deluded aren't you. How on earth can you compare Mali and Nepal education with Japan?
c) You keep saying I have an ideological objection to IQ tests yet ignore the fact that I clearly don't and that they were integral to my work for many years and I used them repeated and was involved in their production. You are just bonkers.
d) So re your last paragraph you really DO think Africans are stupid so therefore you are a racist. I mean what other conclusion can one come to. Go on admit it you think black people are thick. Again I ask why do you think African Americans perform better than Africans if that is the case. They are after all the same people. Africans who suffer poverty do not do so because they are thick, and when rescued from poverty why do they suddenly perform better if you are correct.
It really is offensive if you think Africans are thick.
Also do you have any comprehension of what a score of 43 is? I wouldn't want someone with that IQ level taking me up Everest. But guess what people from Nepal aren't as stupid as you think.
One does wonder what your IQ level is.
And yet, everyone accepts that races vary by height, weight, athleticism, skin colour, hair colour, stoutness, susceptibility to certain diseases (cf Sickle Cell in Africa, and Cystic Fibrosis in Celtic northwest Europe); heck, they even vary by penis size and maybe personality.
It seems odd that we accept that every single evolved human attribute varies a little or a lot between (and within) races, apart from just ONE - intelligence, which is uniquely the same for all races, and any IQ test that says it isn't equal - which they all do - is racist and must be ignored
Confusing
Only to you, Pet, only to you.
When scan reading I noted two posts - one on a Penis Size by country survey, and another this intelligence by country and then what even is intelligence debate.
Happily nobody has asked if there is a correlation between the two.
What is it that distinguishes SKS’s takeaway and beers with party staff in Durham from BJ’s “birthday party”?
Boris is the Prime Minister and the one who took away our Civil Liberties.
Starmer unquestioningly voted with him, which is bad, and wanted to keep the restrictions for longer which is even worse - but he wasn't the one who introduced the rules, that was Boris.
That shouldn’t lead to FPNs for one event and not the other, surely?
Yes it does, the fact that Downing Street introduced the rules is an aggravating factor as to why this has been investigated and fines issued.
Had this been a random person it would never have been. Downing Street is rightly expected to be held to a higher standard.
Hmm. A random person who happens to be LoTo and voted, as you say, for the very same measure.
At the very least, doesn’t it make it rather rich for SKS to demand his resignation over it? Can’t BJ just say “Well, I am held to higher standards than the LoTo”
"We do not believe an offence has been established in relation to the legislation and guidance in place at that time and will therefore take no further action in relation to this matter."
Durham Constabulary
Seems to shut this ddown.
You mean Durham Constabulary that has a Labour Police Commissioner with some questions over her deputy, that Durham?
I would question how much of SKS’ ‘acquittal’ was because he didn’t break the rules and how much because Durham Constabulary didn’t want to / were suggested to not to pursue the matter. As we’ve seen with Cleveland, the Police in the North East have a particular culture
For all those arguing that IQ can't usefully be measured across countries, because IQ is overly focused on achievement within a given educational paradigm, and educational standards aren't consistent across countries: care to have a bash at explaining who set up all those school systems in the developing world, and why they seem to be "worse" than those in the developed world?
Ooh me sir, please sir, pick me sir.
Of the millions of factors can I please start you off with famine, civil war and enforced child labour.
My apologies everyone for this, but really @HYUFD who complains about me continuing arguments has posted a reply to me a full hour after the new thread opened. Talk about pot and kettle. So I'm not letting him off the hook.
@hyufd seems to think that because he posts something from the internet it is correct. Quote: 'No my facts were absolutely right. I posted the IQ data.' Yes you did BUT as everyone has been telling you it is not meaningful to compare countries because of other variables without taking them into account.
He also said: You quite clearly do have an ideological objection to raw IQ test results as you have spent most of this thread whinging about them. Again no I am not as I have made clear over and over again. I only object to the misuse of the data which is what you always do because you are as thick as a plank.
You also said 'The difference between the average Japanese and Mali test results as I have already shown you is far to big to be bridged even with preparation and coaching'. Again I have explained this to you. My reference to coaching was in the UK/USA context of improving individual IQ results. The reason Mali results are so low is because of other variables primarily the complete lack of education compared to Japan. That is not the same as coaching, we are talking about a completely different society, 3rd world compared to 1st world.
OK so finally I will ask you for the umpteenth time do you really believe that the average Nepal IQ is really 43 and the average Mali IQ is really 59 because that is at the level of not being able to tie your shoe laces. Or is it because of other factors like lack of education.
If the latter then all of what you have posted is bollocks isn't it?
If the former then you are a racist if you think Africans are really this stupid.
I posted on the OLD thread not the new one, you have yet again decided to carry your post over to disrupt the new thread so here we go.
You have an ideological objection to IQ tests, hence you completely dismiss the fact that East Asian countries are over 50 IQ points higher than the lowest IQ nations (and also indeed higher than us). That is just a fact, instead all you can do is rant and rave in your usual pompous manner throwing accusations of racism about and accusing me of being thick because I do not agree with your ideological agenda which is that there is no such thing as raw IQ.
You also need to ask why some nations are 3rd world and some nations are very advanced 1st world like Japan? The answer may well be in part due to raw IQ but no again that has to be dismissed by you with a rant about racism.
There are schools in Nepal and Mali as much as there are schools in Japan after all!
a) You kept it going not me but I am stopping now because I know how it annoys everyone.
b) You said: 'There are schools in Nepal and Mali as much as there are schools in Japan after all!' You really are deluded aren't you. How on earth can you compare Mali and Nepal education with Japan?
c) You keep saying I have an ideological objection to IQ tests yet ignore the fact that I clearly don't and that they were integral to my work for many years and I used them repeated and was involved in their production. You are just bonkers.
d) So re your last paragraph you really DO think Africans are stupid so therefore you are a racist. I mean what other conclusion can one come to. Go on admit it you think black people are thick. Again I ask why do you think African Americans perform better than Africans if that is the case. They are after all the same people. Africans who suffer poverty do not do so because they are thick, and when rescued from poverty why do they suddenly perform better if you are correct.
It really is offensive if you think Africans are thick.
Also do you have any comprehension of what a score of 43 is? I wouldn't want someone with that IQ level taking me up Everest. But guess what people from Nepal aren't as stupid as you think.
One does wonder what your IQ level is.
And yet, everyone accepts that races vary by height, weight, athleticism, skin colour, hair colour, stoutness, susceptibility to certain diseases (cf Sickle Cell in Africa, and Cystic Fibrosis in Celtic northwest Europe); heck, they even vary by penis size and maybe personality.
It seems odd that we accept that every single evolved human attribute varies a little or a lot between (and within) races, apart from just ONE - intelligence, which is uniquely the same for all races, and any IQ test that says it isn't equal - which they all do - is racist and must be ignored
Confusing
Because an IQ test is not a test of intelligence, its a test of intelligence within an educational paradigm.
IQ tests are fundamentally flawed comparing across nations, anyone who understands anything about them understands that.
Height, weight etc can be objectively measured, intelligence can't.
And yet American universities have been using a form of IQ tests for decades - SATS - and the best US unis are the best in the world. So clearly IQ tests do measure SOMETHING which is of use in education and work
Perhaps the Scholastic Aptitude Test measures.... scholastic aptitude?
Which is quite a good definition of a certain kind of IQ?
SATs definitely derive from IQ tests
"The SAT was founded in 1926 as an adaptation of the Army Alpha, an IQ test which had been used to check the intelligence of recruits to the US Army. From this test, taken only by a few thousand college applicants, eventually came the modern SAT as we know it."
My apologies everyone for this, but really @HYUFD who complains about me continuing arguments has posted a reply to me a full hour after the new thread opened. Talk about pot and kettle. So I'm not letting him off the hook.
@hyufd seems to think that because he posts something from the internet it is correct. Quote: 'No my facts were absolutely right. I posted the IQ data.' Yes you did BUT as everyone has been telling you it is not meaningful to compare countries because of other variables without taking them into account.
He also said: You quite clearly do have an ideological objection to raw IQ test results as you have spent most of this thread whinging about them. Again no I am not as I have made clear over and over again. I only object to the misuse of the data which is what you always do because you are as thick as a plank.
You also said 'The difference between the average Japanese and Mali test results as I have already shown you is far to big to be bridged even with preparation and coaching'. Again I have explained this to you. My reference to coaching was in the UK/USA context of improving individual IQ results. The reason Mali results are so low is because of other variables primarily the complete lack of education compared to Japan. That is not the same as coaching, we are talking about a completely different society, 3rd world compared to 1st world.
OK so finally I will ask you for the umpteenth time do you really believe that the average Nepal IQ is really 43 and the average Mali IQ is really 59 because that is at the level of not being able to tie your shoe laces. Or is it because of other factors like lack of education.
If the latter then all of what you have posted is bollocks isn't it?
If the former then you are a racist if you think Africans are really this stupid.
I posted on the OLD thread not the new one, you have yet again decided to carry your post over to disrupt the new thread so here we go.
You have an ideological objection to IQ tests, hence you completely dismiss the fact that East Asian countries are over 50 IQ points higher than the lowest IQ nations (and also indeed higher than us). That is just a fact, instead all you can do is rant and rave in your usual pompous manner throwing accusations of racism about and accusing me of being thick because I do not agree with your ideological agenda which is that there is no such thing as raw IQ.
You also need to ask why some nations are 3rd world and some nations are very advanced 1st world like Japan? The answer may well be in part due to raw IQ but no again that has to be dismissed by you with a rant about racism.
There are schools in Nepal and Mali as much as there are schools in Japan after all!
a) You kept it going not me but I am stopping now because I know how it annoys everyone.
b) You said: 'There are schools in Nepal and Mali as much as there are schools in Japan after all!' You really are deluded aren't you. How on earth can you compare Mali and Nepal education with Japan?
c) You keep saying I have an ideological objection to IQ tests yet ignore the fact that I clearly don't and that they were integral to my work for many years and I used them repeated and was involved in their production. You are just bonkers.
d) So re your last paragraph you really DO think Africans are stupid so therefore you are a racist. I mean what other conclusion can one come to. Go on admit it you think black people are thick. Again I ask why do you think African Americans perform better than Africans if that is the case. They are after all the same people. Africans who suffer poverty do not do so because they are thick, and when rescued from poverty why do they suddenly perform better if you are correct.
It really is offensive if you think Africans are thick.
Also do you have any comprehension of what a score of 43 is? I wouldn't want someone with that IQ level taking me up Everest. But guess what people from Nepal aren't as stupid as you think.
One does wonder what your IQ level is.
And yet, everyone accepts that races vary by height, weight, athleticism, skin colour, hair colour, stoutness, susceptibility to certain diseases (cf Sickle Cell in Africa, and Cystic Fibrosis in Celtic northwest Europe); heck, they even vary by penis size and maybe personality.
It seems odd that we accept that every single evolved human attribute varies a little or a lot between (and within) races, apart from just ONE - intelligence, which is uniquely the same for all races, and any IQ test that says it isn't equal - which they all do - is racist and must be ignored
Confusing
Because an IQ test is not a test of intelligence, its a test of intelligence within an educational paradigm.
IQ tests are fundamentally flawed comparing across nations, anyone who understands anything about them understands that.
Height, weight etc can be objectively measured, intelligence can't.
And yet American universities have been using a form of IQ tests for decades - SATS - and the best US unis are the best in the world. So clearly IQ tests do measure SOMETHING which is of use in education and work
SATS are a test within their educational paradigm as I said.
They do measure something but they're not an objective measure of intelligence. Indeed people spend years preparing for their SATS so they can do better in them, which isn't something that would affect the results if it was an objective culture-blind and education-blind measure.
Take a random American and get them to sit a SATS-equivalent overseas without any preparation and they'll perform worse than in their own SATS they've learnt towards. Take a random non-American and get them to sit the SATS without any preparation and they'll perform worse too. Take a random American, deny them any practice and get them to sit the SATS without any preparation and they'll perform worse too.
It isn't objective and never was. Nor does it need to be to serve the purpose of what its there for, just don't abuse it for something its never intended to be there for.
Yet East Asian Americans also get the highest average SAT scores just as East Asians have the highest average IQs. Funny that!
Boris Johnson is to face a vote on whether he should be investigated over claims he misled the Commons about partygate, The Times has learnt.
Sir Lindsay Hoyle, the Commons Speaker, is expected to grant opposition parties’ request for a vote on Thursday on whether to refer Johnson to the privileges committee for an inquiry.
This morning a cabinet minister compared Johnson’s fine for breaking lockdown rules with a speeding ticket as the government tried to downplay the seriousness of the offence. A senior Conservative backbencher said that MPs were “waiting to see what happens” before deciding whether Johnson should remain as leader.
While the government is likely to whip MPs to oppose the motion, it will force MPs to stick by the prime minister publicly or risk an investigation by the privileges committee, led by Labour’s Chris Bryant.
What is it that distinguishes SKS’s takeaway and beers with party staff in Durham from BJ’s “birthday party”?
One was deemed to breach the law and merit FPN's, the other wasn't.
Its such a stupid question that I decided to give it a stupid answer.
The police investigate stuff. The "AH LOOK WE GOT HIM THE HYPOCRITE!!!" argument against Starmer by the Tories / Corbynites (same difference) has been looked at with regards to the facts not the spin. And there was no case to investigate. Same as the Sturgeon in the barber shop case.
Its a dumb an argument as the other attempts to defend the indefensible. Teachers and Nurses were all on the piss as well in the staff room, and its the same as a parking ticket, and he only broke the law in a very specific and limited way etc etc etc.
The Police also initially said there was no case to investigate with regards to Downing Street.
If it wasn't for the Sue Gray report and the aggravating factor that it was Downing Street, they'd have never investigated it, nor should they have.
That doesn't mean what Starmer did is any different to what Boris did, it isn't, except that Starmer isn't the PM, Starmer didn't make the law and Starmer isn't held to the same level of scrutiny that the Prime Minister is.
If Boris doesn't want to be scrutinised as PM there's an easy fix for that.
Boris Johnson is to face a vote on whether he should be investigated over claims he misled the Commons about partygate, The Times has learnt.
Sir Lindsay Hoyle, the Commons Speaker, is expected to grant opposition parties’ request for a vote on Thursday on whether to refer Johnson to the privileges committee for an inquiry.
This morning a cabinet minister compared Johnson’s fine for breaking lockdown rules with a speeding ticket as the government tried to downplay the seriousness of the offence. A senior Conservative backbencher said that MPs were “waiting to see what happens” before deciding whether Johnson should remain as leader.
While the government is likely to whip MPs to oppose the motion, it will force MPs to stick by the prime minister publicly or risk an investigation by the privileges committee, led by Labour’s Chris Bryant.
It's almost as if we have an opposition again. Makes me all nostalgic.
Labour plans to take advantage of the vote before local elections next month by highlighting MPs who vote in support of the prime minister over the parties.
My apologies everyone for this, but really @HYUFD who complains about me continuing arguments has posted a reply to me a full hour after the new thread opened. Talk about pot and kettle. So I'm not letting him off the hook.
@hyufd seems to think that because he posts something from the internet it is correct. Quote: 'No my facts were absolutely right. I posted the IQ data.' Yes you did BUT as everyone has been telling you it is not meaningful to compare countries because of other variables without taking them into account.
He also said: You quite clearly do have an ideological objection to raw IQ test results as you have spent most of this thread whinging about them. Again no I am not as I have made clear over and over again. I only object to the misuse of the data which is what you always do because you are as thick as a plank.
You also said 'The difference between the average Japanese and Mali test results as I have already shown you is far to big to be bridged even with preparation and coaching'. Again I have explained this to you. My reference to coaching was in the UK/USA context of improving individual IQ results. The reason Mali results are so low is because of other variables primarily the complete lack of education compared to Japan. That is not the same as coaching, we are talking about a completely different society, 3rd world compared to 1st world.
OK so finally I will ask you for the umpteenth time do you really believe that the average Nepal IQ is really 43 and the average Mali IQ is really 59 because that is at the level of not being able to tie your shoe laces. Or is it because of other factors like lack of education.
If the latter then all of what you have posted is bollocks isn't it?
If the former then you are a racist if you think Africans are really this stupid.
I posted on the OLD thread not the new one, you have yet again decided to carry your post over to disrupt the new thread so here we go.
You have an ideological objection to IQ tests, hence you completely dismiss the fact that East Asian countries are over 50 IQ points higher than the lowest IQ nations (and also indeed higher than us). That is just a fact, instead all you can do is rant and rave in your usual pompous manner throwing accusations of racism about and accusing me of being thick because I do not agree with your ideological agenda which is that there is no such thing as raw IQ.
You also need to ask why some nations are 3rd world and some nations are very advanced 1st world like Japan? The answer may well be in part due to raw IQ but no again that has to be dismissed by you with a rant about racism.
There are schools in Nepal and Mali as much as there are schools in Japan after all!
a) You kept it going not me but I am stopping now because I know how it annoys everyone.
b) You said: 'There are schools in Nepal and Mali as much as there are schools in Japan after all!' You really are deluded aren't you. How on earth can you compare Mali and Nepal education with Japan?
c) You keep saying I have an ideological objection to IQ tests yet ignore the fact that I clearly don't and that they were integral to my work for many years and I used them repeated and was involved in their production. You are just bonkers.
d) So re your last paragraph you really DO think Africans are stupid so therefore you are a racist. I mean what other conclusion can one come to. Go on admit it you think black people are thick. Again I ask why do you think African Americans perform better than Africans if that is the case. They are after all the same people. Africans who suffer poverty do not do so because they are thick, and when rescued from poverty why do they suddenly perform better if you are correct.
It really is offensive if you think Africans are thick.
Also do you have any comprehension of what a score of 43 is? I wouldn't want someone with that IQ level taking me up Everest. But guess what people from Nepal aren't as stupid as you think.
One does wonder what your IQ level is.
And yet, everyone accepts that races vary by height, weight, athleticism, skin colour, hair colour, stoutness, susceptibility to certain diseases (cf Sickle Cell in Africa, and Cystic Fibrosis in Celtic northwest Europe); heck, they even vary by penis size and maybe personality.
It seems odd that we accept that every single evolved human attribute varies a little or a lot between (and within) races, apart from just ONE - intelligence, which is uniquely the same for all races, and any IQ test that says it isn't equal - which they all do - is racist and must be ignored
Confusing
Because an IQ test is not a test of intelligence, its a test of intelligence within an educational paradigm.
IQ tests are fundamentally flawed comparing across nations, anyone who understands anything about them understands that.
Height, weight etc can be objectively measured, intelligence can't.
'Height, weight etc can be objectively measured, intelligence can't.'
So we may as well scrap exams then
Why?
Exams are not a measure of intelligence, nor are they intended to be. That's not what they're there for.
Anyone who thought an exam was an objective measurement of intelligence is pretty damned ignorant.
Not exactly but Chinese pupils also get the highest average GCSE results in the UK, they of course are East Asian
What a weird thread header - a must win for Bojo? I think not.
Anyway, Bojo later today will once again remind me why I ripped up my Tory membership card.
Patel hour will be very watchable too. She will be crowing “you lot over there don’t even have a policy to sort out once and for all* what the voters want addressed” and it will be interesting to see the response.
*yes I know it’s an unworkable lie and con trick, but still needs politically skill to dismantle at this stage.
My apologies everyone for this, but really @HYUFD who complains about me continuing arguments has posted a reply to me a full hour after the new thread opened. Talk about pot and kettle. So I'm not letting him off the hook.
@hyufd seems to think that because he posts something from the internet it is correct. Quote: 'No my facts were absolutely right. I posted the IQ data.' Yes you did BUT as everyone has been telling you it is not meaningful to compare countries because of other variables without taking them into account.
He also said: You quite clearly do have an ideological objection to raw IQ test results as you have spent most of this thread whinging about them. Again no I am not as I have made clear over and over again. I only object to the misuse of the data which is what you always do because you are as thick as a plank.
You also said 'The difference between the average Japanese and Mali test results as I have already shown you is far to big to be bridged even with preparation and coaching'. Again I have explained this to you. My reference to coaching was in the UK/USA context of improving individual IQ results. The reason Mali results are so low is because of other variables primarily the complete lack of education compared to Japan. That is not the same as coaching, we are talking about a completely different society, 3rd world compared to 1st world.
OK so finally I will ask you for the umpteenth time do you really believe that the average Nepal IQ is really 43 and the average Mali IQ is really 59 because that is at the level of not being able to tie your shoe laces. Or is it because of other factors like lack of education.
If the latter then all of what you have posted is bollocks isn't it?
If the former then you are a racist if you think Africans are really this stupid.
I posted on the OLD thread not the new one, you have yet again decided to carry your post over to disrupt the new thread so here we go.
You have an ideological objection to IQ tests, hence you completely dismiss the fact that East Asian countries are over 50 IQ points higher than the lowest IQ nations (and also indeed higher than us). That is just a fact, instead all you can do is rant and rave in your usual pompous manner throwing accusations of racism about and accusing me of being thick because I do not agree with your ideological agenda which is that there is no such thing as raw IQ.
You also need to ask why some nations are 3rd world and some nations are very advanced 1st world like Japan? The answer may well be in part due to raw IQ but no again that has to be dismissed by you with a rant about racism.
There are schools in Nepal and Mali as much as there are schools in Japan after all!
a) You kept it going not me but I am stopping now because I know how it annoys everyone.
b) You said: 'There are schools in Nepal and Mali as much as there are schools in Japan after all!' You really are deluded aren't you. How on earth can you compare Mali and Nepal education with Japan?
c) You keep saying I have an ideological objection to IQ tests yet ignore the fact that I clearly don't and that they were integral to my work for many years and I used them repeated and was involved in their production. You are just bonkers.
d) So re your last paragraph you really DO think Africans are stupid so therefore you are a racist. I mean what other conclusion can one come to. Go on admit it you think black people are thick. Again I ask why do you think African Americans perform better than Africans if that is the case. They are after all the same people. Africans who suffer poverty do not do so because they are thick, and when rescued from poverty why do they suddenly perform better if you are correct.
It really is offensive if you think Africans are thick.
Also do you have any comprehension of what a score of 43 is? I wouldn't want someone with that IQ level taking me up Everest. But guess what people from Nepal aren't as stupid as you think.
One does wonder what your IQ level is.
a) You replied again on the previous thread, so I replied to you again. You then continued it onto this new thread rather than the old one.
b) Very easily. They both have schools which give pupils the opportunity to learn, I would not expect Malian and Nepali schools to be so crap in relation to Japanese schools as to be the sole reason for Japan's very high average IQ score in relation to them.
c) Clearly you do have an ideological objection to any notion of raw IQ, otherwise you would not have made umpteen posts saying how raw IQ measures are racist.
d) You just prove my point. Rather than look at the facts you just throw out accusations of racism. Even in developed nations we know full well East Asians get the best exam results when all racial backgrounds are on an equal footing.
It is you saying Africans are thick not me, saying Japan has a higher average IQ than African nations is not the same thing at all (you could equally say African nations produce more long distance Olympic gold medallists than Japan).
I have never pretended to be genius level IQ but what my IQ is is irrelevant to a discussion of a comparison of raw IQ scores between nations and ethnicities
I'm not saying IQ measures are racist. I am saying you are.
You are saying Africans are thick if you think they have an IQ of 59. Do you know what that level of IQ means? It sounds like you don't.
Your level of IQ is relevant to these discussions because you time and time again show yourself to be stupid by the contents of the post. It is a good job you aren't in Nepal because you would drag their results down even further.
My apologies everyone for this, but really @HYUFD who complains about me continuing arguments has posted a reply to me a full hour after the new thread opened. Talk about pot and kettle. So I'm not letting him off the hook.
@hyufd seems to think that because he posts something from the internet it is correct. Quote: 'No my facts were absolutely right. I posted the IQ data.' Yes you did BUT as everyone has been telling you it is not meaningful to compare countries because of other variables without taking them into account.
He also said: You quite clearly do have an ideological objection to raw IQ test results as you have spent most of this thread whinging about them. Again no I am not as I have made clear over and over again. I only object to the misuse of the data which is what you always do because you are as thick as a plank.
You also said 'The difference between the average Japanese and Mali test results as I have already shown you is far to big to be bridged even with preparation and coaching'. Again I have explained this to you. My reference to coaching was in the UK/USA context of improving individual IQ results. The reason Mali results are so low is because of other variables primarily the complete lack of education compared to Japan. That is not the same as coaching, we are talking about a completely different society, 3rd world compared to 1st world.
OK so finally I will ask you for the umpteenth time do you really believe that the average Nepal IQ is really 43 and the average Mali IQ is really 59 because that is at the level of not being able to tie your shoe laces. Or is it because of other factors like lack of education.
If the latter then all of what you have posted is bollocks isn't it?
If the former then you are a racist if you think Africans are really this stupid.
I posted on the OLD thread not the new one, you have yet again decided to carry your post over to disrupt the new thread so here we go.
You have an ideological objection to IQ tests, hence you completely dismiss the fact that East Asian countries are over 50 IQ points higher than the lowest IQ nations (and also indeed higher than us). That is just a fact, instead all you can do is rant and rave in your usual pompous manner throwing accusations of racism about and accusing me of being thick because I do not agree with your ideological agenda which is that there is no such thing as raw IQ.
You also need to ask why some nations are 3rd world and some nations are very advanced 1st world like Japan? The answer may well be in part due to raw IQ but no again that has to be dismissed by you with a rant about racism.
There are schools in Nepal and Mali as much as there are schools in Japan after all!
a) You kept it going not me but I am stopping now because I know how it annoys everyone.
b) You said: 'There are schools in Nepal and Mali as much as there are schools in Japan after all!' You really are deluded aren't you. How on earth can you compare Mali and Nepal education with Japan?
c) You keep saying I have an ideological objection to IQ tests yet ignore the fact that I clearly don't and that they were integral to my work for many years and I used them repeated and was involved in their production. You are just bonkers.
d) So re your last paragraph you really DO think Africans are stupid so therefore you are a racist. I mean what other conclusion can one come to. Go on admit it you think black people are thick. Again I ask why do you think African Americans perform better than Africans if that is the case. They are after all the same people. Africans who suffer poverty do not do so because they are thick, and when rescued from poverty why do they suddenly perform better if you are correct.
It really is offensive if you think Africans are thick.
Also do you have any comprehension of what a score of 43 is? I wouldn't want someone with that IQ level taking me up Everest. But guess what people from Nepal aren't as stupid as you think.
One does wonder what your IQ level is.
And yet, everyone accepts that races vary by height, weight, athleticism, skin colour, hair colour, stoutness, susceptibility to certain diseases (cf Sickle Cell in Africa, and Cystic Fibrosis in Celtic northwest Europe); heck, they even vary by penis size and maybe personality.
It seems odd that we accept that every single evolved human attribute varies a little or a lot between (and within) races, apart from just ONE - intelligence, which is uniquely the same for all races, and any IQ test that says it isn't equal - which they all do - is racist and must be ignored
Confusing
Because an IQ test is not a test of intelligence, its a test of intelligence within an educational paradigm.
IQ tests are fundamentally flawed comparing across nations, anyone who understands anything about them understands that.
Height, weight etc can be objectively measured, intelligence can't.
'Height, weight etc can be objectively measured, intelligence can't.'
So we may as well scrap exams then
Why?
Exams are not a measure of intelligence, nor are they intended to be. That's not what they're there for.
Anyone who thought an exam was an objective measurement of intelligence is pretty damned ignorant.
Not exactly but Chinese pupils also get the highest average GCSE results in the UK, they of course are East Asian
More "total distance" (double what it could be) than "detour" - but quite a trek:
Plane sent from Moscow to collect expelled Russian diplomats from Spain, then Greece, was forced to make 15K detour because of EU flight ban—almost as long as world's longest flight between Singapore and New York, according to @flightradar24. https://tinyurl.com/yckfeb35
I got Tradle in 1. Very pleased (but was a bit of a wild guess)
I got Heardle in one today bringing my overall record to 9 attempts, 6 times getting it in one and 3 total failures. Although in one of the failures I did identify the artist after 3 or 4 clues.
3 blasts in Shi'ite neighborhood of Dasht-e-Barchi of Kabul, Afghanistan this morning. First blast targeted a private education center & two others target Abdurahim Shahid High School. Initial reports suggest over 20 deaths. Developing. https://twitter.com/Natsecjeff/status/1516330269128671235
S'OK they're brown. We have changed the socio-economic profile of those people we care about.
No, it's not OK. We left because the occupation was untenable. How we deal with a fundamentalist and repressive Taliban government is a hard question, but ignoring the country's fate is wrong.
At least we're still bombing Iraq. They're the lucky ones.
Are we still bombing Iraq ? I thought we'd stopped by now.
Operation Shader is entering its eighth glorious year. It goes on mainly to justify the extremely expensive and otherwise useless existence of the Cypus SBA/RAF Akrotiri.
Where would RAFAT spend their winter, if there wasn’t Akrotiri?
Just a point of order on the (otherwise excellent) thread header. It was the Corby by-election in 2012, not Copeland (that was 2017 and went the other way).
My apologies everyone for this, but really @HYUFD who complains about me continuing arguments has posted a reply to me a full hour after the new thread opened. Talk about pot and kettle. So I'm not letting him off the hook.
@hyufd seems to think that because he posts something from the internet it is correct. Quote: 'No my facts were absolutely right. I posted the IQ data.' Yes you did BUT as everyone has been telling you it is not meaningful to compare countries because of other variables without taking them into account.
He also said: You quite clearly do have an ideological objection to raw IQ test results as you have spent most of this thread whinging about them. Again no I am not as I have made clear over and over again. I only object to the misuse of the data which is what you always do because you are as thick as a plank.
You also said 'The difference between the average Japanese and Mali test results as I have already shown you is far to big to be bridged even with preparation and coaching'. Again I have explained this to you. My reference to coaching was in the UK/USA context of improving individual IQ results. The reason Mali results are so low is because of other variables primarily the complete lack of education compared to Japan. That is not the same as coaching, we are talking about a completely different society, 3rd world compared to 1st world.
OK so finally I will ask you for the umpteenth time do you really believe that the average Nepal IQ is really 43 and the average Mali IQ is really 59 because that is at the level of not being able to tie your shoe laces. Or is it because of other factors like lack of education.
If the latter then all of what you have posted is bollocks isn't it?
If the former then you are a racist if you think Africans are really this stupid.
I posted on the OLD thread not the new one, you have yet again decided to carry your post over to disrupt the new thread so here we go.
You have an ideological objection to IQ tests, hence you completely dismiss the fact that East Asian countries are over 50 IQ points higher than the lowest IQ nations (and also indeed higher than us). That is just a fact, instead all you can do is rant and rave in your usual pompous manner throwing accusations of racism about and accusing me of being thick because I do not agree with your ideological agenda which is that there is no such thing as raw IQ.
You also need to ask why some nations are 3rd world and some nations are very advanced 1st world like Japan? The answer may well be in part due to raw IQ but no again that has to be dismissed by you with a rant about racism.
There are schools in Nepal and Mali as much as there are schools in Japan after all!
a) You kept it going not me but I am stopping now because I know how it annoys everyone.
b) You said: 'There are schools in Nepal and Mali as much as there are schools in Japan after all!' You really are deluded aren't you. How on earth can you compare Mali and Nepal education with Japan?
c) You keep saying I have an ideological objection to IQ tests yet ignore the fact that I clearly don't and that they were integral to my work for many years and I used them repeated and was involved in their production. You are just bonkers.
d) So re your last paragraph you really DO think Africans are stupid so therefore you are a racist. I mean what other conclusion can one come to. Go on admit it you think black people are thick. Again I ask why do you think African Americans perform better than Africans if that is the case. They are after all the same people. Africans who suffer poverty do not do so because they are thick, and when rescued from poverty why do they suddenly perform better if you are correct.
It really is offensive if you think Africans are thick.
Also do you have any comprehension of what a score of 43 is? I wouldn't want someone with that IQ level taking me up Everest. But guess what people from Nepal aren't as stupid as you think.
One does wonder what your IQ level is.
And yet, everyone accepts that races vary by height, weight, athleticism, skin colour, hair colour, stoutness, susceptibility to certain diseases (cf Sickle Cell in Africa, and Cystic Fibrosis in Celtic northwest Europe); heck, they even vary by penis size and maybe personality.
It seems odd that we accept that every single evolved human attribute varies a little or a lot between (and within) races, apart from just ONE - intelligence, which is uniquely the same for all races, and any IQ test that says it isn't equal - which they all do - is racist and must be ignored
Confusing
I have never denied there may be differences. I was simply pointing out the IQ results you and @hyufd were useless in identifying any differences because of so many other variables. You do realise that @HYUFD has admitted that he believes that the IQ results for much of Africa are as published on that list. That puts most Africans at the level of not being able to tie their shoe laces. Do you want to be associated with that?
I have read widely in this area and I agree with you: a lot of those scores for 3rd World/Global South countries are extremely dubious, if not offensive. They come mainly from the work of Richard Lynn at Ulster University. I have encountered Lynn and - how can I phrase this without troubling the libel lawyers and Our Genial Host? - he's probably one of the few people who might actually benefit from a bit of Critical Race Theory
eg He sometimes eagerly seizes on tiny ancient tests done once in a primitive village and applies this to an entire nation. Ludicrous and probably harmful and one wonders at the motivation
On the other hand, I do believe there are some average variations between races - just as with height, weight, speed, hormones, every other human attribute. They are all evolved, and all evolved slightly differently. I just do no understand why intelligence should be uniquely non-susceptible to different evolutionary pressures. I also find the data on Ashkenazi Jews pretty startling and compelling, and born out by their extraordinary success in the arts, science, chess, finance, etc - a fifth of all Nobel Prizes won by 0.2% of the global population??
This is a subject which has to be handled extremely carefully as it can easily lead to direct, overt racism, and generally it is best not discussed at all, unless it is essential. But nor should the science be suppressed and ignored
It is tricky. It was maybe easier in the day when scientists would talk about really controversial topics in Latin, so only a few understood. Like Krafft Ebbing on sexual fetishes
Purports to be a fair representation of the Mensa test, which Mensa won't itself give you. Less insultingly easy than the taster on the Mensa website, and tightly constrained for time. Basically English language comprehension and mental arithmetic, both eminently improvable by practice
On topic: Frankly preposterous. It's must win for SKS and for SKS only.
And he will.
It’s not amazingly prosperous to analyse the boosterism Boris would get with a win. It’s a balanced header in what a win does to each side finishing on what punters, presumably Applicant, thinks will happen.
Another bit of analyse you a probably not going to like, all sorts of seats go on mid term by elections, but then switch back at the actual election. So what will the Labour win here really tell us? Even a whopper of a win does not change Starmer’s inherent vices in Charisma and Unlikability going into the actual general election.
Oh, of course Boris will get a big boost with a win, but that doesn't itself imply that a defeat will leave him in deep trouble.
This is not a symmetric byelection. Even without everything else that's been going on, for a mid term by-election gained by the government at the previous election, the opposition would be odds-on favourite. It's everything else that's going on that makes Labour an overwhelming favourite - therefore a Labour win is baked in and the result will be greeted generally with a "meh" (except for the Boris haters, of course) unless there's a total collapse. It's only if Labour fail to win that there will be a big story - and therefore the idea that it is "must win" for Boris is, I'm afraid, preposterous.
Your last paragraph is entirely right. A Labour win will tell us nothing other than it's a mid term by-election - unless there's a total Tory collapse.
Comments
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/04/19/vote-leave-data-guru-now-saving-nhs/
We've left a large mess behind us, and have I think some responsibility in mitigating its effects - as the government seems to recognise:
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-pledges-286-million-of-lifesaving-aid-for-afghanistan
That, and paying some attention to what's going on in the country. Which is what seems to have irritated you with my original post.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/18/opinion/republicans-senate-immigration-jd-vance.html
- Swing back to Labour well in excess of the 2019 Tory swing = bad news for Boris
- Swing back in line with 2019 and a Labour win = OK for Starmer but a little underwhelming
- Little change or slight swing to Labour but Tories retain = bad news for Starmer
- Swing to Tories = highly unlikely
@hyufd seems to think that because he posts something from the internet it is correct. Quote: 'No my facts were absolutely right. I posted the IQ data.' Yes you did BUT as everyone has been telling you it is not meaningful to compare countries because of other variables without taking them into account.
He also said: You quite clearly do have an ideological objection to raw IQ test results as you have spent most of this thread whinging about them. Again no I am not as I have made clear over and over again. I only object to the misuse of the data which is what you always do because you are as thick as a plank.
You also said 'The difference between the average Japanese and Mali test results as I have already shown you is far to big to be bridged even with preparation and coaching'. Again I have explained this to you. My reference to coaching was in the UK/USA context of improving individual IQ results. The reason Mali results are so low is because of other variables primarily the complete lack of education compared to Japan. That is not the same as coaching, we are talking about a completely different society, 3rd world compared to 1st world.
OK so finally I will ask you for the umpteenth time do you really believe that the average Nepal IQ is really 43 and the average Mali IQ is really 59 because that is at the level of not being able to tie your shoe laces. Or is it because of other factors like lack of education.
If the latter then all of what you have posted is bollocks isn't it?
If the former then you are a racist if you think Africans are really this stupid.
You have an ideological objection to IQ tests, hence you completely dismiss the fact that East Asian countries are over 50 IQ points higher than the lowest IQ nations (and also indeed higher than us). That is just a fact, instead all you can do is rant and rave in your usual pompous manner throwing accusations of racism about and accusing me of being thick because I do not agree with your ideological agenda which is that there is no such thing as raw IQ.
You also need to ask why some nations are 3rd world and some nations are very advanced 1st world like Japan? The answer may well be in part due to raw IQ but no again that has to be dismissed by you with a rant about racism.
There are schools in Nepal and Mali as much as there are schools in Japan after all!
There is this one which I have recommended several times, apologies if this is regarded as spamming. Supplying dried food and sleeping bags to the volunteer fighters.
You are hand-wringing in which case that aid pledge (delivered by whom to whom, I might ask again) should delight you and make your "ignoring a country's fate is wrong" comment misjudged.
Your original post irritated me because it was a logic fail.
But overly rich soils are indeed bad for biodiversity if you don't want to end up with just nettles. There's a reason limestone areas have lots of interesting plants.
There's issues with poor livestock practice too, not just fertiliser, where direct run off into streams causes significant problems, including nitrification.
So the main thing causing trouble here is sewage not being treated fully because there are too many houses being built without the infrastructure being added to go with them? Just another service that the developers (and often the planners) don't care about to go along with all the others.
Boris has to win back his MPs and its not going to be easy, especially when many hundred councillors lose their positions in just over 2 weeks time.
https://www.gkiqtest.com/dimag-khane-question/
Con 47.0
Lab 42.2
LD (2 wards) 1.1
Grn 7.0
Others (5 candidates, 3 wards, no LD overlap) 2.5
YP gained 6.3% in the ward they stood.
Thoughts:
- This hadn't swung any more Tory from GE19 to LE21, in contrast to Batley & Spen.
- Best Green performance was in Wakefield Rural, so don't read across all that 7% to Labour
- Although not quite as good a read across as B&S in terms of a full slate of candidates, this isn't a bad extra data point for the by-election (3 in 4 metropolitans tend to be better for this - and 2022 data set still to come)
- The start point for any by-election, even had it been held back in 2021, was therefore a bit tighter than GE19. If Labour could hope to compete then, they are easily justified favourites now.
Betting:
- Honest opinion, Labour activists will get a degree of colly wobbles during the campaign, so I'd wonder about a hedge type approach here, albeit running the risk of partygate flaring up again.
b) You said: 'There are schools in Nepal and Mali as much as there are schools in Japan after all!' You really are deluded aren't you. How on earth can you compare Mali and Nepal education with Japan?
c) You keep saying I have an ideological objection to IQ tests yet ignore the fact that I clearly don't and that they were integral to my work for many years and I used them repeated and was involved in their production. You are just bonkers.
d) So re your last paragraph you really DO think Africans are stupid so therefore you are a racist. I mean what other conclusion can one come to. Go on admit it you think black people are thick. Again I ask why do you think African Americans perform better than Africans if that is the case. They are after all the same people. Africans who suffer poverty do not do so because they are thick, and when rescued from poverty why do they suddenly perform better if you are correct.
It really is offensive if you think Africans are thick.
Also do you have any comprehension of what a score of 43 is? I wouldn't want someone with that IQ level taking me up Everest. But guess what people from Nepal aren't as stupid as you think.
One does wonder what your IQ level is.
Starmer unquestioningly voted with him, which is bad, and wanted to keep the restrictions for longer which is even worse - but he wasn't the one who introduced the rules, that was Boris.
Maybe that Boris was responsible for the drafting and passage of these laws?
Maybe that he was the PM and used government buildings for his lawbreaking?
Maybe that he was the one who lied to the HoC about it when he had the duty of candour at the dispatch box?
I am sure I could come up with one or two more if you like.
And he will.
Had this been a random person it would never have been. Downing Street is rightly expected to be held to a higher standard.
What Boris did was worse.
Had he not introduced lockdown, then there'd have been no laws for him to violate. He did, his fault, karmic justice.
LOTO is not Prime Minister.
It seems odd that we accept that every single evolved human attribute varies a little or a lot between (and within) races, apart from just ONE - intelligence, which is uniquely the same for all races, and any IQ test that says it isn't equal - which they all do - is racist and must be ignored
Confusing
b) Very easily. They both have schools which give pupils the opportunity to learn, I would not expect Malian and Nepali schools to be so crap in relation to Japanese schools as to be the sole reason for Japan's very high average IQ score in relation to them.
c) Clearly you do have an ideological objection to any notion of raw IQ, otherwise you would not have made umpteen posts saying how raw IQ measures are racist.
d) You just prove my point. Rather than look at the facts you just throw out accusations of racism. Even in developed nations we know full well East Asians get the best exam results when all racial backgrounds are on an equal footing.
It is you saying Africans are thick not me, saying Japan has a higher average IQ than African nations is not the same thing at all (you could equally say African nations produce more long distance Olympic gold medallists than Japan).
I have never pretended to be genius level IQ but what my IQ is is irrelevant to a discussion of a comparison of raw IQ scores between nations and ethnicities
IQ tests are fundamentally flawed comparing across nations, anyone who understands anything about them understands that.
Height, weight etc can be objectively measured, intelligence can't.
It's quite entertaining though seeing all these cabinet ministers and others defending the indefensible.
In this case the police have been bullied into breaching that entirely sensible approach and to impose retrospective fines. The recipients have, for understandable reasons, chosen not to challenge this on the variety of grounds available to them.
There was no public nuisance, there was no health threat, there is no point to these FPNs, other than to embarrass the government and to drag our police further into politics, a highly undesirable state of affairs.
But our PM is a persistent and inveterate liar. And that is unacceptable. I find it deeply frustrating how often our politics gets bogged down in trivia instead of actually addressing the substantive point.
Durham Constabulary
Seems to shut this ddown.
The Police were reluctant to investigate the breaches in Downing Street and it is only the fact this was Downing Street and they'd introduced the rules that made them eventually do so. That aggravating factor isn't there for Starmer, so no investigation, no FPNs.
So we may as well scrap exams then
Another bit of analyse you a probably not going to like, all sorts of seats go on mid term by elections, but then switch back at the actual election. So what will the Labour win here really tell us? Even a whopper of a win does not change Starmer’s inherent vices in Charisma and Unlikability going into the actual general election.
Not much precedent I would imagine but any lawyers care to comment?
...
‘We all work together - what difference does it make if we drink together?’, said workers fined for breaking Covid lockdown rules
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/south-london-builders-covid-lockdown-party-fine-partygate-boris-johnson-b994957.html
Poor from Lebedev, you'd have thought he could have spiked this
Exams are not a measure of intelligence, nor are they intended to be. That's not what they're there for.
Anyone who thought an exam was an objective measurement of intelligence is pretty damned ignorant.
The issue here is Habitats legislation derived from EU law but now transposed in to UK law. It requires a 'likely significant effect' on certain protected sites to be ruled out before 'plans and projects' can proceed. The evolution of case law on the subject has meant that this applies to very abstract situations - eg car exhaust fumes from a additional vehicular movements associated with one car on a forest 20 miles away where environmental degradation has taken place. Because the cause of the environmental degradation is uncertain, a likely significant effect cannot be ruled out, and whilst this uncertainty exists, planning permission cannot be granted. That is how the courts have applied the law, and decision makers (Council's and planning Inspectors) have to follow, even though it often feels wildly disproportionate and manifestly absurd.
I have not had direct experience of the current nitrates stuff - but I understand is rooted in various litigation against housing development where Natural Englands advice on how impacts can be mitigated was challenged in the courts, the result being that there is no way for development to go ahead. The consequence is that Natural England have effectively issued a directive against such housing development in large parts of England (about 70 local authorities) and any permissions granted against this advice could be overturned in court.
The government have told the Council's asking them to find a solution, and given them each £100k to do so. I think the idea is that, for each area, you set up some kind of mitigation plan to neutralise the impact on a case by case basis, but obviously that is going to be subject to challenge on a case by case basis. Every legal challenge brings the barristers etc in and costs big money - £100k won't go very far.
Anyway, Bojo later today will once again remind me why I ripped up my Tory membership card.
But Joe Bloggs inviting 50 people around for drinks, even if they all work together, and many police witnessing it, absolutely would have been stopped from carrying on the party and often fined.
I am still a bit worried though, are we looking at widening polls but still a hidden larger than usual sack of don’t know likely abstain ready for late manoeuvres.
What this has given us on our media is more exposure to Le Pen speeches and policy, and there is a definite undercurrent of something very wrong lurking beneath them, like when the wrong sort of people were taking over the ministry of magic.
They do measure something but they're not an objective measure of intelligence. Indeed people spend years preparing for their SATS so they can do better in them, which isn't something that would affect the results if it was an objective culture-blind and education-blind measure.
Take a random American and get them to sit a SATS-equivalent overseas without any preparation and they'll perform worse than in their own SATS they've learnt towards.
Take a random non-American and get them to sit the SATS without any preparation and they'll perform worse too.
Take a random American, deny them any practice and get them to sit the SATS without any preparation and they'll perform worse too.
It isn't objective and never was. Nor does it need to be to serve the purpose of what its there for, just don't abuse it for something its never intended to be there for.
The police investigate stuff. The "AH LOOK WE GOT HIM THE HYPOCRITE!!!" argument against Starmer by the Tories / Corbynites (same difference) has been looked at with regards to the facts not the spin. And there was no case to investigate. Same as the Sturgeon in the barber shop case.
Its a dumb an argument as the other attempts to defend the indefensible. Teachers and Nurses were all on the piss as well in the staff room, and its the same as a parking ticket, and he only broke the law in a very specific and limited way etc etc etc.
Boris Johnson is to face a vote on whether he should be investigated over claims he misled the Commons about partygate, The Times has learnt.
Sir Lindsay Hoyle, the Commons Speaker, is expected to grant opposition parties’ request for a vote on Thursday on whether to refer Johnson to the privileges committee for an inquiry.
This morning a cabinet minister compared Johnson’s fine for breaking lockdown rules with a speeding ticket as the government tried to downplay the seriousness of the offence. A senior Conservative backbencher said that MPs were “waiting to see what happens” before deciding whether Johnson should remain as leader.
While the government is likely to whip MPs to oppose the motion, it will force MPs to stick by the prime minister publicly or risk an investigation by the privileges committee, led by Labour’s Chris Bryant.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/boris-johnson-partygate-announcement-apology-lnf35vwr0
Happily nobody has asked if there is a correlation between the two.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Durham_Police_and_Crime_Commissioner
I would question how much of SKS’ ‘acquittal’ was because he didn’t break the rules and how much because Durham Constabulary didn’t want to / were suggested to not to pursue the matter. As we’ve seen with Cleveland, the Police in the North East have a particular culture
Of the millions of factors can I please start you off with famine, civil war and enforced child labour.
SATs definitely derive from IQ tests
"The SAT was founded in 1926 as an adaptation of the Army Alpha, an IQ test which had been used to check the intelligence of recruits to the US Army. From this test, taken only by a few thousand college applicants, eventually came the modern SAT as we know it."
https://www.petersons.com/blog/a-brief-history-of-the-sat-and-how-it-changes/
If it wasn't for the Sue Gray report and the aggravating factor that it was Downing Street, they'd have never investigated it, nor should they have.
That doesn't mean what Starmer did is any different to what Boris did, it isn't, except that Starmer isn't the PM, Starmer didn't make the law and Starmer isn't held to the same level of scrutiny that the Prime Minister is.
If Boris doesn't want to be scrutinised as PM there's an easy fix for that.
https://www.ethnicity-facts-figures.service.gov.uk/education-skills-and-training/11-to-16-years-old/a-to-c-in-english-and-maths-gcse-attainment-for-children-aged-14-to-16-key-stage-4/latest#:~:text=The data shows that, in,out of all ethnic groups
*yes I know it’s an unworkable lie and con trick, but still needs politically skill to dismantle at this stage.
I’m sure those poor folk feel suitably levelled up, and are over the moon with their new sovereignty.
You are saying Africans are thick if you think they have an IQ of 59. Do you know what that level of IQ means? It sounds like you don't.
Your level of IQ is relevant to these discussions because you time and time again show yourself to be stupid by the contents of the post. It is a good job you aren't in Nepal because you would drag their results down even further.
Those kids will have studied and worked hard to get their results, not just rocked up on the day and relied upon their genetics to see them through.
Plane sent from Moscow to collect expelled Russian diplomats from Spain, then Greece, was forced to make 15K detour because of EU flight ban—almost as long as world's longest flight between Singapore and New York, according to @flightradar24. https://tinyurl.com/yckfeb35
https://twitter.com/Lucian_Kim/status/1516247218696638468
It was the Corby by-election in 2012, not Copeland (that was 2017 and went the other way).
eg He sometimes eagerly seizes on tiny ancient tests done once in a primitive village and applies this to an entire nation. Ludicrous and probably harmful and one wonders at the motivation
On the other hand, I do believe there are some average variations between races - just as with height, weight, speed, hormones, every other human attribute. They are all evolved, and all evolved slightly differently. I just do no understand why intelligence should be uniquely non-susceptible to different evolutionary pressures. I also find the data on Ashkenazi Jews pretty startling and compelling, and born out by their extraordinary success in the arts, science, chess, finance, etc - a fifth of all Nobel Prizes won by 0.2% of the global population??
Finally, however, I agree with @IshmaelZ
This is a subject which has to be handled extremely carefully as it can easily lead to direct, overt racism, and generally it is best not discussed at all, unless it is essential. But nor should the science be suppressed and ignored
It is tricky. It was maybe easier in the day when scientists would talk about really controversial topics in Latin, so only a few understood. Like Krafft Ebbing on sexual fetishes
Purports to be a fair representation of the Mensa test, which Mensa won't itself give you. Less insultingly easy than the taster on the Mensa website, and tightly constrained for time. Basically English language comprehension and mental arithmetic, both eminently improvable by practice
This is not a symmetric byelection. Even without everything else that's been going on, for a mid term by-election gained by the government at the previous election, the opposition would be odds-on favourite. It's everything else that's going on that makes Labour an overwhelming favourite - therefore a Labour win is baked in and the result will be greeted generally with a "meh" (except for the Boris haters, of course) unless there's a total collapse. It's only if Labour fail to win that there will be a big story - and therefore the idea that it is "must win" for Boris is, I'm afraid, preposterous.
Your last paragraph is entirely right. A Labour win will tell us nothing other than it's a mid term by-election - unless there's a total Tory collapse.