“We are now dangerously close to nuclear war The dam attack is a turning point. The West must act urgently to stop Putin seeing unconventional warfare as a viable option”
We probably are dangerously close to nuclear war, but where was Hamish when Ukraine cut most of the water supply to the Crimea during 2014-22 by closing the North Crimean Canal? If it's a war crime it must be a war crime whichever side does it. Since when was blowing up a dam unconventional anyway? And it's not at all clear who did it yet, although if the Russian assertion that Ukraine shelled it is anywhere near the truth they will probably furnish evidence within a few days...and if they don't...
Someone needs to bang Putin and Zelensky's heads together.
Zelenskyy was not president of Ukraine until 2019
Did I blame Zelensky for cutting the water supply to Crimea in 2014?
“We are now dangerously close to nuclear war The dam attack is a turning point. The West must act urgently to stop Putin seeing unconventional warfare as a viable option”
Now he’s saying that we need to focus on an impending nuclear war? Which is it?
I’ve no idea. He has a ridiculous name
However I think his point here is valid. If Putin blew the dam - and the evidence points that way - it suggests he is prepared to keep escalating - and there aren’t many further steps he can take before he reaches the nuclear level
That doesn’t mean a bomb. Could be an “accident” at ZPP
The prime military significance of the dam event may well turn out to be ZPP-related.
You say "if Putin blew the dam", but a similar conclusion follows from "if Zelensky blew the dam".
It could be that both of these f*cking nutters probably with very short penises are pushing the world in the same direction.
(Yes I have started drinking again under Armageddo-stress after many years of quiet abstention.)
On the bright side a nuclear war will put lots of dust in the atmosphere and counteract the warming effect
Every cloud. The idea of a nuclear winter has been dumped, though, as probable Soviet propaganda...,
I'm not sure that's true
Georgy Golitsyn pushed idea hard, with Andropov’s backing, to increase support for unilateral disarmament in the West.
The models turned out to be wrong in a number of ways - the Iraq oil well fires in 1991 were the icing on the cake.
This is not to say that there wouldn’t be climatic effects from a Global Thermonuclear War - but instant ice age wasn’t one of them.
Interesting that you should mention Global Thermonuclear War as the classic film War Games was released 40 years ago this week.
The parents of the private school I mentioned have raised £1.2m in 48 hours. The school say they need £2m and that is looking possible. It seems a serious misjudgment by the now former Board.
Good show by the parents.
But it also indicates why the naysayers of Labour's policy are wrong. There's plenty of money out there when the wealthy get squeezed
It’s not a subsample so hardly worth noting, let alone worthy of a PB thread all of its own.
Definite signs of Humza not fucking up, mind.
SKS otoh..
Definite sign of "close the North Sea" SKS fucking up in Scotland.
Who the hell is advising him???
The World Economic Forum.
And quite a lot of voters in Scotland agree, too, whether one likes it or not.
Scotland is the most anti a new oil developments ban part of the UK, 39% of Scots oppose a ban on new oil and gas developments in the North Sea compared to only 32% opposed in the UK overall (with Londoners most in favour of a ban). https://yougov.co.uk/topics/consumer/survey-results/daily/2023/05/30/adad6/1
Yet both the SNP and Starmer Labour back a ban on new oil and gas developments, with only the Conservatives in favour
To all the bettors here - can Putin's behaviour be understood as a gambler? His actions are double-or-quits type gambles. He's a plunger, this much is clear, and it seems he's heading for gambler's ruin. His opponents, by contrast, are cautious and rational hedgers for whom the stakes are higher, existential even. Putin is also, as is well known, a judoka who likes to unbalance his opponent. I cannot see him embarking on negotiations that imply compromise. It doesn't fit his world view or personality.
I certainly don't think he'd embark on direct negotiations but that's what Lavrov is for. He'd take the blame for any concessions that have to be made.
Rishi Sunak is in big trouble if these focus groups are right.
He's been nick-named "little Rishi", because he cannot stand up to Johnson.
"Weak"
"Too rich"
CBA to sit through 15 minutes of that, but you aren't really selling it to me. Check out who is PM. This is like saying Churchill has been nick-named "little Winnie", because he cannot stand up to Hitler. Feeble stuff.
Starmer is "meh", Sunak is too rich for the Red Wall to vote for him. They do not like him.
I don't understand the Dutch Salute reference. Please explain
Dutch Salute theory in polling explained. Look for a gradual or even sudden rise for this trend across surveys.
For LLG frequently showing in the 60s, why wait till May 1st to work out how you are tactically voting, and tell pollsters something different till then - when you know today and can be right up front will the pollster?
Dutch Salute theory is based on HY being right about something he posted last week - in much of the blue wall the main challenge to the Tories are Lib Dem’s - so if it goes with current polling (HY uses a lot of If’s) this degree of Labour voting will be wasted votes in so many places and hand the seats to the Tories.
Hang on, it’s not even an If there’s going to be tactical voting. With 60% LLG a great number will know exactly how to vote tactical a long time before the General Election.
However, this tactical voting is going to be massively regional - many telling pollsters today they will vote Lab, will start to tell pollsters Lib Dem instead. But they will do this in certain places, not evenly across the nation. In the Nationwide poll Labour will FALL - Labours lead over the Tories will FALL - all this with no extra Tory votes but Lib Dem’s on the rise.
This national polling, at first glance looking much more optimistic for the Tories, will utterly disguise what is really shaping up - the national polling picture cannot give us what will actually be going on - swing calculators based on average swing will slip woefully behind the huge variation in tactical vote between place to place, region to region, wall to wall.
Voters knowing in the coming months how they will vote tactically in the general election, simply becoming all up front with pollsters about their vote, and how tactical voting will be wildly different from place to place not showing in the nationwide polls, this explains Dutch Salute theory. What to look out for, what is causing it, and the added caution this builds into the NATIONAL POLLS, that, if I’m right, will if anything show Tories closing the gap to Labour, yet completely miss the tactical storm brewing.
No it's about norks.
I’m the psephologist who created the theory! I should know what it is!
I do have a point. BJO keeps pointing out Labour lead has fallen from in the twenties to about 12 to 14 - which isn’t much opposition lead at all one year before an election, 2015 and all that, and he asks for an explanation.
I’ve given the explanation.
If the LLG has moved nowhere, Tories gone nowhere, Lib Dem’s creeping up and Labour down, that narrowing of the gap disguises the tactical taking shape.
Why should LLG wait till next April to make up their mind when they know today and can start being straight up front with pollsters.
So Dutch Salute "theory" is a hypothesis to do with the regionalisation of tactical voting and the bearing of breasts. Am I on the right lines?
...Back to my second bottle of wine tonight...
No breasts at all.
After about 20 minutes of work I have divined that "LLG" means "Lab - LibDem - Green".
My own favourite metric is right/left where right includes nationalists and far right and greens, and centrists such as liberals are ignored. OK everyone has their own metric and their metrics are of varying utility, but mine at least points up a big difference between Scotland and Wales.
So what we are saying is that the left milky dumpling is bigger than the right milky dumpling, and the cleavage sagging a bit in the middle.
Nothing a well fitted brassiere wouldn't sort out.
To all the bettors here - can Putin's behaviour be understood as a gambler? His actions are double-or-quits type gambles. He's a plunger, this much is clear, and it seems he's heading for gambler's ruin. His opponents, by contrast, are cautious and rational hedgers for whom the stakes are higher, existential even. Putin is also, as is well known, a judoka who likes to unbalance his opponent. I cannot see him embarking on negotiations that imply compromise. It doesn't fit his world view or personality.
Even he would do so if he felt there was no other way - the issue at present is neither side sees it to be to their advantage to embark on negotiations now, hence much more fighting will be necessary to change that (we can hope by making even Putin's intransigence untenable, rather than Ukraine being forced to accept the current lines of control), and instant 'peace' advocates are just Putinistas by another name.
“We are now dangerously close to nuclear war The dam attack is a turning point. The West must act urgently to stop Putin seeing unconventional warfare as a viable option”
We probably are dangerously close to nuclear war, but where was Hamish when Ukraine cut most of the water supply to the Crimea during 2014-22 by closing the North Crimean Canal? If it's a war crime it must be a war crime whichever side does it. Since when was blowing up a dam unconventional anyway? And it's not at all clear who did it yet, although if the Russian assertion that Ukraine shelled it is anywhere near the truth they will probably furnish evidence within a few days...and if they don't...
Someone needs to bang Putin and Zelensky's heads together.
Zelenskyy was not president of Ukraine until 2019
Did I blame Zelensky for cutting the water supply to Crimea in 2014?
“We are now dangerously close to nuclear war The dam attack is a turning point. The West must act urgently to stop Putin seeing unconventional warfare as a viable option”
Now he’s saying that we need to focus on an impending nuclear war? Which is it?
I’ve no idea. He has a ridiculous name
However I think his point here is valid. If Putin blew the dam - and the evidence points that way - it suggests he is prepared to keep escalating - and there aren’t many further steps he can take before he reaches the nuclear level
That doesn’t mean a bomb. Could be an “accident” at ZPP
The prime military significance of the dam event may well turn out to be ZPP-related.
You say "if Putin blew the dam", but a similar conclusion follows from "if Zelensky blew the dam".
It could be that both of these f*cking nutters probably with very short penises are pushing the world in the same direction.
(Yes I have started drinking again under Armageddo-stress after many years of quiet abstention.)
On the bright side a nuclear war will put lots of dust in the atmosphere and counteract the warming effect
Every cloud. The idea of a nuclear winter has been dumped, though, as probable Soviet propaganda, even though when I were a lad it was being pushed out by the authorities in Britain something rotten,
The idea of a nuclear winter has not been dumped its a known fact that a high density of particulate matter in the atmosphere reduces solar forcing. Trying to claim otherwise shows you are an idiot
You just have to read even the Wikipedia article on nuclear winter and compare it with what was propagandised in say Britain in say 1980. You can insult me as much as you like, but the nuclear war causes nuclear winter hypothesis is not advanced anywhere near as much as it was in the 1980s. It has in fact been blamed on KGB propaganda. I am looking for a source to show you that.
Edit: here you go, and this is by no means the only source:
Gosh so we have millenia of proof that volcanoes throwing dust into the atmosphere cools the atmosphere......yet you quote that....I insult you because you dont do science. It is the whole science behind the KT boundary you idiot
To be honest, under the stewardship of Rishi Sunak when Chancellor, the whole country could be put under a Section 114 notice.
The biggest disaster is the Victoria Square development which was meant to create a new commercial and residential heart for Woking but the £750 million previous value has been downgraded to £200 million. For a Borough Council (not a unitary), the scale of the debt is extraordinary - I'm also forced to ask why this measure wasn't taken when the Conservative administration at the Town Hall was piling up these debts.
So Dutch Salute "theory" is a hypothesis to do with the regionalisation of tactical voting and the bearing of breasts. Am I on the right lines?
...Back to my second bottle of wine tonight...
No breasts at all.
After about 20 minutes of work I have divined that "LLG" means "Lab - LibDem - Green".
My own favourite metric is right/left where right includes nationalists and far right and greens, and centrists such as liberals are ignored. OK everyone has their own metric and their metrics are of varying utility, but mine at least points up a big difference between Scotland and Wales.
So what we are saying is that the left milky dumpling is bigger than the right milky dumpling, and the cleavage sagging a bit in the middle.
Nothing a well fitted brassiere wouldn't sort out.
So Dutch Salute "theory" is a hypothesis to do with the regionalisation of tactical voting and the bearing of breasts. Am I on the right lines?
...Back to my second bottle of wine tonight...
No breasts at all.
After about 20 minutes of work I have divined that "LLG" means "Lab - LibDem - Green".
My own favourite metric is right/left where right includes nationalists and far right and greens, and centrists such as liberals are ignored. OK everyone has their own metric and their metrics are of varying utility, but mine at least points up a big difference between Scotland and Wales.
So what we are saying is that the left milky dumpling is bigger than the right milky dumpling, and the cleavage sagging a bit in the middle.
Nothing a well fitted brassiere wouldn't sort out.
To be honest, under the stewardship of Rishi Sunak when Chancellor, the whole country could be put under a Section 114 notice.
The biggest disaster is the Victoria Square development which was meant to create a new commercial and residential heart for Woking but the £750 million previous value has been downgraded to £200 million. For a Borough Council (not a unitary), the scale of the debt is extraordinary - I'm also forced to ask why this measure wasn't taken when the Conservative administration at the Town Hall was piling up these debts.
Yet both the SNP and Starmer Labour back a ban on new oil and gas developments, with only the Conservatives in favour
Scotland is the second most in favour of a ban, at 40%, second only to London on 46%.
Also, your figures seem to be wrong. Scotland is 36%, not 39% opposed to a ban.
Scotland is marginally IN FAVOUR of such a ban according to your figures.
Still more Scots are opposed to a ban on new oil developments than the 32% opposed to a ban in the UK overall. (Northerners are as supportive of a ban as Scots but both still significantly less than Londoners are).
Yet BOTH the SNP and Starmer Labour back a ban on new oil developments with only the Conservatives standing up for the more than a third of Scots who oppose a ban on new oil and gas developments in the North Sea
To be honest, under the stewardship of Rishi Sunak when Chancellor, the whole country could be put under a Section 114 notice.
The biggest disaster is the Victoria Square development which was meant to create a new commercial and residential heart for Woking but the £750 million previous value has been downgraded to £200 million. For a Borough Council (not a unitary), the scale of the debt is extraordinary - I'm also forced to ask why this measure wasn't taken when the Conservative administration at the Town Hall was piling up these debts.
What the fuck?
Woking has run up £2bn in debts???
I cannot quite conceive how some councils have managed to run up such huge debts. It should be impossible to manage that if they were trying to do it!
To be honest, under the stewardship of Rishi Sunak when Chancellor, the whole country could be put under a Section 114 notice.
The biggest disaster is the Victoria Square development which was meant to create a new commercial and residential heart for Woking but the £750 million previous value has been downgraded to £200 million. For a Borough Council (not a unitary), the scale of the debt is extraordinary - I'm also forced to ask why this measure wasn't taken when the Conservative administration at the Town Hall was piling up these debts.
£2bn debt and, what, £18m turnover - that's going to take a while to pay off.
“We are now dangerously close to nuclear war The dam attack is a turning point. The West must act urgently to stop Putin seeing unconventional warfare as a viable option”
We probably are dangerously close to nuclear war, but where was Hamish when Ukraine cut most of the water supply to the Crimea during 2014-22 by closing the North Crimean Canal? If it's a war crime it must be a war crime whichever side does it. Since when was blowing up a dam unconventional anyway? And it's not at all clear who did it yet, although if the Russian assertion that Ukraine shelled it is anywhere near the truth they will probably furnish evidence within a few days...and if they don't...
Someone needs to bang Putin and Zelensky's heads together.
Zelenskyy was not president of Ukraine until 2019
Did I blame Zelensky for cutting the water supply to Crimea in 2014?
“We are now dangerously close to nuclear war The dam attack is a turning point. The West must act urgently to stop Putin seeing unconventional warfare as a viable option”
Now he’s saying that we need to focus on an impending nuclear war? Which is it?
I’ve no idea. He has a ridiculous name
However I think his point here is valid. If Putin blew the dam - and the evidence points that way - it suggests he is prepared to keep escalating - and there aren’t many further steps he can take before he reaches the nuclear level
That doesn’t mean a bomb. Could be an “accident” at ZPP
The prime military significance of the dam event may well turn out to be ZPP-related.
You say "if Putin blew the dam", but a similar conclusion follows from "if Zelensky blew the dam".
It could be that both of these f*cking nutters probably with very short penises are pushing the world in the same direction.
(Yes I have started drinking again under Armageddo-stress after many years of quiet abstention.)
On the bright side a nuclear war will put lots of dust in the atmosphere and counteract the warming effect
Every cloud. The idea of a nuclear winter has been dumped, though, as probable Soviet propaganda...,
I'm not sure that's true
Georgy Golitsyn pushed idea hard, with Andropov’s backing, to increase support for unilateral disarmament in the West.
The models turned out to be wrong in a number of ways - the Iraq oil well fires in 1991 were the icing on the cake.
This is not to say that there wouldn’t be climatic effects from a Global Thermonuclear War - but instant ice age wasn’t one of them.
Interesting that you should mention Global Thermonuclear War as the classic film War Games was released 40 years ago this week.
Who would survive? That's an interesting question. I would predict... convicts and file clerks. The worst convicts. Those deep down in solitary confinement. And the most ordinary file clerks. Probably for large insurance companies, because they would be in fire-proof rooms, protected by tons of the best insulator in the world: paper. And imagine what will happen. The small group of vicious criminals will fight the army of file clerks for the remaining means of life. The convicts will know violence, but the file clerks will know organization. Who do think'll win? It's all hypotheses of course, but fun to play around with.
To all the bettors here - can Putin's behaviour be understood as a gambler? His actions are double-or-quits type gambles. He's a plunger, this much is clear, and it seems he's heading for gambler's ruin. His opponents, by contrast, are cautious and rational hedgers for whom the stakes are higher, existential even. Putin is also, as is well known, a judoka who likes to unbalance his opponent. I cannot see him embarking on negotiations that imply compromise. It doesn't fit his world view or personality.
He gambles like a high-stakes Hold Em poker player, not like a sports bettor. Texas Hold ‘Em is (rightly imho) seen as the greatest gambler’s game because it combines chance, skill and moxy like no other. Bluffing, bluff-calling, slow playing and bullying etc are all parts of it. There is nothing quite like it.
I love it as a game. As an approach to governance or geopolitics, it’s genuinely horrific.
To be honest, under the stewardship of Rishi Sunak when Chancellor, the whole country could be put under a Section 114 notice.
The biggest disaster is the Victoria Square development which was meant to create a new commercial and residential heart for Woking but the £750 million previous value has been downgraded to £200 million. For a Borough Council (not a unitary), the scale of the debt is extraordinary - I'm also forced to ask why this measure wasn't taken when the Conservative administration at the Town Hall was piling up these debts.
What the fuck?
Woking has run up £2bn in debts???
I cannot quite conceive how some councils have managed to run up such huge debts. It should be impossible to manage that if they were trying to do it!
Invest in property on an epic scale. Because property is a one way punt....
So Dutch Salute "theory" is a hypothesis to do with the regionalisation of tactical voting and the bearing of breasts. Am I on the right lines?
...Back to my second bottle of wine tonight...
No breasts at all.
After about 20 minutes of work I have divined that "LLG" means "Lab - LibDem - Green".
My own favourite metric is right/left where right includes nationalists and far right and greens, and centrists such as liberals are ignored. OK everyone has their own metric and their metrics are of varying utility, but mine at least points up a big difference between Scotland and Wales.
So what we are saying is that the left milky dumpling is bigger than the right milky dumpling, and the cleavage sagging a bit in the middle.
Nothing a well fitted brassiere wouldn't sort out.
You are very weird.
While I disagree with some of your (always well-thought-through) analysis from time to time; this is a very pithy and correct summary.
“We are now dangerously close to nuclear war The dam attack is a turning point. The West must act urgently to stop Putin seeing unconventional warfare as a viable option”
We probably are dangerously close to nuclear war, but where was Hamish when Ukraine cut most of the water supply to the Crimea during 2014-22 by closing the North Crimean Canal? If it's a war crime it must be a war crime whichever side does it. Since when was blowing up a dam unconventional anyway? And it's not at all clear who did it yet, although if the Russian assertion that Ukraine shelled it is anywhere near the truth they will probably furnish evidence within a few days...and if they don't...
Someone needs to bang Putin and Zelensky's heads together.
Zelenskyy was not president of Ukraine until 2019
Did I blame Zelensky for cutting the water supply to Crimea in 2014?
“We are now dangerously close to nuclear war The dam attack is a turning point. The West must act urgently to stop Putin seeing unconventional warfare as a viable option”
Now he’s saying that we need to focus on an impending nuclear war? Which is it?
I’ve no idea. He has a ridiculous name
However I think his point here is valid. If Putin blew the dam - and the evidence points that way - it suggests he is prepared to keep escalating - and there aren’t many further steps he can take before he reaches the nuclear level
That doesn’t mean a bomb. Could be an “accident” at ZPP
The prime military significance of the dam event may well turn out to be ZPP-related.
You say "if Putin blew the dam", but a similar conclusion follows from "if Zelensky blew the dam".
It could be that both of these f*cking nutters probably with very short penises are pushing the world in the same direction.
(Yes I have started drinking again under Armageddo-stress after many years of quiet abstention.)
On the bright side a nuclear war will put lots of dust in the atmosphere and counteract the warming effect
Every cloud. The idea of a nuclear winter has been dumped, though, as probable Soviet propaganda, even though when I were a lad it was being pushed out by the authorities in Britain something rotten,
The idea of a nuclear winter has not been dumped its a known fact that a high density of particulate matter in the atmosphere reduces solar forcing. Trying to claim otherwise shows you are an idiot
You just have to read even the Wikipedia article on nuclear winter and compare it with what was propagandised in say Britain in say 1980. You can insult me as much as you like, but the nuclear war causes nuclear winter hypothesis is not advanced anywhere near as much as it was in the 1980s. It has in fact been blamed on KGB propaganda. I am looking for a source to show you that.
Edit: here you go, and this is by no means the only source:
Gosh so we have millenia of proof that volcanoes throwing dust into the atmosphere cools the atmosphere......yet you quote that....I insult you because you dont do science. It is the whole science behind the KT boundary you idiot
To be honest, under the stewardship of Rishi Sunak when Chancellor, the whole country could be put under a Section 114 notice.
The biggest disaster is the Victoria Square development which was meant to create a new commercial and residential heart for Woking but the £750 million previous value has been downgraded to £200 million. For a Borough Council (not a unitary), the scale of the debt is extraordinary - I'm also forced to ask why this measure wasn't taken when the Conservative administration at the Town Hall was piling up these debts.
What the fuck?
Woking has run up £2bn in debts???
I cannot quite conceive how some councils have managed to run up such huge debts. It should be impossible to manage that if they were trying to do it!
Cos LA funding was cut to the bone over the last 13 years maybe?
“We are now dangerously close to nuclear war The dam attack is a turning point. The West must act urgently to stop Putin seeing unconventional warfare as a viable option”
We probably are dangerously close to nuclear war, but where was Hamish when Ukraine cut most of the water supply to the Crimea during 2014-22 by closing the North Crimean Canal? If it's a war crime it must be a war crime whichever side does it. Since when was blowing up a dam unconventional anyway? And it's not at all clear who did it yet, although if the Russian assertion that Ukraine shelled it is anywhere near the truth they will probably furnish evidence within a few days...and if they don't...
Someone needs to bang Putin and Zelensky's heads together.
Zelenskyy was not president of Ukraine until 2019
Did I blame Zelensky for cutting the water supply to Crimea in 2014?
“We are now dangerously close to nuclear war The dam attack is a turning point. The West must act urgently to stop Putin seeing unconventional warfare as a viable option”
Now he’s saying that we need to focus on an impending nuclear war? Which is it?
I’ve no idea. He has a ridiculous name
However I think his point here is valid. If Putin blew the dam - and the evidence points that way - it suggests he is prepared to keep escalating - and there aren’t many further steps he can take before he reaches the nuclear level
That doesn’t mean a bomb. Could be an “accident” at ZPP
The prime military significance of the dam event may well turn out to be ZPP-related.
You say "if Putin blew the dam", but a similar conclusion follows from "if Zelensky blew the dam".
It could be that both of these f*cking nutters probably with very short penises are pushing the world in the same direction.
(Yes I have started drinking again under Armageddo-stress after many years of quiet abstention.)
On the bright side a nuclear war will put lots of dust in the atmosphere and counteract the warming effect
Every cloud. The idea of a nuclear winter has been dumped, though, as probable Soviet propaganda...,
I'm not sure that's true
Georgy Golitsyn pushed idea hard, with Andropov’s backing, to increase support for unilateral disarmament in the West.
The models turned out to be wrong in a number of ways - the Iraq oil well fires in 1991 were the icing on the cake.
This is not to say that there wouldn’t be climatic effects from a Global Thermonuclear War - but instant ice age wasn’t one of them.
Interesting that you should mention Global Thermonuclear War as the classic film War Games was released 40 years ago this week.
So Dutch Salute "theory" is a hypothesis to do with the regionalisation of tactical voting and the bearing of breasts. Am I on the right lines?
...Back to my second bottle of wine tonight...
No breasts at all.
After about 20 minutes of work I have divined that "LLG" means "Lab - LibDem - Green".
My own favourite metric is right/left where right includes nationalists and far right and greens, and centrists such as liberals are ignored. OK everyone has their own metric and their metrics are of varying utility, but mine at least points up a big difference between Scotland and Wales.
So what we are saying is that the left milky dumpling is bigger than the right milky dumpling, and the cleavage sagging a bit in the middle.
Nothing a well fitted brassiere wouldn't sort out.
To be honest, under the stewardship of Rishi Sunak when Chancellor, the whole country could be put under a Section 114 notice.
The biggest disaster is the Victoria Square development which was meant to create a new commercial and residential heart for Woking but the £750 million previous value has been downgraded to £200 million. For a Borough Council (not a unitary), the scale of the debt is extraordinary - I'm also forced to ask why this measure wasn't taken when the Conservative administration at the Town Hall was piling up these debts.
What the fuck?
Woking has run up £2bn in debts???
Population c. 100k. That's £20,000 each - much more if you exclude kids and non-workers.
Honestly, the irresponsibility of these Tory councils beggars belief.
“We are now dangerously close to nuclear war The dam attack is a turning point. The West must act urgently to stop Putin seeing unconventional warfare as a viable option”
We probably are dangerously close to nuclear war, but where was Hamish when Ukraine cut most of the water supply to the Crimea during 2014-22 by closing the North Crimean Canal? If it's a war crime it must be a war crime whichever side does it. Since when was blowing up a dam unconventional anyway? And it's not at all clear who did it yet, although if the Russian assertion that Ukraine shelled it is anywhere near the truth they will probably furnish evidence within a few days...and if they don't...
Someone needs to bang Putin and Zelensky's heads together.
Zelenskyy was not president of Ukraine until 2019
Did I blame Zelensky for cutting the water supply to Crimea in 2014?
“We are now dangerously close to nuclear war The dam attack is a turning point. The West must act urgently to stop Putin seeing unconventional warfare as a viable option”
Now he’s saying that we need to focus on an impending nuclear war? Which is it?
I’ve no idea. He has a ridiculous name
However I think his point here is valid. If Putin blew the dam - and the evidence points that way - it suggests he is prepared to keep escalating - and there aren’t many further steps he can take before he reaches the nuclear level
That doesn’t mean a bomb. Could be an “accident” at ZPP
The prime military significance of the dam event may well turn out to be ZPP-related.
You say "if Putin blew the dam", but a similar conclusion follows from "if Zelensky blew the dam".
It could be that both of these f*cking nutters probably with very short penises are pushing the world in the same direction.
(Yes I have started drinking again under Armageddo-stress after many years of quiet abstention.)
On the bright side a nuclear war will put lots of dust in the atmosphere and counteract the warming effect
Every cloud. The idea of a nuclear winter has been dumped, though, as probable Soviet propaganda, even though when I were a lad it was being pushed out by the authorities in Britain something rotten,
The idea of a nuclear winter has not been dumped its a known fact that a high density of particulate matter in the atmosphere reduces solar forcing. Trying to claim otherwise shows you are an idiot
You just have to read even the Wikipedia article on nuclear winter and compare it with what was propagandised in say Britain in say 1980. You can insult me as much as you like, but the nuclear war causes nuclear winter hypothesis is not advanced anywhere near as much as it was in the 1980s. It has in fact been blamed on KGB propaganda. I am looking for a source to show you that.
Edit: here you go, and this is by no means the only source:
Gosh so we have millenia of proof that volcanoes throwing dust into the atmosphere cools the atmosphere......yet you quote that....I insult you because you dont do science. It is the whole science behind the KT boundary you idiot
“We are now dangerously close to nuclear war The dam attack is a turning point. The West must act urgently to stop Putin seeing unconventional warfare as a viable option”
We probably are dangerously close to nuclear war, but where was Hamish when Ukraine cut most of the water supply to the Crimea during 2014-22 by closing the North Crimean Canal? If it's a war crime it must be a war crime whichever side does it. Since when was blowing up a dam unconventional anyway? And it's not at all clear who did it yet, although if the Russian assertion that Ukraine shelled it is anywhere near the truth they will probably furnish evidence within a few days...and if they don't...
Someone needs to bang Putin and Zelensky's heads together.
Zelenskyy was not president of Ukraine until 2019
Did I blame Zelensky for cutting the water supply to Crimea in 2014?
“We are now dangerously close to nuclear war The dam attack is a turning point. The West must act urgently to stop Putin seeing unconventional warfare as a viable option”
Now he’s saying that we need to focus on an impending nuclear war? Which is it?
I’ve no idea. He has a ridiculous name
However I think his point here is valid. If Putin blew the dam - and the evidence points that way - it suggests he is prepared to keep escalating - and there aren’t many further steps he can take before he reaches the nuclear level
That doesn’t mean a bomb. Could be an “accident” at ZPP
The prime military significance of the dam event may well turn out to be ZPP-related.
You say "if Putin blew the dam", but a similar conclusion follows from "if Zelensky blew the dam".
It could be that both of these f*cking nutters probably with very short penises are pushing the world in the same direction.
(Yes I have started drinking again under Armageddo-stress after many years of quiet abstention.)
On the bright side a nuclear war will put lots of dust in the atmosphere and counteract the warming effect
Every cloud. The idea of a nuclear winter has been dumped, though, as probable Soviet propaganda, even though when I were a lad it was being pushed out by the authorities in Britain something rotten,
The idea of a nuclear winter has not been dumped its a known fact that a high density of particulate matter in the atmosphere reduces solar forcing. Trying to claim otherwise shows you are an idiot
You just have to read even the Wikipedia article on nuclear winter and compare it with what was propagandised in say Britain in say 1980. You can insult me as much as you like, but the nuclear war causes nuclear winter hypothesis is not advanced anywhere near as much as it was in the 1980s. It has in fact been blamed on KGB propaganda. I am looking for a source to show you that.
Edit: here you go, and this is by no means the only source:
Gosh so we have millenia of proof that volcanoes throwing dust into the atmosphere cools the atmosphere......yet you quote that....I insult you because you dont do science. It is the whole science behind the KT boundary you idiot
K–Pg, not KT. Meteorite impact, not volcanoes.
The Megavolcanos throw staggering amounts of material into the atmosphere over very long periods - 30,000 years for the Deccan Traps, for example.
The K-Pg event was a 72,000,000 megaton yield equivalent.
At peak, the global nuclear arsenal was something like 2,000 megatons.
To be honest, under the stewardship of Rishi Sunak when Chancellor, the whole country could be put under a Section 114 notice.
The biggest disaster is the Victoria Square development which was meant to create a new commercial and residential heart for Woking but the £750 million previous value has been downgraded to £200 million. For a Borough Council (not a unitary), the scale of the debt is extraordinary - I'm also forced to ask why this measure wasn't taken when the Conservative administration at the Town Hall was piling up these debts.
What the fuck?
Woking has run up £2bn in debts???
I cannot quite conceive how some councils have managed to run up such huge debts. It should be impossible to manage that if they were trying to do it!
Cos LA funding was cut to the bone over the last 13 years maybe?
No.
I mean, that is certainly also true, but most council's don't get anywhere close to these absurdly high examples, and even if the politicians are nuts and the officers incompetent it should be hard to legally run up such massive debts through what is presumably very risky borrowing.
It isn't enough simply that council funding has been cut sharply, to explain the few examples where they are not simply feeling a lot of strain or in trouble, but billions in trouble. Especially when only the larger authorities approach a billion turnover a year, with much of that non-discretionary.
As a life long Hammers fan (like my Dad and Grandad before me) I am delighted that they have won their first bit of European silverware since the year I was born.
Yet both the SNP and Starmer Labour back a ban on new oil and gas developments, with only the Conservatives in favour
Scotland is the second most in favour of a ban, at 40%, second only to London on 46%.
Also, your figures seem to be wrong. Scotland is 36%, not 39% opposed to a ban.
Scotland is marginally IN FAVOUR of such a ban according to your figures.
Still more Scots are opposed to a ban on new oil developments than the 32% opposed to a ban in the UK overall. (Northerners are as supportive of a ban as Scots but both still significantly less than Londoners are).
Yet BOTH the SNP and Starmer Labour back a ban on new oil developments with only the Conservatives standing up for the more than a third of Scots who oppose a ban on new oil and gas developments in the North Sea
I'll do this as a picture so you can understand it better:
figures for Scotland
yes, ban it: 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤
no ban please: 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤
don't know: 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤 👤👤👤👤👤
And that No Ban group is over a third of Scottish voters and more than the UK average, yet ONLY the Scottish Conservatives are standing up for those who don't want a ban on new oil and gas extraction from the North Sea
As a life long Hammers fan (like my Dad and Grandad before me) I am delighted that they have won their first bit of European silverware since the year I was born.
Yet both the SNP and Starmer Labour back a ban on new oil and gas developments, with only the Conservatives in favour
Scotland is the second most in favour of a ban, at 40%, second only to London on 46%.
Also, your figures seem to be wrong. Scotland is 36%, not 39% opposed to a ban.
Scotland is marginally IN FAVOUR of such a ban according to your figures.
Still more Scots are opposed to a ban on new oil developments than the 32% opposed to a ban in the UK overall. (Northerners are as supportive of a ban as Scots but both still significantly less than Londoners are).
Yet BOTH the SNP and Starmer Labour back a ban on new oil developments with only the Conservatives standing up for the more than a third of Scots who oppose a ban on new oil and gas developments in the North Sea
I'll do this as a picture so you can understand it better:
figures for Scotland
yes, ban it: 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤
no ban please: 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤
don't know: 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤 👤👤👤👤👤
And that No Ban group is over a third of Scottish voters and more than the UK average, yet ONLY the Scottish Conservatives are standing up for those who don't want a ban on new oil and gas extraction from the North Sea
Of course, in Indy-Scotland it wouldn't matter a jot what Westminster politicians think.
“We are now dangerously close to nuclear war The dam attack is a turning point. The West must act urgently to stop Putin seeing unconventional warfare as a viable option”
We probably are dangerously close to nuclear war, but where was Hamish when Ukraine cut most of the water supply to the Crimea during 2014-22 by closing the North Crimean Canal? If it's a war crime it must be a war crime whichever side does it. Since when was blowing up a dam unconventional anyway? And it's not at all clear who did it yet, although if the Russian assertion that Ukraine shelled it is anywhere near the truth they will probably furnish evidence within a few days...and if they don't...
Someone needs to bang Putin and Zelensky's heads together.
Zelenskyy was not president of Ukraine until 2019
Did I blame Zelensky for cutting the water supply to Crimea in 2014?
“We are now dangerously close to nuclear war The dam attack is a turning point. The West must act urgently to stop Putin seeing unconventional warfare as a viable option”
Now he’s saying that we need to focus on an impending nuclear war? Which is it?
I’ve no idea. He has a ridiculous name
However I think his point here is valid. If Putin blew the dam - and the evidence points that way - it suggests he is prepared to keep escalating - and there aren’t many further steps he can take before he reaches the nuclear level
That doesn’t mean a bomb. Could be an “accident” at ZPP
The prime military significance of the dam event may well turn out to be ZPP-related.
You say "if Putin blew the dam", but a similar conclusion follows from "if Zelensky blew the dam".
It could be that both of these f*cking nutters probably with very short penises are pushing the world in the same direction.
(Yes I have started drinking again under Armageddo-stress after many years of quiet abstention.)
On the bright side a nuclear war will put lots of dust in the atmosphere and counteract the warming effect
Every cloud. The idea of a nuclear winter has been dumped, though, as probable Soviet propaganda, even though when I were a lad it was being pushed out by the authorities in Britain something rotten,
The idea of a nuclear winter has not been dumped its a known fact that a high density of particulate matter in the atmosphere reduces solar forcing. Trying to claim otherwise shows you are an idiot
You just have to read even the Wikipedia article on nuclear winter and compare it with what was propagandised in say Britain in say 1980. You can insult me as much as you like, but the nuclear war causes nuclear winter hypothesis is not advanced anywhere near as much as it was in the 1980s. It has in fact been blamed on KGB propaganda. I am looking for a source to show you that.
Edit: here you go, and this is by no means the only source:
Gosh so we have millenia of proof that volcanoes throwing dust into the atmosphere cools the atmosphere......yet you quote that....I insult you because you dont do science. It is the whole science behind the KT boundary you idiot
Yet both the SNP and Starmer Labour back a ban on new oil and gas developments, with only the Conservatives in favour
Scotland is the second most in favour of a ban, at 40%, second only to London on 46%.
Also, your figures seem to be wrong. Scotland is 36%, not 39% opposed to a ban.
Scotland is marginally IN FAVOUR of such a ban according to your figures.
Still more Scots are opposed to a ban on new oil developments than the 32% opposed to a ban in the UK overall. (Northerners are as supportive of a ban as Scots but both still significantly less than Londoners are).
Yet BOTH the SNP and Starmer Labour back a ban on new oil developments with only the Conservatives standing up for the more than a third of Scots who oppose a ban on new oil and gas developments in the North Sea
I'll do this as a picture so you can understand it better:
figures for Scotland
yes, ban it: 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤
no ban please: 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤
don't know: 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤 👤👤👤👤👤
And that No Ban group is over a third of Scottish voters and more than the UK average, yet ONLY the Scottish Conservatives are standing up for those who don't want a ban on new oil and gas extraction from the North Sea
Of course, in Indy-Scotland it wouldn't matter a jot what Westminster politicians think.
In Indy Scotland Scots would have an SNP government more in tune with Londoners than Scots on North Sea Oil extraction. Thankfully however the SNP support in Scotland is falling rapidly and Scottish Conservative support is far more resilient than UK Conservative support at present since the last election
“We are now dangerously close to nuclear war The dam attack is a turning point. The West must act urgently to stop Putin seeing unconventional warfare as a viable option”
We probably are dangerously close to nuclear war, but where was Hamish when Ukraine cut most of the water supply to the Crimea during 2014-22 by closing the North Crimean Canal? If it's a war crime it must be a war crime whichever side does it. Since when was blowing up a dam unconventional anyway? And it's not at all clear who did it yet, although if the Russian assertion that Ukraine shelled it is anywhere near the truth they will probably furnish evidence within a few days...and if they don't...
Someone needs to bang Putin and Zelensky's heads together.
Zelenskyy was not president of Ukraine until 2019
Did I blame Zelensky for cutting the water supply to Crimea in 2014?
“We are now dangerously close to nuclear war The dam attack is a turning point. The West must act urgently to stop Putin seeing unconventional warfare as a viable option”
Now he’s saying that we need to focus on an impending nuclear war? Which is it?
I’ve no idea. He has a ridiculous name
However I think his point here is valid. If Putin blew the dam - and the evidence points that way - it suggests he is prepared to keep escalating - and there aren’t many further steps he can take before he reaches the nuclear level
That doesn’t mean a bomb. Could be an “accident” at ZPP
The prime military significance of the dam event may well turn out to be ZPP-related.
You say "if Putin blew the dam", but a similar conclusion follows from "if Zelensky blew the dam".
It could be that both of these f*cking nutters probably with very short penises are pushing the world in the same direction.
(Yes I have started drinking again under Armageddo-stress after many years of quiet abstention.)
On the bright side a nuclear war will put lots of dust in the atmosphere and counteract the warming effect
Every cloud. The idea of a nuclear winter has been dumped, though, as probable Soviet propaganda, even though when I were a lad it was being pushed out by the authorities in Britain something rotten,
The idea of a nuclear winter has not been dumped its a known fact that a high density of particulate matter in the atmosphere reduces solar forcing. Trying to claim otherwise shows you are an idiot
You just have to read even the Wikipedia article on nuclear winter and compare it with what was propagandised in say Britain in say 1980. You can insult me as much as you like, but the nuclear war causes nuclear winter hypothesis is not advanced anywhere near as much as it was in the 1980s. It has in fact been blamed on KGB propaganda. I am looking for a source to show you that.
Edit: here you go, and this is by no means the only source:
Gosh so we have millenia of proof that volcanoes throwing dust into the atmosphere cools the atmosphere......yet you quote that....I insult you because you dont do science. It is the whole science behind the KT boundary you idiot
To be honest, under the stewardship of Rishi Sunak when Chancellor, the whole country could be put under a Section 114 notice.
The biggest disaster is the Victoria Square development which was meant to create a new commercial and residential heart for Woking but the £750 million previous value has been downgraded to £200 million. For a Borough Council (not a unitary), the scale of the debt is extraordinary - I'm also forced to ask why this measure wasn't taken when the Conservative administration at the Town Hall was piling up these debts.
What the fuck?
Woking has run up £2bn in debts???
I cannot quite conceive how some councils have managed to run up such huge debts. It should be impossible to manage that if they were trying to do it!
Cos LA funding was cut to the bone over the last 13 years maybe?
No.
I mean, that is certainly also true, but most council's don't get anywhere close to these absurdly high examples, and even if the politicians are nuts and the officers incompetent it should be hard to legally run up such massive debts through what is presumably very risky borrowing.
It isn't enough simply that council funding has been cut sharply, to explain the few examples where they are not simply feeling a lot of strain or in trouble, but billions in trouble. Especially when only the larger authorities approach a billion turnover a year, with much of that non-discretionary.
Horrible sensation that this has something to do with the multiple failures we've seen recently;
On 13 August 2010, the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, Eric Pickles, announced that the Audit Commission was to be scrapped, with its functions being transferred to the voluntary, not-for-profit or private sector. The government aimed to save £50m annually, with the commission's function transferred to the Local Government Ombudsman and private accounting firms.
“We are now dangerously close to nuclear war The dam attack is a turning point. The West must act urgently to stop Putin seeing unconventional warfare as a viable option”
We probably are dangerously close to nuclear war, but where was Hamish when Ukraine cut most of the water supply to the Crimea during 2014-22 by closing the North Crimean Canal? If it's a war crime it must be a war crime whichever side does it. Since when was blowing up a dam unconventional anyway? And it's not at all clear who did it yet, although if the Russian assertion that Ukraine shelled it is anywhere near the truth they will probably furnish evidence within a few days...and if they don't...
Someone needs to bang Putin and Zelensky's heads together.
Zelenskyy was not president of Ukraine until 2019
Did I blame Zelensky for cutting the water supply to Crimea in 2014?
“We are now dangerously close to nuclear war The dam attack is a turning point. The West must act urgently to stop Putin seeing unconventional warfare as a viable option”
Now he’s saying that we need to focus on an impending nuclear war? Which is it?
I’ve no idea. He has a ridiculous name
However I think his point here is valid. If Putin blew the dam - and the evidence points that way - it suggests he is prepared to keep escalating - and there aren’t many further steps he can take before he reaches the nuclear level
That doesn’t mean a bomb. Could be an “accident” at ZPP
The prime military significance of the dam event may well turn out to be ZPP-related.
You say "if Putin blew the dam", but a similar conclusion follows from "if Zelensky blew the dam".
It could be that both of these f*cking nutters probably with very short penises are pushing the world in the same direction.
(Yes I have started drinking again under Armageddo-stress after many years of quiet abstention.)
On the bright side a nuclear war will put lots of dust in the atmosphere and counteract the warming effect
Every cloud. The idea of a nuclear winter has been dumped, though, as probable Soviet propaganda, even though when I were a lad it was being pushed out by the authorities in Britain something rotten,
The idea of a nuclear winter has not been dumped its a known fact that a high density of particulate matter in the atmosphere reduces solar forcing. Trying to claim otherwise shows you are an idiot
You just have to read even the Wikipedia article on nuclear winter and compare it with what was propagandised in say Britain in say 1980. You can insult me as much as you like, but the nuclear war causes nuclear winter hypothesis is not advanced anywhere near as much as it was in the 1980s. It has in fact been blamed on KGB propaganda. I am looking for a source to show you that.
Edit: here you go, and this is by no means the only source:
Gosh so we have millenia of proof that volcanoes throwing dust into the atmosphere cools the atmosphere......yet you quote that....I insult you because you dont do science. It is the whole science behind the KT boundary you idiot
“We are now dangerously close to nuclear war The dam attack is a turning point. The West must act urgently to stop Putin seeing unconventional warfare as a viable option”
We probably are dangerously close to nuclear war, but where was Hamish when Ukraine cut most of the water supply to the Crimea during 2014-22 by closing the North Crimean Canal? If it's a war crime it must be a war crime whichever side does it. Since when was blowing up a dam unconventional anyway? And it's not at all clear who did it yet, although if the Russian assertion that Ukraine shelled it is anywhere near the truth they will probably furnish evidence within a few days...and if they don't...
Someone needs to bang Putin and Zelensky's heads together.
Zelenskyy was not president of Ukraine until 2019
Did I blame Zelensky for cutting the water supply to Crimea in 2014?
“We are now dangerously close to nuclear war The dam attack is a turning point. The West must act urgently to stop Putin seeing unconventional warfare as a viable option”
Now he’s saying that we need to focus on an impending nuclear war? Which is it?
I’ve no idea. He has a ridiculous name
However I think his point here is valid. If Putin blew the dam - and the evidence points that way - it suggests he is prepared to keep escalating - and there aren’t many further steps he can take before he reaches the nuclear level
That doesn’t mean a bomb. Could be an “accident” at ZPP
The prime military significance of the dam event may well turn out to be ZPP-related.
You say "if Putin blew the dam", but a similar conclusion follows from "if Zelensky blew the dam".
It could be that both of these f*cking nutters probably with very short penises are pushing the world in the same direction.
(Yes I have started drinking again under Armageddo-stress after many years of quiet abstention.)
On the bright side a nuclear war will put lots of dust in the atmosphere and counteract the warming effect
Every cloud. The idea of a nuclear winter has been dumped, though, as probable Soviet propaganda, even though when I were a lad it was being pushed out by the authorities in Britain something rotten,
The idea of a nuclear winter has not been dumped its a known fact that a high density of particulate matter in the atmosphere reduces solar forcing. Trying to claim otherwise shows you are an idiot
You just have to read even the Wikipedia article on nuclear winter and compare it with what was propagandised in say Britain in say 1980. You can insult me as much as you like, but the nuclear war causes nuclear winter hypothesis is not advanced anywhere near as much as it was in the 1980s. It has in fact been blamed on KGB propaganda. I am looking for a source to show you that.
Edit: here you go, and this is by no means the only source:
Gosh so we have millenia of proof that volcanoes throwing dust into the atmosphere cools the atmosphere......yet you quote that....I insult you because you dont do science. It is the whole science behind the KT boundary you idiot
K-t the k-pg is the same thing just two different names for the same thing
Yes, KT is the old terminology
So different names but same thing....I learnt it as KT so sue me
I'm just letting you know your information is a bit dated. You don't need to make a song and dance about it, it wasn't a criticism.
You said
"K–Pg, not KT. Meteorite impact, not volcanoes."
which implies k-pg was meteorite impact and kt was volcano's
No, they are on two separate lines to demonstrate that I am correcting two separate points. One, the terminology, two the mechanism.
You understood exactly what I meant by k-t so it was you just trying to be a smart arse as the terminology changed since I learnt about it. It was just a sneer rather than a point.
Yet both the SNP and Starmer Labour back a ban on new oil and gas developments, with only the Conservatives in favour
Scotland is the second most in favour of a ban, at 40%, second only to London on 46%.
Also, your figures seem to be wrong. Scotland is 36%, not 39% opposed to a ban.
Scotland is marginally IN FAVOUR of such a ban according to your figures.
Still more Scots are opposed to a ban on new oil developments than the 32% opposed to a ban in the UK overall. (Northerners are as supportive of a ban as Scots but both still significantly less than Londoners are).
Yet BOTH the SNP and Starmer Labour back a ban on new oil developments with only the Conservatives standing up for the more than a third of Scots who oppose a ban on new oil and gas developments in the North Sea
I'll do this as a picture so you can understand it better:
figures for Scotland
yes, ban it: 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤
no ban please: 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤
don't know: 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤 👤👤👤👤👤
And that No Ban group is over a third of Scottish voters and more than the UK average, yet ONLY the Scottish Conservatives are standing up for those who don't want a ban on new oil and gas extraction from the North Sea
Of course, in Indy-Scotland it wouldn't matter a jot what Westminster politicians think.
In Indy Scotland Scots would have an SNP government more in tune with Londoners than Scots on North Sea Oil extraction. Thankfully however the SNP support in Scotland is falling rapidly and Scottish Conservative support is far more resilient than UK Conservative support at present
Starmer's fall in his Scotland ratings are likely for some to be his ban on further oil licences especially in the North East, but I would suggest his stance on Brexit is not helping as we see the SNP calling him out as a Brexiteer
As I said earlier the SNP do appear to have stabilised their position and a lot will depend on the result of the police investigations
What sort of fucking world do we live in where Nadine fucking Dorries gets a peerage?
(Excuse my language, but really....)
I do not doubt we have had worse Peers. At least she's bought her peerage with slavish loyalty, rather than lucre.
Though it's a good enough excuse to bring up one of my personal proposals for instant reform of the HoL - MPs are not allowed to become Peers until 6 years (or two parliamentary terms, whichever is longer) have passed. To encourage them to earn a place through continued good works, not get rewarded or persuaded to retire by being kicked upstairs.
“We are now dangerously close to nuclear war The dam attack is a turning point. The West must act urgently to stop Putin seeing unconventional warfare as a viable option”
We probably are dangerously close to nuclear war, but where was Hamish when Ukraine cut most of the water supply to the Crimea during 2014-22 by closing the North Crimean Canal? If it's a war crime it must be a war crime whichever side does it. Since when was blowing up a dam unconventional anyway? And it's not at all clear who did it yet, although if the Russian assertion that Ukraine shelled it is anywhere near the truth they will probably furnish evidence within a few days...and if they don't...
Someone needs to bang Putin and Zelensky's heads together.
Zelenskyy was not president of Ukraine until 2019
Did I blame Zelensky for cutting the water supply to Crimea in 2014?
“We are now dangerously close to nuclear war The dam attack is a turning point. The West must act urgently to stop Putin seeing unconventional warfare as a viable option”
Now he’s saying that we need to focus on an impending nuclear war? Which is it?
I’ve no idea. He has a ridiculous name
However I think his point here is valid. If Putin blew the dam - and the evidence points that way - it suggests he is prepared to keep escalating - and there aren’t many further steps he can take before he reaches the nuclear level
That doesn’t mean a bomb. Could be an “accident” at ZPP
The prime military significance of the dam event may well turn out to be ZPP-related.
You say "if Putin blew the dam", but a similar conclusion follows from "if Zelensky blew the dam".
It could be that both of these f*cking nutters probably with very short penises are pushing the world in the same direction.
(Yes I have started drinking again under Armageddo-stress after many years of quiet abstention.)
On the bright side a nuclear war will put lots of dust in the atmosphere and counteract the warming effect
Every cloud. The idea of a nuclear winter has been dumped, though, as probable Soviet propaganda, even though when I were a lad it was being pushed out by the authorities in Britain something rotten,
The idea of a nuclear winter has not been dumped its a known fact that a high density of particulate matter in the atmosphere reduces solar forcing. Trying to claim otherwise shows you are an idiot
You just have to read even the Wikipedia article on nuclear winter and compare it with what was propagandised in say Britain in say 1980. You can insult me as much as you like, but the nuclear war causes nuclear winter hypothesis is not advanced anywhere near as much as it was in the 1980s. It has in fact been blamed on KGB propaganda. I am looking for a source to show you that.
Edit: here you go, and this is by no means the only source:
Gosh so we have millenia of proof that volcanoes throwing dust into the atmosphere cools the atmosphere......yet you quote that....I insult you because you dont do science. It is the whole science behind the KT boundary you idiot
K-t the k-pg is the same thing just two different names for the same thing
Yes, KT is the old terminology
So different names but same thing....I learnt it as KT so sue me
I'm just letting you know your information is a bit dated. You don't need to make a song and dance about it, it wasn't a criticism.
You said
"K–Pg, not KT. Meteorite impact, not volcanoes."
which implies k-pg was meteorite impact and kt was volcano's
meteorite impact is the closest analog to massive nuclear warheads detonating which was my point
Although you did mention volcanoes and not meteors tbf.
I mentioned volcanos as part of the same point, both meteors and volcano's put a lot of shit in the atmosphere which has a cooling effect. Are they the same no. But they both have a cooling effect
Yet both the SNP and Starmer Labour back a ban on new oil and gas developments, with only the Conservatives in favour
Scotland is the second most in favour of a ban, at 40%, second only to London on 46%.
Also, your figures seem to be wrong. Scotland is 36%, not 39% opposed to a ban.
Scotland is marginally IN FAVOUR of such a ban according to your figures.
Still more Scots are opposed to a ban on new oil developments than the 32% opposed to a ban in the UK overall. (Northerners are as supportive of a ban as Scots but both still significantly less than Londoners are).
Yet BOTH the SNP and Starmer Labour back a ban on new oil developments with only the Conservatives standing up for the more than a third of Scots who oppose a ban on new oil and gas developments in the North Sea
I'll do this as a picture so you can understand it better:
figures for Scotland
yes, ban it: 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤
no ban please: 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤
don't know: 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤 👤👤👤👤👤
And that No Ban group is over a third of Scottish voters and more than the UK average, yet ONLY the Scottish Conservatives are standing up for those who don't want a ban on new oil and gas extraction from the North Sea
Of course, in Indy-Scotland it wouldn't matter a jot what Westminster politicians think.
In Indy Scotland Scots would have an SNP government more in tune with Londoners than Scots on North Sea Oil extraction. Thankfully however the SNP support in Scotland is falling rapidly and Scottish Conservative support is far more resilient than UK Conservative support at present
Starmer's fall in his Scotland ratings are likely for some to be his ban on further oil licences especially in the North East, but I would suggest his stance on Brexit is not helping as we see the SNP calling him out as a Brexiteer
As I said earlier the SNP do appear to have stabilised their position and a lot will depend on the result of the police investigations
Even on today's poll the SNP vote is still down 8% on 2019
Yet both the SNP and Starmer Labour back a ban on new oil and gas developments, with only the Conservatives in favour
Scotland is the second most in favour of a ban, at 40%, second only to London on 46%.
Also, your figures seem to be wrong. Scotland is 36%, not 39% opposed to a ban.
Scotland is marginally IN FAVOUR of such a ban according to your figures.
Still more Scots are opposed to a ban on new oil developments than the 32% opposed to a ban in the UK overall. (Northerners are as supportive of a ban as Scots but both still significantly less than Londoners are).
Yet BOTH the SNP and Starmer Labour back a ban on new oil developments with only the Conservatives standing up for the more than a third of Scots who oppose a ban on new oil and gas developments in the North Sea
I'll do this as a picture so you can understand it better:
figures for Scotland
yes, ban it: 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤
no ban please: 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤
don't know: 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤 👤👤👤👤👤
And that No Ban group is over a third of Scottish voters and more than the UK average, yet ONLY the Scottish Conservatives are standing up for those who don't want a ban on new oil and gas extraction from the North Sea
Of course, in Indy-Scotland it wouldn't matter a jot what Westminster politicians think.
In Indy Scotland Scots would have an SNP government more in tune with Londoners than Scots on North Sea Oil extraction. Thankfully however the SNP support in Scotland is falling rapidly and Scottish Conservative support is far more resilient than UK Conservative support at present
Starmer's fall in his Scotland ratings are likely for some to be his ban on further oil licences especially in the North East, but I would suggest his stance on Brexit is not helping as we see the SNP calling him out as a Brexiteer
As I said earlier the SNP do appear to have stabilised their position and a lot will depend on the result of the police investigations
Even on today's poll the SNP vote is still down 8% on 2019
All very well and good, but I was hoping for a real implosion. Couldn't they reveal there's a second minivan or something, we haven't had anything juicy for weeks.
“We are now dangerously close to nuclear war The dam attack is a turning point. The West must act urgently to stop Putin seeing unconventional warfare as a viable option”
We probably are dangerously close to nuclear war, but where was Hamish when Ukraine cut most of the water supply to the Crimea during 2014-22 by closing the North Crimean Canal? If it's a war crime it must be a war crime whichever side does it. Since when was blowing up a dam unconventional anyway? And it's not at all clear who did it yet, although if the Russian assertion that Ukraine shelled it is anywhere near the truth they will probably furnish evidence within a few days...and if they don't...
Someone needs to bang Putin and Zelensky's heads together.
Zelenskyy was not president of Ukraine until 2019
Did I blame Zelensky for cutting the water supply to Crimea in 2014?
“We are now dangerously close to nuclear war The dam attack is a turning point. The West must act urgently to stop Putin seeing unconventional warfare as a viable option”
Now he’s saying that we need to focus on an impending nuclear war? Which is it?
I’ve no idea. He has a ridiculous name
However I think his point here is valid. If Putin blew the dam - and the evidence points that way - it suggests he is prepared to keep escalating - and there aren’t many further steps he can take before he reaches the nuclear level
That doesn’t mean a bomb. Could be an “accident” at ZPP
The prime military significance of the dam event may well turn out to be ZPP-related.
You say "if Putin blew the dam", but a similar conclusion follows from "if Zelensky blew the dam".
It could be that both of these f*cking nutters probably with very short penises are pushing the world in the same direction.
(Yes I have started drinking again under Armageddo-stress after many years of quiet abstention.)
On the bright side a nuclear war will put lots of dust in the atmosphere and counteract the warming effect
Every cloud. The idea of a nuclear winter has been dumped, though, as probable Soviet propaganda, even though when I were a lad it was being pushed out by the authorities in Britain something rotten,
The idea of a nuclear winter has not been dumped its a known fact that a high density of particulate matter in the atmosphere reduces solar forcing. Trying to claim otherwise shows you are an idiot
You just have to read even the Wikipedia article on nuclear winter and compare it with what was propagandised in say Britain in say 1980. You can insult me as much as you like, but the nuclear war causes nuclear winter hypothesis is not advanced anywhere near as much as it was in the 1980s. It has in fact been blamed on KGB propaganda. I am looking for a source to show you that.
Edit: here you go, and this is by no means the only source:
Gosh so we have millenia of proof that volcanoes throwing dust into the atmosphere cools the atmosphere......yet you quote that....I insult you because you dont do science. It is the whole science behind the KT boundary you idiot
K-t the k-pg is the same thing just two different names for the same thing
Yes, KT is the old terminology
So different names but same thing....I learnt it as KT so sue me
I'm just letting you know your information is a bit dated. You don't need to make a song and dance about it, it wasn't a criticism.
To be fair it was always dated... and wrong. Though that is no criticism of Pagan. It was lazy geologists who couldn't be bothered to correct the original mistake.
The K stands for Cretaceous Period which is the last period within the Mezozoic Era. The Mezozoic was followed by the Cenozoic which was also originally known as the Tertiary - the T in K-T. And the first period of the Cenozoic was the Paleogene.
So for consistency the boundary should either have been based on the Eras - in which case it would have been M-C (or M-T in old money) or based on periods - which is where we have settled and why it is now called the K-Pg.
The argument over meteorites vs volcanoes goes back and forward every few decades. mostly because there were both meteorties and volcanoes of the scale to cause extniction events very close to each other in time. And getting an accurate fix from 65 million years away is, well, not very accurate.
To be honest, under the stewardship of Rishi Sunak when Chancellor, the whole country could be put under a Section 114 notice.
The biggest disaster is the Victoria Square development which was meant to create a new commercial and residential heart for Woking but the £750 million previous value has been downgraded to £200 million. For a Borough Council (not a unitary), the scale of the debt is extraordinary - I'm also forced to ask why this measure wasn't taken when the Conservative administration at the Town Hall was piling up these debts.
What the fuck?
Woking has run up £2bn in debts???
I cannot quite conceive how some councils have managed to run up such huge debts. It should be impossible to manage that if they were trying to do it!
Woking is not the only one. But it is absolutely appalling that a Borough Council of perhaps 70,000 voters has managed to run up debt of £2bn.
Let that sink in for a second.
If the Council had borrowed £1,000 for each of those potential voters, it would be £70m. If they'd borrowed £10,000, it would be £700m.
The Council has run up debts equivalent to £30,000 per voter.
How on earth was this allowed to happen? There's no way Council tax per voter exceeds £1,000. But let's pretend that it is. Even in that scenario its debts are 30x its tax receipts. Absolute madness.
“We are now dangerously close to nuclear war The dam attack is a turning point. The West must act urgently to stop Putin seeing unconventional warfare as a viable option”
We probably are dangerously close to nuclear war, but where was Hamish when Ukraine cut most of the water supply to the Crimea during 2014-22 by closing the North Crimean Canal? If it's a war crime it must be a war crime whichever side does it. Since when was blowing up a dam unconventional anyway? And it's not at all clear who did it yet, although if the Russian assertion that Ukraine shelled it is anywhere near the truth they will probably furnish evidence within a few days...and if they don't...
Someone needs to bang Putin and Zelensky's heads together.
Zelenskyy was not president of Ukraine until 2019
Did I blame Zelensky for cutting the water supply to Crimea in 2014?
“We are now dangerously close to nuclear war The dam attack is a turning point. The West must act urgently to stop Putin seeing unconventional warfare as a viable option”
Now he’s saying that we need to focus on an impending nuclear war? Which is it?
I’ve no idea. He has a ridiculous name
However I think his point here is valid. If Putin blew the dam - and the evidence points that way - it suggests he is prepared to keep escalating - and there aren’t many further steps he can take before he reaches the nuclear level
That doesn’t mean a bomb. Could be an “accident” at ZPP
The prime military significance of the dam event may well turn out to be ZPP-related.
You say "if Putin blew the dam", but a similar conclusion follows from "if Zelensky blew the dam".
It could be that both of these f*cking nutters probably with very short penises are pushing the world in the same direction.
(Yes I have started drinking again under Armageddo-stress after many years of quiet abstention.)
On the bright side a nuclear war will put lots of dust in the atmosphere and counteract the warming effect
Every cloud. The idea of a nuclear winter has been dumped, though, as probable Soviet propaganda, even though when I were a lad it was being pushed out by the authorities in Britain something rotten,
The idea of a nuclear winter has not been dumped its a known fact that a high density of particulate matter in the atmosphere reduces solar forcing. Trying to claim otherwise shows you are an idiot
You just have to read even the Wikipedia article on nuclear winter and compare it with what was propagandised in say Britain in say 1980. You can insult me as much as you like, but the nuclear war causes nuclear winter hypothesis is not advanced anywhere near as much as it was in the 1980s. It has in fact been blamed on KGB propaganda. I am looking for a source to show you that.
Edit: here you go, and this is by no means the only source:
Gosh so we have millenia of proof that volcanoes throwing dust into the atmosphere cools the atmosphere......yet you quote that....I insult you because you dont do science. It is the whole science behind the KT boundary you idiot
K-t the k-pg is the same thing just two different names for the same thing
Yes, KT is the old terminology
So different names but same thing....I learnt it as KT so sue me
I'm just letting you know your information is a bit dated. You don't need to make a song and dance about it, it wasn't a criticism.
To be fair it was always dated... and wrong. Though that is no criticism of Pagan. It was lazy geologists who coldn't be bothered to correct the original mistake.
The K stands for Cretaceous Period which is the last period within the Mezozoic Era. The Mezozoic was followed by the Cenozoic which was also originally known as the Tertiary - the T in K-T. And the first period of the Cenozoic was the Paleogene.
So for consistency the boundary should either have been based on the Eras - in which case it would have been M-C (or M-T in old money) or based on periods - which is where we have settled and why it is now called the K-Pg.
The argument over meteorites vs volcanoes goes back and forward every few decades. mostly because there were both meteorties and volcanoes of the scale to cause extniction events very close to each other in time. And getting an accurate fix from 65 million years away is, well, not very accurate.
I would also imagine meteor strikes on that scale are likely to trigger volcano's so its sort of there were volcano's there were meteors then there were even more volcano's
To be honest, under the stewardship of Rishi Sunak when Chancellor, the whole country could be put under a Section 114 notice.
The biggest disaster is the Victoria Square development which was meant to create a new commercial and residential heart for Woking but the £750 million previous value has been downgraded to £200 million. For a Borough Council (not a unitary), the scale of the debt is extraordinary - I'm also forced to ask why this measure wasn't taken when the Conservative administration at the Town Hall was piling up these debts.
What the fuck?
Woking has run up £2bn in debts???
I cannot quite conceive how some councils have managed to run up such huge debts. It should be impossible to manage that if they were trying to do it!
Woking is not the only one. But it is absolutely appalling that a Borough Council of perhaps 70,000 voters has managed to run up debt of £2bn.
Let that sink in for a second.
If the Council had borrowed £1,000 for each of those potential voters, it would be £70m. If they'd borrowed £10,000, it would be £700m.
The Council has run up debts equivalent to £30,000 per voter.
How on earth was this allowed to happen? There's no way Council tax per voter exceeds £1,000. But let's pretend that it is. Even in that scenario its debts are 30x its tax receipts. Absolute madness.
Are the Tory Councillors personally liable in any way? You know, like the Westminster Tories for their gerrymandering.
Yet both the SNP and Starmer Labour back a ban on new oil and gas developments, with only the Conservatives in favour
Scotland is the second most in favour of a ban, at 40%, second only to London on 46%.
Also, your figures seem to be wrong. Scotland is 36%, not 39% opposed to a ban.
Scotland is marginally IN FAVOUR of such a ban according to your figures.
Still more Scots are opposed to a ban on new oil developments than the 32% opposed to a ban in the UK overall. (Northerners are as supportive of a ban as Scots but both still significantly less than Londoners are).
Yet BOTH the SNP and Starmer Labour back a ban on new oil developments with only the Conservatives standing up for the more than a third of Scots who oppose a ban on new oil and gas developments in the North Sea
I'll do this as a picture so you can understand it better:
figures for Scotland
yes, ban it: 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤
no ban please: 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤
don't know: 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤 👤👤👤👤👤
And that No Ban group is over a third of Scottish voters and more than the UK average, yet ONLY the Scottish Conservatives are standing up for those who don't want a ban on new oil and gas extraction from the North Sea
Of course, in Indy-Scotland it wouldn't matter a jot what Westminster politicians think.
In Indy Scotland Scots would have an SNP government more in tune with Londoners than Scots on North Sea Oil extraction. Thankfully however the SNP support in Scotland is falling rapidly and Scottish Conservative support is far more resilient than UK Conservative support at present
Starmer's fall in his Scotland ratings are likely for some to be his ban on further oil licences especially in the North East, but I would suggest his stance on Brexit is not helping as we see the SNP calling him out as a Brexiteer
As I said earlier the SNP do appear to have stabilised their position and a lot will depend on the result of the police investigations
Even on today's poll the SNP vote is still down 8% on 2019
It would not have been unreasonable to see a double digit fall
The Rutherglen by election will be interesting as will the result of the police investigations
While support for independence has fallen it still remains in the mid forties and the SNP retain considerable support
To be honest, under the stewardship of Rishi Sunak when Chancellor, the whole country could be put under a Section 114 notice.
The biggest disaster is the Victoria Square development which was meant to create a new commercial and residential heart for Woking but the £750 million previous value has been downgraded to £200 million. For a Borough Council (not a unitary), the scale of the debt is extraordinary - I'm also forced to ask why this measure wasn't taken when the Conservative administration at the Town Hall was piling up these debts.
What the fuck?
Woking has run up £2bn in debts???
I cannot quite conceive how some councils have managed to run up such huge debts. It should be impossible to manage that if they were trying to do it!
Woking is not the only one. But it is absolutely appalling that a Borough Council of perhaps 70,000 voters has managed to run up debt of £2bn.
Let that sink in for a second.
If the Council had borrowed £1,000 for each of those potential voters, it would be £70m. If they'd borrowed £10,000, it would be £700m.
The Council has run up debts equivalent to £30,000 per voter.
How on earth was this allowed to happen? There's no way Council tax per voter exceeds £1,000. But let's pretend that it is. Even in that scenario its debts are 30x its tax receipts. Absolute madness.
I know a lot of people involved in local government, political and employee. This sort of thing is just as baffling to them, since the very idea of doing something so reckless wouldn't survive 5 minutes in any competently staffed and run authority.
Debts? Sure, that's life. Many not completely terrible ones close to tipping over? Definitely. But these egregious examples? Yeesh.
“We are now dangerously close to nuclear war The dam attack is a turning point. The West must act urgently to stop Putin seeing unconventional warfare as a viable option”
We probably are dangerously close to nuclear war, but where was Hamish when Ukraine cut most of the water supply to the Crimea during 2014-22 by closing the North Crimean Canal? If it's a war crime it must be a war crime whichever side does it. Since when was blowing up a dam unconventional anyway? And it's not at all clear who did it yet, although if the Russian assertion that Ukraine shelled it is anywhere near the truth they will probably furnish evidence within a few days...and if they don't...
Someone needs to bang Putin and Zelensky's heads together.
Zelenskyy was not president of Ukraine until 2019
Did I blame Zelensky for cutting the water supply to Crimea in 2014?
“We are now dangerously close to nuclear war The dam attack is a turning point. The West must act urgently to stop Putin seeing unconventional warfare as a viable option”
Now he’s saying that we need to focus on an impending nuclear war? Which is it?
I’ve no idea. He has a ridiculous name
However I think his point here is valid. If Putin blew the dam - and the evidence points that way - it suggests he is prepared to keep escalating - and there aren’t many further steps he can take before he reaches the nuclear level
That doesn’t mean a bomb. Could be an “accident” at ZPP
The prime military significance of the dam event may well turn out to be ZPP-related.
You say "if Putin blew the dam", but a similar conclusion follows from "if Zelensky blew the dam".
It could be that both of these f*cking nutters probably with very short penises are pushing the world in the same direction.
(Yes I have started drinking again under Armageddo-stress after many years of quiet abstention.)
On the bright side a nuclear war will put lots of dust in the atmosphere and counteract the warming effect
Every cloud. The idea of a nuclear winter has been dumped, though, as probable Soviet propaganda, even though when I were a lad it was being pushed out by the authorities in Britain something rotten,
The idea of a nuclear winter has not been dumped its a known fact that a high density of particulate matter in the atmosphere reduces solar forcing. Trying to claim otherwise shows you are an idiot
You just have to read even the Wikipedia article on nuclear winter and compare it with what was propagandised in say Britain in say 1980. You can insult me as much as you like, but the nuclear war causes nuclear winter hypothesis is not advanced anywhere near as much as it was in the 1980s. It has in fact been blamed on KGB propaganda. I am looking for a source to show you that.
Edit: here you go, and this is by no means the only source:
Gosh so we have millenia of proof that volcanoes throwing dust into the atmosphere cools the atmosphere......yet you quote that....I insult you because you dont do science. It is the whole science behind the KT boundary you idiot
K-t the k-pg is the same thing just two different names for the same thing
Yes, KT is the old terminology
So different names but same thing....I learnt it as KT so sue me
I'm just letting you know your information is a bit dated. You don't need to make a song and dance about it, it wasn't a criticism.
To be fair it was always dated... and wrong. Though that is no criticism of Pagan. It was lazy geologists who couldn't be bothered to correct the original mistake.
The K stands for Cretaceous Period which is the last period within the Mezozoic Era. The Mezozoic was followed by the Cenozoic which was also originally known as the Tertiary - the T in K-T. And the first period of the Cenozoic was the Paleogene.
So for consistency the boundary should either have been based on the Eras - in which case it would have been M-C (or M-T in old money) or based on periods - which is where we have settled and why it is now called the K-Pg.
The argument over meteorites vs volcanoes goes back and forward every few decades. mostly because there were both meteorties and volcanoes of the scale to cause extniction events very close to each other in time. And getting an accurate fix from 65 million years away is, well, not very accurate.
To be honest, under the stewardship of Rishi Sunak when Chancellor, the whole country could be put under a Section 114 notice.
The biggest disaster is the Victoria Square development which was meant to create a new commercial and residential heart for Woking but the £750 million previous value has been downgraded to £200 million. For a Borough Council (not a unitary), the scale of the debt is extraordinary - I'm also forced to ask why this measure wasn't taken when the Conservative administration at the Town Hall was piling up these debts.
What the fuck?
Woking has run up £2bn in debts???
Population c. 100k. That's £20,000 each - much more if you exclude kids and non-workers.
Honestly, the irresponsibility of these Tory councils beggars belief.
I'm sure there are some pretty irresponsible Labour and LibDem councils too. But £2bn. That's insane.
Did no-one stop and think: you know, this is a lot of money. Did no-one ask, what would happen if interest rates went up?
“We are now dangerously close to nuclear war The dam attack is a turning point. The West must act urgently to stop Putin seeing unconventional warfare as a viable option”
We probably are dangerously close to nuclear war, but where was Hamish when Ukraine cut most of the water supply to the Crimea during 2014-22 by closing the North Crimean Canal? If it's a war crime it must be a war crime whichever side does it. Since when was blowing up a dam unconventional anyway? And it's not at all clear who did it yet, although if the Russian assertion that Ukraine shelled it is anywhere near the truth they will probably furnish evidence within a few days...and if they don't...
Someone needs to bang Putin and Zelensky's heads together.
Zelenskyy was not president of Ukraine until 2019
Did I blame Zelensky for cutting the water supply to Crimea in 2014?
“We are now dangerously close to nuclear war The dam attack is a turning point. The West must act urgently to stop Putin seeing unconventional warfare as a viable option”
Now he’s saying that we need to focus on an impending nuclear war? Which is it?
I’ve no idea. He has a ridiculous name
However I think his point here is valid. If Putin blew the dam - and the evidence points that way - it suggests he is prepared to keep escalating - and there aren’t many further steps he can take before he reaches the nuclear level
That doesn’t mean a bomb. Could be an “accident” at ZPP
The prime military significance of the dam event may well turn out to be ZPP-related.
You say "if Putin blew the dam", but a similar conclusion follows from "if Zelensky blew the dam".
It could be that both of these f*cking nutters probably with very short penises are pushing the world in the same direction.
(Yes I have started drinking again under Armageddo-stress after many years of quiet abstention.)
On the bright side a nuclear war will put lots of dust in the atmosphere and counteract the warming effect
Every cloud. The idea of a nuclear winter has been dumped, though, as probable Soviet propaganda, even though when I were a lad it was being pushed out by the authorities in Britain something rotten,
The idea of a nuclear winter has not been dumped its a known fact that a high density of particulate matter in the atmosphere reduces solar forcing. Trying to claim otherwise shows you are an idiot
You just have to read even the Wikipedia article on nuclear winter and compare it with what was propagandised in say Britain in say 1980. You can insult me as much as you like, but the nuclear war causes nuclear winter hypothesis is not advanced anywhere near as much as it was in the 1980s. It has in fact been blamed on KGB propaganda. I am looking for a source to show you that.
Edit: here you go, and this is by no means the only source:
Gosh so we have millenia of proof that volcanoes throwing dust into the atmosphere cools the atmosphere......yet you quote that....I insult you because you dont do science. It is the whole science behind the KT boundary you idiot
K-t the k-pg is the same thing just two different names for the same thing
Yes, KT is the old terminology
So different names but same thing....I learnt it as KT so sue me
I'm just letting you know your information is a bit dated. You don't need to make a song and dance about it, it wasn't a criticism.
To be fair it was always dated... and wrong. Though that is no criticism of Pagan. It was lazy geologists who coldn't be bothered to correct the original mistake.
The K stands for Cretaceous Period which is the last period within the Mezozoic Era. The Mezozoic was followed by the Cenozoic which was also originally known as the Tertiary - the T in K-T. And the first period of the Cenozoic was the Paleogene.
So for consistency the boundary should either have been based on the Eras - in which case it would have been M-C (or M-T in old money) or based on periods - which is where we have settled and why it is now called the K-Pg.
The argument over meteorites vs volcanoes goes back and forward every few decades. mostly because there were both meteorties and volcanoes of the scale to cause extniction events very close to each other in time. And getting an accurate fix from 65 million years away is, well, not very accurate.
I'll defer to your greater knowledge and training on this. It was my understanding that something like a consensus was formed now around meteorite impact being the main driver but if you think that volcanism is still "in play" I accept your verdict.
Possible for the two to be linked - Deccan Traps eruptiuon is suspiciously close in time and precisely opposite in place (diametrically across the globe) to be a sort of contre-coup effect of the Yucatan impact.
“We are now dangerously close to nuclear war The dam attack is a turning point. The West must act urgently to stop Putin seeing unconventional warfare as a viable option”
We probably are dangerously close to nuclear war, but where was Hamish when Ukraine cut most of the water supply to the Crimea during 2014-22 by closing the North Crimean Canal? If it's a war crime it must be a war crime whichever side does it. Since when was blowing up a dam unconventional anyway? And it's not at all clear who did it yet, although if the Russian assertion that Ukraine shelled it is anywhere near the truth they will probably furnish evidence within a few days...and if they don't...
Someone needs to bang Putin and Zelensky's heads together.
Zelenskyy was not president of Ukraine until 2019
Did I blame Zelensky for cutting the water supply to Crimea in 2014?
“We are now dangerously close to nuclear war The dam attack is a turning point. The West must act urgently to stop Putin seeing unconventional warfare as a viable option”
Now he’s saying that we need to focus on an impending nuclear war? Which is it?
I’ve no idea. He has a ridiculous name
However I think his point here is valid. If Putin blew the dam - and the evidence points that way - it suggests he is prepared to keep escalating - and there aren’t many further steps he can take before he reaches the nuclear level
That doesn’t mean a bomb. Could be an “accident” at ZPP
The prime military significance of the dam event may well turn out to be ZPP-related.
You say "if Putin blew the dam", but a similar conclusion follows from "if Zelensky blew the dam".
It could be that both of these f*cking nutters probably with very short penises are pushing the world in the same direction.
(Yes I have started drinking again under Armageddo-stress after many years of quiet abstention.)
On the bright side a nuclear war will put lots of dust in the atmosphere and counteract the warming effect
Every cloud. The idea of a nuclear winter has been dumped, though, as probable Soviet propaganda, even though when I were a lad it was being pushed out by the authorities in Britain something rotten,
The idea of a nuclear winter has not been dumped its a known fact that a high density of particulate matter in the atmosphere reduces solar forcing. Trying to claim otherwise shows you are an idiot
You just have to read even the Wikipedia article on nuclear winter and compare it with what was propagandised in say Britain in say 1980. You can insult me as much as you like, but the nuclear war causes nuclear winter hypothesis is not advanced anywhere near as much as it was in the 1980s. It has in fact been blamed on KGB propaganda. I am looking for a source to show you that.
Edit: here you go, and this is by no means the only source:
Gosh so we have millenia of proof that volcanoes throwing dust into the atmosphere cools the atmosphere......yet you quote that....I insult you because you dont do science. It is the whole science behind the KT boundary you idiot
K-t the k-pg is the same thing just two different names for the same thing
Yes, KT is the old terminology
So different names but same thing....I learnt it as KT so sue me
I'm just letting you know your information is a bit dated. You don't need to make a song and dance about it, it wasn't a criticism.
You said
"K–Pg, not KT. Meteorite impact, not volcanoes."
which implies k-pg was meteorite impact and kt was volcano's
meteorite impact is the closest analog to massive nuclear warheads detonating which was my point
Astonishingly, the energy released by the impact of the Chicxulub meteor is estimated to be equivalent to about 72 teratonnes of TNT, which has got to be far more than all the world's nukes combined.
“We are now dangerously close to nuclear war The dam attack is a turning point. The West must act urgently to stop Putin seeing unconventional warfare as a viable option”
We probably are dangerously close to nuclear war, but where was Hamish when Ukraine cut most of the water supply to the Crimea during 2014-22 by closing the North Crimean Canal? If it's a war crime it must be a war crime whichever side does it. Since when was blowing up a dam unconventional anyway? And it's not at all clear who did it yet, although if the Russian assertion that Ukraine shelled it is anywhere near the truth they will probably furnish evidence within a few days...and if they don't...
Someone needs to bang Putin and Zelensky's heads together.
Zelenskyy was not president of Ukraine until 2019
Did I blame Zelensky for cutting the water supply to Crimea in 2014?
“We are now dangerously close to nuclear war The dam attack is a turning point. The West must act urgently to stop Putin seeing unconventional warfare as a viable option”
Now he’s saying that we need to focus on an impending nuclear war? Which is it?
I’ve no idea. He has a ridiculous name
However I think his point here is valid. If Putin blew the dam - and the evidence points that way - it suggests he is prepared to keep escalating - and there aren’t many further steps he can take before he reaches the nuclear level
That doesn’t mean a bomb. Could be an “accident” at ZPP
The prime military significance of the dam event may well turn out to be ZPP-related.
You say "if Putin blew the dam", but a similar conclusion follows from "if Zelensky blew the dam".
It could be that both of these f*cking nutters probably with very short penises are pushing the world in the same direction.
(Yes I have started drinking again under Armageddo-stress after many years of quiet abstention.)
On the bright side a nuclear war will put lots of dust in the atmosphere and counteract the warming effect
Every cloud. The idea of a nuclear winter has been dumped, though, as probable Soviet propaganda, even though when I were a lad it was being pushed out by the authorities in Britain something rotten,
The idea of a nuclear winter has not been dumped its a known fact that a high density of particulate matter in the atmosphere reduces solar forcing. Trying to claim otherwise shows you are an idiot
You just have to read even the Wikipedia article on nuclear winter and compare it with what was propagandised in say Britain in say 1980. You can insult me as much as you like, but the nuclear war causes nuclear winter hypothesis is not advanced anywhere near as much as it was in the 1980s. It has in fact been blamed on KGB propaganda. I am looking for a source to show you that.
Edit: here you go, and this is by no means the only source:
Gosh so we have millenia of proof that volcanoes throwing dust into the atmosphere cools the atmosphere......yet you quote that....I insult you because you dont do science. It is the whole science behind the KT boundary you idiot
K-t the k-pg is the same thing just two different names for the same thing
Yes, KT is the old terminology
So different names but same thing....I learnt it as KT so sue me
I'm just letting you know your information is a bit dated. You don't need to make a song and dance about it, it wasn't a criticism.
You said
"K–Pg, not KT. Meteorite impact, not volcanoes."
which implies k-pg was meteorite impact and kt was volcano's
meteorite impact is the closest analog to massive nuclear warheads detonating which was my point
Astonishingly, the energy released by the impact of the Chicxulub meteor is estimated to be equivalent to about 72 teratonnes of TNT, which has got to be far more than all the world's nukes combined.
Also, the specific chemical composition of the rocks there was particularly unfortinate in terms of atmospheric effects of the vaporized strata, though alas I forget the details of the hypothesis.
Yet both the SNP and Starmer Labour back a ban on new oil and gas developments, with only the Conservatives in favour
Scotland is the second most in favour of a ban, at 40%, second only to London on 46%.
Also, your figures seem to be wrong. Scotland is 36%, not 39% opposed to a ban.
Scotland is marginally IN FAVOUR of such a ban according to your figures.
Still more Scots are opposed to a ban on new oil developments than the 32% opposed to a ban in the UK overall. (Northerners are as supportive of a ban as Scots but both still significantly less than Londoners are).
Yet BOTH the SNP and Starmer Labour back a ban on new oil developments with only the Conservatives standing up for the more than a third of Scots who oppose a ban on new oil and gas developments in the North Sea
I'll do this as a picture so you can understand it better:
figures for Scotland
yes, ban it: 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤
no ban please: 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤
don't know: 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤 👤👤👤👤👤
And that No Ban group is over a third of Scottish voters and more than the UK average, yet ONLY the Scottish Conservatives are standing up for those who don't want a ban on new oil and gas extraction from the North Sea
Of course, in Indy-Scotland it wouldn't matter a jot what Westminster politicians think.
In Indy Scotland Scots would have an SNP government more in tune with Londoners than Scots on North Sea Oil extraction. Thankfully however the SNP support in Scotland is falling rapidly and Scottish Conservative support is far more resilient than UK Conservative support at present
Starmer's fall in his Scotland ratings are likely for some to be his ban on further oil licences especially in the North East, but I would suggest his stance on Brexit is not helping as we see the SNP calling him out as a Brexiteer
As I said earlier the SNP do appear to have stabilised their position and a lot will depend on the result of the police investigations
Even on today's poll the SNP vote is still down 8% on 2019
It would not have been unreasonable to see a double digit fall
The Rutherglen by election will be interesting as will the result of the police investigations
While support for independence has fallen it still remains in the mid forties and the SNP retain considerable support
To be honest, under the stewardship of Rishi Sunak when Chancellor, the whole country could be put under a Section 114 notice.
The biggest disaster is the Victoria Square development which was meant to create a new commercial and residential heart for Woking but the £750 million previous value has been downgraded to £200 million. For a Borough Council (not a unitary), the scale of the debt is extraordinary - I'm also forced to ask why this measure wasn't taken when the Conservative administration at the Town Hall was piling up these debts.
What the fuck?
Woking has run up £2bn in debts???
Population c. 100k. That's £20,000 each - much more if you exclude kids and non-workers.
Honestly, the irresponsibility of these Tory councils beggars belief.
I'm sure there are some pretty irresponsible Labour and LibDem councils too. But £2bn. That's insane.
Did no-one stop and think: you know, this is a lot of money. Did no-one ask, what would happen if interest rates went up?
I have no doubt that no one stopped to think. Slough council went bankrupt last year. This is an example of slough council in 2020....they owned a 4 floor building. They were on the ground floor.Our company rented the first floor, half the second floor was rented and the third floor had been empty for four years. Our lease came up for renewal. The company said we want a reduction (think 150k a year to 100k). Council went no its going to be 300k so we went fuck off and moved builiding so they the had 2.5 floors unrented
To be honest, under the stewardship of Rishi Sunak when Chancellor, the whole country could be put under a Section 114 notice.
The biggest disaster is the Victoria Square development which was meant to create a new commercial and residential heart for Woking but the £750 million previous value has been downgraded to £200 million. For a Borough Council (not a unitary), the scale of the debt is extraordinary - I'm also forced to ask why this measure wasn't taken when the Conservative administration at the Town Hall was piling up these debts.
What the fuck?
Woking has run up £2bn in debts???
I cannot quite conceive how some councils have managed to run up such huge debts. It should be impossible to manage that if they were trying to do it!
Woking is not the only one. But it is absolutely appalling that a Borough Council of perhaps 70,000 voters has managed to run up debt of £2bn.
Let that sink in for a second.
If the Council had borrowed £1,000 for each of those potential voters, it would be £70m. If they'd borrowed £10,000, it would be £700m.
The Council has run up debts equivalent to £30,000 per voter.
How on earth was this allowed to happen? There's no way Council tax per voter exceeds £1,000. But let's pretend that it is. Even in that scenario its debts are 30x its tax receipts. Absolute madness.
Worse than that. Being a District / Borough, proposed Band D council tax rises is to £263 per year.
“We are now dangerously close to nuclear war The dam attack is a turning point. The West must act urgently to stop Putin seeing unconventional warfare as a viable option”
We probably are dangerously close to nuclear war, but where was Hamish when Ukraine cut most of the water supply to the Crimea during 2014-22 by closing the North Crimean Canal? If it's a war crime it must be a war crime whichever side does it. Since when was blowing up a dam unconventional anyway? And it's not at all clear who did it yet, although if the Russian assertion that Ukraine shelled it is anywhere near the truth they will probably furnish evidence within a few days...and if they don't...
Someone needs to bang Putin and Zelensky's heads together.
Zelenskyy was not president of Ukraine until 2019
Did I blame Zelensky for cutting the water supply to Crimea in 2014?
“We are now dangerously close to nuclear war The dam attack is a turning point. The West must act urgently to stop Putin seeing unconventional warfare as a viable option”
Now he’s saying that we need to focus on an impending nuclear war? Which is it?
I’ve no idea. He has a ridiculous name
However I think his point here is valid. If Putin blew the dam - and the evidence points that way - it suggests he is prepared to keep escalating - and there aren’t many further steps he can take before he reaches the nuclear level
That doesn’t mean a bomb. Could be an “accident” at ZPP
The prime military significance of the dam event may well turn out to be ZPP-related.
You say "if Putin blew the dam", but a similar conclusion follows from "if Zelensky blew the dam".
It could be that both of these f*cking nutters probably with very short penises are pushing the world in the same direction.
(Yes I have started drinking again under Armageddo-stress after many years of quiet abstention.)
On the bright side a nuclear war will put lots of dust in the atmosphere and counteract the warming effect
Every cloud. The idea of a nuclear winter has been dumped, though, as probable Soviet propaganda, even though when I were a lad it was being pushed out by the authorities in Britain something rotten,
The idea of a nuclear winter has not been dumped its a known fact that a high density of particulate matter in the atmosphere reduces solar forcing. Trying to claim otherwise shows you are an idiot
You just have to read even the Wikipedia article on nuclear winter and compare it with what was propagandised in say Britain in say 1980. You can insult me as much as you like, but the nuclear war causes nuclear winter hypothesis is not advanced anywhere near as much as it was in the 1980s. It has in fact been blamed on KGB propaganda. I am looking for a source to show you that.
Edit: here you go, and this is by no means the only source:
Gosh so we have millenia of proof that volcanoes throwing dust into the atmosphere cools the atmosphere......yet you quote that....I insult you because you dont do science. It is the whole science behind the KT boundary you idiot
K-t the k-pg is the same thing just two different names for the same thing
Yes, KT is the old terminology
So different names but same thing....I learnt it as KT so sue me
I'm just letting you know your information is a bit dated. You don't need to make a song and dance about it, it wasn't a criticism.
You said
"K–Pg, not KT. Meteorite impact, not volcanoes."
which implies k-pg was meteorite impact and kt was volcano's
meteorite impact is the closest analog to massive nuclear warheads detonating which was my point
Although you did mention volcanoes and not meteors tbf.
I mentioned volcanos as part of the same point, both meteors and volcano's put a lot of shit in the atmosphere which has a cooling effect. Are they the same no. But they both have a cooling effect
On that we are agreed. The question is would a full-scale nuclear war lead to a multi-year 'winter'?
I don't know. And on balance I don't care either as we'll all be screwed with or without that winter.
“We are now dangerously close to nuclear war The dam attack is a turning point. The West must act urgently to stop Putin seeing unconventional warfare as a viable option”
We probably are dangerously close to nuclear war, but where was Hamish when Ukraine cut most of the water supply to the Crimea during 2014-22 by closing the North Crimean Canal? If it's a war crime it must be a war crime whichever side does it. Since when was blowing up a dam unconventional anyway? And it's not at all clear who did it yet, although if the Russian assertion that Ukraine shelled it is anywhere near the truth they will probably furnish evidence within a few days...and if they don't...
Someone needs to bang Putin and Zelensky's heads together.
Zelenskyy was not president of Ukraine until 2019
Did I blame Zelensky for cutting the water supply to Crimea in 2014?
“We are now dangerously close to nuclear war The dam attack is a turning point. The West must act urgently to stop Putin seeing unconventional warfare as a viable option”
Now he’s saying that we need to focus on an impending nuclear war? Which is it?
I’ve no idea. He has a ridiculous name
However I think his point here is valid. If Putin blew the dam - and the evidence points that way - it suggests he is prepared to keep escalating - and there aren’t many further steps he can take before he reaches the nuclear level
That doesn’t mean a bomb. Could be an “accident” at ZPP
The prime military significance of the dam event may well turn out to be ZPP-related.
You say "if Putin blew the dam", but a similar conclusion follows from "if Zelensky blew the dam".
It could be that both of these f*cking nutters probably with very short penises are pushing the world in the same direction.
(Yes I have started drinking again under Armageddo-stress after many years of quiet abstention.)
On the bright side a nuclear war will put lots of dust in the atmosphere and counteract the warming effect
Every cloud. The idea of a nuclear winter has been dumped, though, as probable Soviet propaganda, even though when I were a lad it was being pushed out by the authorities in Britain something rotten,
The idea of a nuclear winter has not been dumped its a known fact that a high density of particulate matter in the atmosphere reduces solar forcing. Trying to claim otherwise shows you are an idiot
You just have to read even the Wikipedia article on nuclear winter and compare it with what was propagandised in say Britain in say 1980. You can insult me as much as you like, but the nuclear war causes nuclear winter hypothesis is not advanced anywhere near as much as it was in the 1980s. It has in fact been blamed on KGB propaganda. I am looking for a source to show you that.
Edit: here you go, and this is by no means the only source:
Gosh so we have millenia of proof that volcanoes throwing dust into the atmosphere cools the atmosphere......yet you quote that....I insult you because you dont do science. It is the whole science behind the KT boundary you idiot
K-t the k-pg is the same thing just two different names for the same thing
Yes, KT is the old terminology
So different names but same thing....I learnt it as KT so sue me
I'm just letting you know your information is a bit dated. You don't need to make a song and dance about it, it wasn't a criticism.
You said
"K–Pg, not KT. Meteorite impact, not volcanoes."
which implies k-pg was meteorite impact and kt was volcano's
meteorite impact is the closest analog to massive nuclear warheads detonating which was my point
Astonishingly, the energy released by the impact of the Chicxulub meteor is estimated to be equivalent to about 72 teratonnes of TNT, which has got to be far more than all the world's nukes combined.
About 35,000 times the yield of all the world's nukes....
Yet both the SNP and Starmer Labour back a ban on new oil and gas developments, with only the Conservatives in favour
Scotland is the second most in favour of a ban, at 40%, second only to London on 46%.
Also, your figures seem to be wrong. Scotland is 36%, not 39% opposed to a ban.
Scotland is marginally IN FAVOUR of such a ban according to your figures.
Still more Scots are opposed to a ban on new oil developments than the 32% opposed to a ban in the UK overall. (Northerners are as supportive of a ban as Scots but both still significantly less than Londoners are).
Yet BOTH the SNP and Starmer Labour back a ban on new oil developments with only the Conservatives standing up for the more than a third of Scots who oppose a ban on new oil and gas developments in the North Sea
I'll do this as a picture so you can understand it better:
figures for Scotland
yes, ban it: 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤
no ban please: 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤
don't know: 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤 👤👤👤👤👤
And that No Ban group is over a third of Scottish voters and more than the UK average, yet ONLY the Scottish Conservatives are standing up for those who don't want a ban on new oil and gas extraction from the North Sea
Of course, in Indy-Scotland it wouldn't matter a jot what Westminster politicians think.
In Indy Scotland Scots would have an SNP government more in tune with Londoners than Scots on North Sea Oil extraction. Thankfully however the SNP support in Scotland is falling rapidly and Scottish Conservative support is far more resilient than UK Conservative support at present
Starmer's fall in his Scotland ratings are likely for some to be his ban on further oil licences especially in the North East, but I would suggest his stance on Brexit is not helping as we see the SNP calling him out as a Brexiteer
As I said earlier the SNP do appear to have stabilised their position and a lot will depend on the result of the police investigations
Even on today's poll the SNP vote is still down 8% on 2019
It would not have been unreasonable to see a double digit fall
The Rutherglen by election will be interesting as will the result of the police investigations
While support for independence has fallen it still remains in the mid forties and the SNP retain considerable support
I'm note sure independence support has fallen. The last 4 R&W have shown YES 42, 44, 42, 43 NO 51, 50, 52, 50 (Mar, Apr, May, Jun)
That looks static to me. The last one before R&W was Ipsos, which showed YES 51 NO 45 but Ipsos tends to show higher YES in general, so you probably shouldn't try to make trends between Ipsos and R&W polls.
It has a 'wee' bit but not decisively and certainly today's Scottish poll is better for the SNP then they could have expected
To be honest, under the stewardship of Rishi Sunak when Chancellor, the whole country could be put under a Section 114 notice.
The biggest disaster is the Victoria Square development which was meant to create a new commercial and residential heart for Woking but the £750 million previous value has been downgraded to £200 million. For a Borough Council (not a unitary), the scale of the debt is extraordinary - I'm also forced to ask why this measure wasn't taken when the Conservative administration at the Town Hall was piling up these debts.
What the fuck?
Woking has run up £2bn in debts???
Population c. 100k. That's £20,000 each - much more if you exclude kids and non-workers.
Honestly, the irresponsibility of these Tory councils beggars belief.
I'm sure there are some pretty irresponsible Labour and LibDem councils too. But £2bn. That's insane.
Did no-one stop and think: you know, this is a lot of money. Did no-one ask, what would happen if interest rates went up?
Yes, of course I was making a political point. But frankly, I'm not aware of a Labour or Lib Dem authority being quite so imprudent as to run up debts of £2bn on what is, in effect, a modestly-sized town council. It's preposterous.
To be honest, under the stewardship of Rishi Sunak when Chancellor, the whole country could be put under a Section 114 notice.
The biggest disaster is the Victoria Square development which was meant to create a new commercial and residential heart for Woking but the £750 million previous value has been downgraded to £200 million. For a Borough Council (not a unitary), the scale of the debt is extraordinary - I'm also forced to ask why this measure wasn't taken when the Conservative administration at the Town Hall was piling up these debts.
What the fuck?
Woking has run up £2bn in debts???
I cannot quite conceive how some councils have managed to run up such huge debts. It should be impossible to manage that if they were trying to do it!
Woking is not the only one. But it is absolutely appalling that a Borough Council of perhaps 70,000 voters has managed to run up debt of £2bn.
Let that sink in for a second.
If the Council had borrowed £1,000 for each of those potential voters, it would be £70m. If they'd borrowed £10,000, it would be £700m.
The Council has run up debts equivalent to £30,000 per voter.
How on earth was this allowed to happen? There's no way Council tax per voter exceeds £1,000. But let's pretend that it is. Even in that scenario its debts are 30x its tax receipts. Absolute madness.
Worse than that. Being a District / Borough, proposed Band D council tax rises is to £263 per year.
Core funding for Woking council is £16 million a year.
Yet both the SNP and Starmer Labour back a ban on new oil and gas developments, with only the Conservatives in favour
Scotland is the second most in favour of a ban, at 40%, second only to London on 46%.
Also, your figures seem to be wrong. Scotland is 36%, not 39% opposed to a ban.
Scotland is marginally IN FAVOUR of such a ban according to your figures.
Still more Scots are opposed to a ban on new oil developments than the 32% opposed to a ban in the UK overall. (Northerners are as supportive of a ban as Scots but both still significantly less than Londoners are).
Yet BOTH the SNP and Starmer Labour back a ban on new oil developments with only the Conservatives standing up for the more than a third of Scots who oppose a ban on new oil and gas developments in the North Sea
I'll do this as a picture so you can understand it better:
figures for Scotland
yes, ban it: 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤
no ban please: 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤
don't know: 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤 👤👤👤👤👤
And that No Ban group is over a third of Scottish voters and more than the UK average, yet ONLY the Scottish Conservatives are standing up for those who don't want a ban on new oil and gas extraction from the North Sea
Of course, in Indy-Scotland it wouldn't matter a jot what Westminster politicians think.
In Indy Scotland Scots would have an SNP government more in tune with Londoners than Scots on North Sea Oil extraction. Thankfully however the SNP support in Scotland is falling rapidly and Scottish Conservative support is far more resilient than UK Conservative support at present
Starmer's fall in his Scotland ratings are likely for some to be his ban on further oil licences especially in the North East, but I would suggest his stance on Brexit is not helping as we see the SNP calling him out as a Brexiteer
As I said earlier the SNP do appear to have stabilised their position and a lot will depend on the result of the police investigations
Even on today's poll the SNP vote is still down 8% on 2019
It would not have been unreasonable to see a double digit fall
The Rutherglen by election will be interesting as will the result of the police investigations
While support for independence has fallen it still remains in the mid forties and the SNP retain considerable support
I'm note sure independence support has fallen. The last 4 R&W have shown YES 42, 44, 42, 43 NO 51, 50, 52, 50 (Mar, Apr, May, Jun)
That looks static to me. The last one before R&W was Ipsos, which showed YES 51 NO 45 but Ipsos tends to show higher YES in general, so you probably shouldn't try to make trends between Ipsos and R&W polls.
So all have R & W have Yes even below the 45% it got in 2014, while current Holyrood polls give a Unionist majority in 2026, which would kill off hopes of indyref2 anytime soon
“We are now dangerously close to nuclear war The dam attack is a turning point. The West must act urgently to stop Putin seeing unconventional warfare as a viable option”
We probably are dangerously close to nuclear war, but where was Hamish when Ukraine cut most of the water supply to the Crimea during 2014-22 by closing the North Crimean Canal? If it's a war crime it must be a war crime whichever side does it. Since when was blowing up a dam unconventional anyway? And it's not at all clear who did it yet, although if the Russian assertion that Ukraine shelled it is anywhere near the truth they will probably furnish evidence within a few days...and if they don't...
Someone needs to bang Putin and Zelensky's heads together.
Zelenskyy was not president of Ukraine until 2019
Did I blame Zelensky for cutting the water supply to Crimea in 2014?
“We are now dangerously close to nuclear war The dam attack is a turning point. The West must act urgently to stop Putin seeing unconventional warfare as a viable option”
Now he’s saying that we need to focus on an impending nuclear war? Which is it?
I’ve no idea. He has a ridiculous name
However I think his point here is valid. If Putin blew the dam - and the evidence points that way - it suggests he is prepared to keep escalating - and there aren’t many further steps he can take before he reaches the nuclear level
That doesn’t mean a bomb. Could be an “accident” at ZPP
The prime military significance of the dam event may well turn out to be ZPP-related.
You say "if Putin blew the dam", but a similar conclusion follows from "if Zelensky blew the dam".
It could be that both of these f*cking nutters probably with very short penises are pushing the world in the same direction.
(Yes I have started drinking again under Armageddo-stress after many years of quiet abstention.)
On the bright side a nuclear war will put lots of dust in the atmosphere and counteract the warming effect
Every cloud. The idea of a nuclear winter has been dumped, though, as probable Soviet propaganda, even though when I were a lad it was being pushed out by the authorities in Britain something rotten,
The idea of a nuclear winter has not been dumped its a known fact that a high density of particulate matter in the atmosphere reduces solar forcing. Trying to claim otherwise shows you are an idiot
You just have to read even the Wikipedia article on nuclear winter and compare it with what was propagandised in say Britain in say 1980. You can insult me as much as you like, but the nuclear war causes nuclear winter hypothesis is not advanced anywhere near as much as it was in the 1980s. It has in fact been blamed on KGB propaganda. I am looking for a source to show you that.
Edit: here you go, and this is by no means the only source:
Gosh so we have millenia of proof that volcanoes throwing dust into the atmosphere cools the atmosphere......yet you quote that....I insult you because you dont do science. It is the whole science behind the KT boundary you idiot
K-t the k-pg is the same thing just two different names for the same thing
Yes, KT is the old terminology
So different names but same thing....I learnt it as KT so sue me
I'm just letting you know your information is a bit dated. You don't need to make a song and dance about it, it wasn't a criticism.
To be fair it was always dated... and wrong. Though that is no criticism of Pagan. It was lazy geologists who couldn't be bothered to correct the original mistake.
The K stands for Cretaceous Period which is the last period within the Mezozoic Era. The Mezozoic was followed by the Cenozoic which was also originally known as the Tertiary - the T in K-T. And the first period of the Cenozoic was the Paleogene.
So for consistency the boundary should either have been based on the Eras - in which case it would have been M-C (or M-T in old money) or based on periods - which is where we have settled and why it is now called the K-Pg.
The argument over meteorites vs volcanoes goes back and forward every few decades. mostly because there were both meteorties and volcanoes of the scale to cause extniction events very close to each other in time. And getting an accurate fix from 65 million years away is, well, not very accurate.
It could have been a comet.
Yes, a meteorite can be from a comet. It's just a generic term for something hard from space that makes it to surface. Probably makes no difference to you if you're underneath it.
A comet would give you that kind of kinetic energy.
To be honest, under the stewardship of Rishi Sunak when Chancellor, the whole country could be put under a Section 114 notice.
The biggest disaster is the Victoria Square development which was meant to create a new commercial and residential heart for Woking but the £750 million previous value has been downgraded to £200 million. For a Borough Council (not a unitary), the scale of the debt is extraordinary - I'm also forced to ask why this measure wasn't taken when the Conservative administration at the Town Hall was piling up these debts.
What the fuck?
Woking has run up £2bn in debts???
Population c. 100k. That's £20,000 each - much more if you exclude kids and non-workers.
Honestly, the irresponsibility of these Tory councils beggars belief.
I'm sure there are some pretty irresponsible Labour and LibDem councils too. But £2bn. That's insane.
Did no-one stop and think: you know, this is a lot of money. Did no-one ask, what would happen if interest rates went up?
Yes, of course I was making a political point. But frankly, I'm not aware of a Labour or Lib Dem authority being quite so imprudent as to run up debts of £2bn on what is, in effect, a modestly-sized town council. It's preposterous.
Quick Google skim has Croydon and Thurrock on about 1.5 billion each and Slough on 750 million. But they're all variants on unitary authorities. Woking is a second tier district, free from the OMG Social Care thing.
“We are now dangerously close to nuclear war The dam attack is a turning point. The West must act urgently to stop Putin seeing unconventional warfare as a viable option”
We probably are dangerously close to nuclear war, but where was Hamish when Ukraine cut most of the water supply to the Crimea during 2014-22 by closing the North Crimean Canal? If it's a war crime it must be a war crime whichever side does it. Since when was blowing up a dam unconventional anyway? And it's not at all clear who did it yet, although if the Russian assertion that Ukraine shelled it is anywhere near the truth they will probably furnish evidence within a few days...and if they don't...
Someone needs to bang Putin and Zelensky's heads together.
Zelenskyy was not president of Ukraine until 2019
Did I blame Zelensky for cutting the water supply to Crimea in 2014?
“We are now dangerously close to nuclear war The dam attack is a turning point. The West must act urgently to stop Putin seeing unconventional warfare as a viable option”
Now he’s saying that we need to focus on an impending nuclear war? Which is it?
I’ve no idea. He has a ridiculous name
However I think his point here is valid. If Putin blew the dam - and the evidence points that way - it suggests he is prepared to keep escalating - and there aren’t many further steps he can take before he reaches the nuclear level
That doesn’t mean a bomb. Could be an “accident” at ZPP
The prime military significance of the dam event may well turn out to be ZPP-related.
You say "if Putin blew the dam", but a similar conclusion follows from "if Zelensky blew the dam".
It could be that both of these f*cking nutters probably with very short penises are pushing the world in the same direction.
(Yes I have started drinking again under Armageddo-stress after many years of quiet abstention.)
On the bright side a nuclear war will put lots of dust in the atmosphere and counteract the warming effect
Every cloud. The idea of a nuclear winter has been dumped, though, as probable Soviet propaganda, even though when I were a lad it was being pushed out by the authorities in Britain something rotten,
The idea of a nuclear winter has not been dumped its a known fact that a high density of particulate matter in the atmosphere reduces solar forcing. Trying to claim otherwise shows you are an idiot
You just have to read even the Wikipedia article on nuclear winter and compare it with what was propagandised in say Britain in say 1980. You can insult me as much as you like, but the nuclear war causes nuclear winter hypothesis is not advanced anywhere near as much as it was in the 1980s. It has in fact been blamed on KGB propaganda. I am looking for a source to show you that.
Edit: here you go, and this is by no means the only source:
Gosh so we have millenia of proof that volcanoes throwing dust into the atmosphere cools the atmosphere......yet you quote that....I insult you because you dont do science. It is the whole science behind the KT boundary you idiot
K-t the k-pg is the same thing just two different names for the same thing
Yes, KT is the old terminology
So different names but same thing....I learnt it as KT so sue me
I'm just letting you know your information is a bit dated. You don't need to make a song and dance about it, it wasn't a criticism.
To be fair it was always dated... and wrong. Though that is no criticism of Pagan. It was lazy geologists who coldn't be bothered to correct the original mistake.
The K stands for Cretaceous Period which is the last period within the Mezozoic Era. The Mezozoic was followed by the Cenozoic which was also originally known as the Tertiary - the T in K-T. And the first period of the Cenozoic was the Paleogene.
So for consistency the boundary should either have been based on the Eras - in which case it would have been M-C (or M-T in old money) or based on periods - which is where we have settled and why it is now called the K-Pg.
The argument over meteorites vs volcanoes goes back and forward every few decades. mostly because there were both meteorties and volcanoes of the scale to cause extniction events very close to each other in time. And getting an accurate fix from 65 million years away is, well, not very accurate.
I'll defer to your greater knowledge and training on this. It was my understanding that something like a consensus was formed now around meteorite impact being the main driver but if you think that volcanism is still "in play" I accept your verdict.
The argument comes about not because of the question of whther it was a meteorite or vulcanism but because many people believe it was both. Again the distance in time makes it difficult to be sure but it looks like the extinctions were well underway before the strike. And this may well have been because of the vulcanism. We are dealing with vanisingly small exposures of rock from that specific point in time (even if you take that point as being, say, half a million years) so realy this is just an argument that will bat back and forth for ever more.
To be honest, under the stewardship of Rishi Sunak when Chancellor, the whole country could be put under a Section 114 notice.
The biggest disaster is the Victoria Square development which was meant to create a new commercial and residential heart for Woking but the £750 million previous value has been downgraded to £200 million. For a Borough Council (not a unitary), the scale of the debt is extraordinary - I'm also forced to ask why this measure wasn't taken when the Conservative administration at the Town Hall was piling up these debts.
What the fuck?
Woking has run up £2bn in debts???
I cannot quite conceive how some councils have managed to run up such huge debts. It should be impossible to manage that if they were trying to do it!
Woking is not the only one. But it is absolutely appalling that a Borough Council of perhaps 70,000 voters has managed to run up debt of £2bn.
Let that sink in for a second.
If the Council had borrowed £1,000 for each of those potential voters, it would be £70m. If they'd borrowed £10,000, it would be £700m.
The Council has run up debts equivalent to £30,000 per voter.
How on earth was this allowed to happen? There's no way Council tax per voter exceeds £1,000. But let's pretend that it is. Even in that scenario its debts are 30x its tax receipts. Absolute madness.
Worse than that. Being a District / Borough, proposed Band D council tax rises is to £263 per year.
Core funding for Woking council is £16 million a year.
Yet both the SNP and Starmer Labour back a ban on new oil and gas developments, with only the Conservatives in favour
Scotland is the second most in favour of a ban, at 40%, second only to London on 46%.
Also, your figures seem to be wrong. Scotland is 36%, not 39% opposed to a ban.
Scotland is marginally IN FAVOUR of such a ban according to your figures.
Still more Scots are opposed to a ban on new oil developments than the 32% opposed to a ban in the UK overall. (Northerners are as supportive of a ban as Scots but both still significantly less than Londoners are).
Yet BOTH the SNP and Starmer Labour back a ban on new oil developments with only the Conservatives standing up for the more than a third of Scots who oppose a ban on new oil and gas developments in the North Sea
I'll do this as a picture so you can understand it better:
figures for Scotland
yes, ban it: 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤
no ban please: 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤
don't know: 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤 👤👤👤👤👤
And that No Ban group is over a third of Scottish voters and more than the UK average, yet ONLY the Scottish Conservatives are standing up for those who don't want a ban on new oil and gas extraction from the North Sea
2014 when people like you were telling all and sundry that North Sea oil was an exhausted resource seems an awfully long time ago.
Yet both the SNP and Starmer Labour back a ban on new oil and gas developments, with only the Conservatives in favour
Scotland is the second most in favour of a ban, at 40%, second only to London on 46%.
Also, your figures seem to be wrong. Scotland is 36%, not 39% opposed to a ban.
Scotland is marginally IN FAVOUR of such a ban according to your figures.
Still more Scots are opposed to a ban on new oil developments than the 32% opposed to a ban in the UK overall. (Northerners are as supportive of a ban as Scots but both still significantly less than Londoners are).
Yet BOTH the SNP and Starmer Labour back a ban on new oil developments with only the Conservatives standing up for the more than a third of Scots who oppose a ban on new oil and gas developments in the North Sea
I'll do this as a picture so you can understand it better:
figures for Scotland
yes, ban it: 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤
no ban please: 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤
don't know: 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤 👤👤👤👤👤
And that No Ban group is over a third of Scottish voters and more than the UK average, yet ONLY the Scottish Conservatives are standing up for those who don't want a ban on new oil and gas extraction from the North Sea
Of course, in Indy-Scotland it wouldn't matter a jot what Westminster politicians think.
In Indy Scotland Scots would have an SNP government more in tune with Londoners than Scots on North Sea Oil extraction. Thankfully however the SNP support in Scotland is falling rapidly and Scottish Conservative support is far more resilient than UK Conservative support at present
Starmer's fall in his Scotland ratings are likely for some to be his ban on further oil licences especially in the North East, but I would suggest his stance on Brexit is not helping as we see the SNP calling him out as a Brexiteer
As I said earlier the SNP do appear to have stabilised their position and a lot will depend on the result of the police investigations
Even on today's poll the SNP vote is still down 8% on 2019
It would not have been unreasonable to see a double digit fall
The Rutherglen by election will be interesting as will the result of the police investigations
While support for independence has fallen it still remains in the mid forties and the SNP retain considerable support
I'm note sure independence support has fallen. The last 4 R&W have shown YES 42, 44, 42, 43 NO 51, 50, 52, 50 (Mar, Apr, May, Jun)
That looks static to me. The last one before R&W was Ipsos, which showed YES 51 NO 45 but Ipsos tends to show higher YES in general, so you probably shouldn't try to make trends between Ipsos and R&W polls.
It has a 'wee' bit but not decisively and certainly today's Scottish poll is better for the SNP then they could have expected
I get the impression Starmer's Daily Express column may have damaged him north of the border. I think he perhaps need to listen to Deborah Mattinson maybe a bit less.
Yet both the SNP and Starmer Labour back a ban on new oil and gas developments, with only the Conservatives in favour
Scotland is the second most in favour of a ban, at 40%, second only to London on 46%.
Also, your figures seem to be wrong. Scotland is 36%, not 39% opposed to a ban.
Scotland is marginally IN FAVOUR of such a ban according to your figures.
Still more Scots are opposed to a ban on new oil developments than the 32% opposed to a ban in the UK overall. (Northerners are as supportive of a ban as Scots but both still significantly less than Londoners are).
Yet BOTH the SNP and Starmer Labour back a ban on new oil developments with only the Conservatives standing up for the more than a third of Scots who oppose a ban on new oil and gas developments in the North Sea
I'll do this as a picture so you can understand it better:
figures for Scotland
yes, ban it: 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤
no ban please: 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤
don't know: 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤 👤👤👤👤👤
And that No Ban group is over a third of Scottish voters and more than the UK average, yet ONLY the Scottish Conservatives are standing up for those who don't want a ban on new oil and gas extraction from the North Sea
Of course, in Indy-Scotland it wouldn't matter a jot what Westminster politicians think.
In Indy Scotland Scots would have an SNP government more in tune with Londoners than Scots on North Sea Oil extraction. Thankfully however the SNP support in Scotland is falling rapidly and Scottish Conservative support is far more resilient than UK Conservative support at present
Starmer's fall in his Scotland ratings are likely for some to be his ban on further oil licences especially in the North East, but I would suggest his stance on Brexit is not helping as we see the SNP calling him out as a Brexiteer
As I said earlier the SNP do appear to have stabilised their position and a lot will depend on the result of the police investigations
Even on today's poll the SNP vote is still down 8% on 2019
It would not have been unreasonable to see a double digit fall
The Rutherglen by election will be interesting as will the result of the police investigations
While support for independence has fallen it still remains in the mid forties and the SNP retain considerable support
I'm note sure independence support has fallen. The last 4 R&W have shown YES 42, 44, 42, 43 NO 51, 50, 52, 50 (Mar, Apr, May, Jun)
That looks static to me. The last one before R&W was Ipsos, which showed YES 51 NO 45 but Ipsos tends to show higher YES in general, so you probably shouldn't try to make trends between Ipsos and R&W polls.
So all have R & W have Yes even below the 45% it got in 2014, while current Holyrood polls give a Unionist majority in 2026, which would kill off hopes of indyref2 anytime soon
Yes got 38% in 2014 if you include people who didn't vote. If you don't include them, then R&W have YES on 45.1%, slightly up on the 44.7% in the actual referendum.
Please do make sure you are comparing like with like, I know you wouldn't want to be thought of dishonest, manipulative, or stupid.
Plenty of DKs will vote and in 2014 they went No.
As stated, Redfield and other pollsters are also forecasting a Unionist majority at Holyrood in 2026 anyway, which would kill off indyref2 talk indefinitely
As I said yesterday: is the problem American sobriety? British city centres are doing ok because the British need to drink, and therefore need somewhere they can get to without driving. So even if they're not actually working in town, they're coming there afterwards for a drink. But if your evening consists of soft drinks and a drive home, city centres hold no particular advantage.
Here is how Seattle Times is reporting Pence's statement:
"Pence opens presidential bid with denunciation of Trump over Jan. 6 insurrection and abortion"
Get the feeling that many UKer PBers - along with many in USA - will be unimpressed by anything other than unequivocal anti-Trump candidate(s) for 2024 Republican nomination.
HOWEVER, while 2022 midterms gave plenty of evidence that swing voters AND many Republicans are of that mindset, they also showed that running AGAINST Trump was NOT a great strategy for winning GOP nomination for whatever.
THUS the reluctance (or at least major share of it) to do a Lynn Cheney for 2024.
Note that goodly chunk of Republicans (including leaners (who either oppose Trump outright, or are seriously allergic to him, are skeptical (for some reason) that it's possible for 1001% anti-45er to win the Republican nomination.
As I said yesterday: is the problem American sobriety? British city centres are doing ok because the British need to drink, and therefore need somewhere they can get to without driving. So even if they're not actually working in town, they're coming there afterwards for a drink. But if your evening consists of soft drinks and a drive home, city centres hold no particular advantage.
It’s a whole combination of things. The innate American love of the suburb and the car. The loathing of public transport. The big houses that are nice to WFH in. The general fucked up nature of American city centers - drugs, homeless, urbanscapes ruined by car lots and shit buildings
But this is an enormous problem and I’m encountering it everywhere. Denver last year. Cincinnati now. Multiple other places
It’s desolate. Ffs this is a city twice the size of Manchester and this is the buzzing heart. On a beautiful balmy evening of about 25C
Here is how Seattle Times is reporting Pence's statement:
"Pence opens presidential bid with denunciation of Trump over Jan. 6 insurrection and abortion"
Get the feeling that many UKer PBers - along with many in USA - will be unimpressed by anything other than unequivocal anti-Trump candidate(s) for 2024 Republican nomination.
HOWEVER, while 2022 midterms gave plenty of evidence that swing voters AND many Republicans are of that mindset, they also showed that running AGAINST Trump was NOT a great strategy for winning GOP nomination for whatever.
THUS the reluctance (or at least major share of it) to do a Lynn Cheney for 2024.
Note that goodly chunk of Republicans (including leaners (who either oppose Trump outright, or are seriously allergic to him, are skeptical (for some reason) that it's possible for 1001% anti-45er to win the Republican nomination.
Just sayin'.
I would probably vote for Pence, both for the GOP nomination and in the general election next year if I was American, however unless Trump or DeSantis collapse I don't see him getting very far
As I said yesterday: is the problem American sobriety? British city centres are doing ok because the British need to drink, and therefore need somewhere they can get to without driving. So even if they're not actually working in town, they're coming there afterwards for a drink. But if your evening consists of soft drinks and a drive home, city centres hold no particular advantage.
It’s a whole combination of things. The innate American love of the suburb and the car. The loathing of public transport. The big houses that are nice to WFH in. The general fucked up nature of American city centers - drugs, homeless, urbanscapes ruined by car lots and shit buildings
But this is an enormous problem and I’m encountering it everywhere. Denver last year. Cincinnati now. Multiple other places
It’s desolate. Ffs this is a city twice the size of Manchester and this is the buzzing heart. On a beautiful balmy evening of about 25C
But this is not new.
I remember visiting LA in 1999, being downtown, and thinking "wait, wtf?"
Nobody lives Downtown - they’re all out in the suburbs. When I used to go there for work at corporate events Dinners would start at 18.00 and at 19.30 someone would announce “that concludes this evenings event” and you couldn’t clear the room faster if you’d hit the fire alarm - leaving a few bemused Europeans stranded at empty tables wondering where the fiddle everyone had gone…
As I said yesterday: is the problem American sobriety? British city centres are doing ok because the British need to drink, and therefore need somewhere they can get to without driving. So even if they're not actually working in town, they're coming there afterwards for a drink. But if your evening consists of soft drinks and a drive home, city centres hold no particular advantage.
It’s a whole combination of things. The innate American love of the suburb and the car. The loathing of public transport. The big houses that are nice to WFH in. The general fucked up nature of American city centers - drugs, homeless, urbanscapes ruined by car lots and shit buildings
But this is an enormous problem and I’m encountering it everywhere. Denver last year. Cincinnati now. Multiple other places
It’s desolate. Ffs this is a city twice the size of Manchester and this is the buzzing heart. On a beautiful balmy evening of about 25C
Cincinnati city centre, at least, doesn't looked fucked up. Looks quite nice, in a 'but where are the pubs' way. Just horribly deserted.
A pedant notes, however, that the Cincinnati metropolitan area is has a population of 1.7m. So smaller than Manchester, whose Metropolitan population is approaching 3m. Closer to Glasgow, I think. Still, your point stands.
“We are now dangerously close to nuclear war The dam attack is a turning point. The West must act urgently to stop Putin seeing unconventional warfare as a viable option”
We probably are dangerously close to nuclear war, but where was Hamish when Ukraine cut most of the water supply to the Crimea during 2014-22 by closing the North Crimean Canal? If it's a war crime it must be a war crime whichever side does it. Since when was blowing up a dam unconventional anyway? And it's not at all clear who did it yet, although if the Russian assertion that Ukraine shelled it is anywhere near the truth they will probably furnish evidence within a few days...and if they don't...
Someone needs to bang Putin and Zelensky's heads together.
Zelenskyy was not president of Ukraine until 2019
Did I blame Zelensky for cutting the water supply to Crimea in 2014?
“We are now dangerously close to nuclear war The dam attack is a turning point. The West must act urgently to stop Putin seeing unconventional warfare as a viable option”
Now he’s saying that we need to focus on an impending nuclear war? Which is it?
I’ve no idea. He has a ridiculous name
However I think his point here is valid. If Putin blew the dam - and the evidence points that way - it suggests he is prepared to keep escalating - and there aren’t many further steps he can take before he reaches the nuclear level
That doesn’t mean a bomb. Could be an “accident” at ZPP
The prime military significance of the dam event may well turn out to be ZPP-related.
You say "if Putin blew the dam", but a similar conclusion follows from "if Zelensky blew the dam".
It could be that both of these f*cking nutters probably with very short penises are pushing the world in the same direction.
(Yes I have started drinking again under Armageddo-stress after many years of quiet abstention.)
On the bright side a nuclear war will put lots of dust in the atmosphere and counteract the warming effect
Every cloud. The idea of a nuclear winter has been dumped, though, as probable Soviet propaganda, even though when I were a lad it was being pushed out by the authorities in Britain something rotten,
The idea of a nuclear winter has not been dumped its a known fact that a high density of particulate matter in the atmosphere reduces solar forcing. Trying to claim otherwise shows you are an idiot
You just have to read even the Wikipedia article on nuclear winter and compare it with what was propagandised in say Britain in say 1980. You can insult me as much as you like, but the nuclear war causes nuclear winter hypothesis is not advanced anywhere near as much as it was in the 1980s. It has in fact been blamed on KGB propaganda. I am looking for a source to show you that.
Edit: here you go, and this is by no means the only source:
Gosh so we have millenia of proof that volcanoes throwing dust into the atmosphere cools the atmosphere......yet you quote that....I insult you because you dont do science. It is the whole science behind the KT boundary you idiot
K-t the k-pg is the same thing just two different names for the same thing
Yes, KT is the old terminology
So different names but same thing....I learnt it as KT so sue me
I'm just letting you know your information is a bit dated. You don't need to make a song and dance about it, it wasn't a criticism.
To be fair it was always dated... and wrong. Though that is no criticism of Pagan. It was lazy geologists who coldn't be bothered to correct the original mistake.
The K stands for Cretaceous Period which is the last period within the Mezozoic Era. The Mezozoic was followed by the Cenozoic which was also originally known as the Tertiary - the T in K-T. And the first period of the Cenozoic was the Paleogene.
So for consistency the boundary should either have been based on the Eras - in which case it would have been M-C (or M-T in old money) or based on periods - which is where we have settled and why it is now called the K-Pg.
The argument over meteorites vs volcanoes goes back and forward every few decades. mostly because there were both meteorties and volcanoes of the scale to cause extniction events very close to each other in time. And getting an accurate fix from 65 million years away is, well, not very accurate.
I'll defer to your greater knowledge and training on this. It was my understanding that something like a consensus was formed now around meteorite impact being the main driver but if you think that volcanism is still "in play" I accept your verdict.
Possible for the two to be linked - Deccan Traps eruptiuon is suspiciously close in time and precisely opposite in place (diametrically across the globe) to be a sort of contre-coup effect of the Yucatan impact.
Here's a recent paper presenting evidence of just that:
Yet both the SNP and Starmer Labour back a ban on new oil and gas developments, with only the Conservatives in favour
Scotland is the second most in favour of a ban, at 40%, second only to London on 46%.
Also, your figures seem to be wrong. Scotland is 36%, not 39% opposed to a ban.
Scotland is marginally IN FAVOUR of such a ban according to your figures.
Still more Scots are opposed to a ban on new oil developments than the 32% opposed to a ban in the UK overall. (Northerners are as supportive of a ban as Scots but both still significantly less than Londoners are).
Yet BOTH the SNP and Starmer Labour back a ban on new oil developments with only the Conservatives standing up for the more than a third of Scots who oppose a ban on new oil and gas developments in the North Sea
I'll do this as a picture so you can understand it better:
figures for Scotland
yes, ban it: 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤
no ban please: 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤
don't know: 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤 👤👤👤👤👤
And that No Ban group is over a third of Scottish voters and more than the UK average, yet ONLY the Scottish Conservatives are standing up for those who don't want a ban on new oil and gas extraction from the North Sea
Of course, in Indy-Scotland it wouldn't matter a jot what Westminster politicians think.
In Indy Scotland Scots would have an SNP government more in tune with Londoners than Scots on North Sea Oil extraction. Thankfully however the SNP support in Scotland is falling rapidly and Scottish Conservative support is far more resilient than UK Conservative support at present
Starmer's fall in his Scotland ratings are likely for some to be his ban on further oil licences especially in the North East, but I would suggest his stance on Brexit is not helping as we see the SNP calling him out as a Brexiteer
As I said earlier the SNP do appear to have stabilised their position and a lot will depend on the result of the police investigations
Even on today's poll the SNP vote is still down 8% on 2019
It would not have been unreasonable to see a double digit fall
The Rutherglen by election will be interesting as will the result of the police investigations
While support for independence has fallen it still remains in the mid forties and the SNP retain considerable support
I'm note sure independence support has fallen. The last 4 R&W have shown YES 42, 44, 42, 43 NO 51, 50, 52, 50 (Mar, Apr, May, Jun)
That looks static to me. The last one before R&W was Ipsos, which showed YES 51 NO 45 but Ipsos tends to show higher YES in general, so you probably shouldn't try to make trends between Ipsos and R&W polls.
So all have R & W have Yes even below the 45% it got in 2014, while current Holyrood polls give a Unionist majority in 2026, which would kill off hopes of indyref2 anytime soon
Yes got 38% in 2014 if you include people who didn't vote. If you don't include them, then R&W have YES on 45.1%, slightly up on the 44.7% in the actual referendum.
Please do make sure you are comparing like with like, I know you wouldn't want to be thought of dishonest, manipulative, or stupid.
Plenty of DKs will vote and in 2014 they went No.
As stated, Redfield and other pollsters are also forecasting a Unionist majority at Holyrood in 2026 anyway, which would kill off indyref2 talk indefinitely
But the DKs in that poll are far fewer than the DNV in 2014. So unless you think another indy ref will have a turnout in excess of 93%, which it obviously won't, you're flat wrong. Again.
85% voted in indyref2014, anything is possible. Though as mentioned and you again ignored the forecast Unionist majority in 2026 means there may never be an indyref2 anyway and most likely certainly not this decade
As I said yesterday: is the problem American sobriety? British city centres are doing ok because the British need to drink, and therefore need somewhere they can get to without driving. So even if they're not actually working in town, they're coming there afterwards for a drink. But if your evening consists of soft drinks and a drive home, city centres hold no particular advantage.
It’s a whole combination of things. The innate American love of the suburb and the car. The loathing of public transport. The big houses that are nice to WFH in. The general fucked up nature of American city centers - drugs, homeless, urbanscapes ruined by car lots and shit buildings
But this is an enormous problem and I’m encountering it everywhere. Denver last year. Cincinnati now. Multiple other places
It’s desolate. Ffs this is a city twice the size of Manchester and this is the buzzing heart. On a beautiful balmy evening of about 25C
But this is not new.
I remember visiting LA in 1999, being downtown, and thinking "wait, wtf?"
Yet both the SNP and Starmer Labour back a ban on new oil and gas developments, with only the Conservatives in favour
Scotland is the second most in favour of a ban, at 40%, second only to London on 46%.
Also, your figures seem to be wrong. Scotland is 36%, not 39% opposed to a ban.
Scotland is marginally IN FAVOUR of such a ban according to your figures.
Still more Scots are opposed to a ban on new oil developments than the 32% opposed to a ban in the UK overall. (Northerners are as supportive of a ban as Scots but both still significantly less than Londoners are).
Yet BOTH the SNP and Starmer Labour back a ban on new oil developments with only the Conservatives standing up for the more than a third of Scots who oppose a ban on new oil and gas developments in the North Sea
I'll do this as a picture so you can understand it better:
figures for Scotland
yes, ban it: 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤
no ban please: 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤
don't know: 👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤👤 👤👤👤👤👤
And that No Ban group is over a third of Scottish voters and more than the UK average, yet ONLY the Scottish Conservatives are standing up for those who don't want a ban on new oil and gas extraction from the North Sea
2014 when people like you were telling all and sundry that North Sea oil was an exhausted resource seems an awfully long time ago.
I do wonder why the BBC and other organisations ever gave a moments notice to these idiots. Anyone who actually knew anything at all about the North Sea knew it was utter BS. The only way North Sea oil 'runs out' in our lifetimes is when it becomes so cheap it is no longer worth the effort to drill for it. And given that that wasn't the case even at 9 dollars a barrel, the only thing that will actually spell the end of North Sea oil is lack of demand. (Excepting the lunacy of Governments sticking their noses in)
As I said yesterday: is the problem American sobriety? British city centres are doing ok because the British need to drink, and therefore need somewhere they can get to without driving. So even if they're not actually working in town, they're coming there afterwards for a drink. But if your evening consists of soft drinks and a drive home, city centres hold no particular advantage.
It’s a whole combination of things. The innate American love of the suburb and the car. The loathing of public transport. The big houses that are nice to WFH in. The general fucked up nature of American city centers - drugs, homeless, urbanscapes ruined by car lots and shit buildings
But this is an enormous problem and I’m encountering it everywhere. Denver last year. Cincinnati now. Multiple other places
It’s desolate. Ffs this is a city twice the size of Manchester and this is the buzzing heart. On a beautiful balmy evening of about 25C
But this is not new.
I remember visiting LA in 1999, being downtown, and thinking "wait, wtf?"
Comments
"Wouldn't you prefer a good game of Chess?"
"Later. Let's play Global Thermonuclear War".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KXzNo0vR_dU
But it also indicates why the naysayers of Labour's policy are wrong. There's plenty of money out there when the wealthy get squeezed
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/consumer/survey-results/daily/2023/05/30/adad6/1
Yet both the SNP and Starmer Labour back a ban on new oil and gas developments, with only the Conservatives in favour
At his launch rally in Iowa, Mr Pence alleged that Mr Trump had “demanded” he choose between personal loyalty and the Constitution while attempting to overturn the results of the 2020 election.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/trump-demanded-i-choose-between-him-and-constitution-says-mike-pence-as-he-launches-presidential-bid/ar-AA1cg3Ak?rc=1&ocid=winp1taskbar&cvid=e015bbbb62f54d3cab922cd636e1e6fb&ei=9
Nothing a well fitted brassiere wouldn't sort out.
Woking has run up £2bn in debts???
Yet BOTH the SNP and Starmer Labour back a ban on new oil developments with only the Conservatives standing up for the more than a third of Scots who oppose a ban on new oil and gas developments in the North Sea
From 2023 cambridge university seems to still believe in nuclear winter maybe they are not academic enough because westie knows better
more sparks about the tinder
Who would survive? That's an interesting question. I would predict... convicts and file clerks. The worst convicts. Those deep down in solitary confinement. And the most ordinary file clerks. Probably for large insurance companies, because they would be in fire-proof rooms, protected by tons of the best insulator in the world: paper. And imagine what will happen. The small group of vicious criminals will fight the army of file clerks for the remaining means of life. The convicts will know violence, but the file clerks will know organization. Who do think'll win? It's all hypotheses of course, but fun to play around with.
I love it as a game. As an approach to governance or geopolitics, it’s genuinely horrific.
K-t
the k-pg is the same thing just two different names for the same thing
Honestly, the irresponsibility of these Tory councils beggars belief.
The K-Pg event was a 72,000,000 megaton yield equivalent.
At peak, the global nuclear arsenal was something like 2,000 megatons.
https://twitter.com/Steven_Swinford/status/1666549042216685569?t=a6O0hCbr4T8_BcczZugGgw&s=19
I mean, that is certainly also true, but most council's don't get anywhere close to these absurdly high examples, and even if the politicians are nuts and the officers incompetent it should be hard to legally run up such massive debts through what is presumably very risky borrowing.
It isn't enough simply that council funding has been cut sharply, to explain the few examples where they are not simply feeling a lot of strain or in trouble, but billions in trouble. Especially when only the larger authorities approach a billion turnover a year, with much of that non-discretionary.
(Excuse my language, but really....)
"K–Pg, not KT.
Meteorite impact, not volcanoes."
which implies k-pg was meteorite impact and kt was volcano's
On 13 August 2010, the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, Eric Pickles, announced that the Audit Commission was to be scrapped, with its functions being transferred to the voluntary, not-for-profit or private sector. The government aimed to save £50m annually, with the commission's function transferred to the Local Government Ombudsman and private accounting firms.
As I said earlier the SNP do appear to have stabilised their position and a lot will depend on the result of the police investigations
Though it's a good enough excuse to bring up one of my personal proposals for instant reform of the HoL - MPs are not allowed to become Peers until 6 years (or two parliamentary terms, whichever is longer) have passed. To encourage them to earn a place through continued good works, not get rewarded or persuaded to retire by being kicked upstairs.
The K stands for Cretaceous Period which is the last period within the Mezozoic Era. The Mezozoic was followed by the Cenozoic which was also originally known as the Tertiary - the T in K-T. And the first period of the Cenozoic was the Paleogene.
So for consistency the boundary should either have been based on the Eras - in which case it would have been M-C (or M-T in old money) or based on periods - which is where we have settled and why it is now called the K-Pg.
The argument over meteorites vs volcanoes goes back and forward every few decades. mostly because there were both meteorties and volcanoes of the scale to cause extniction events very close to each other in time. And getting an accurate fix from 65 million years away is, well, not very accurate.
Let that sink in for a second.
If the Council had borrowed £1,000 for each of those potential voters, it would be £70m. If they'd borrowed £10,000, it would be £700m.
The Council has run up debts equivalent to £30,000 per voter.
How on earth was this allowed to happen? There's no way Council tax per voter exceeds £1,000. But let's pretend that it is. Even in that scenario its debts are 30x its tax receipts. Absolute madness.
The Rutherglen by election will be interesting as will the result of the police investigations
While support for independence has fallen it still remains in the mid forties and the SNP retain considerable support
Debts? Sure, that's life. Many not completely terrible ones close to tipping over? Definitely. But these egregious examples? Yeesh.
Did no-one stop and think: you know, this is a lot of money. Did no-one ask, what would happen if interest rates went up?
https://twitter.com/TimothyDSnyder/status/1666549895438671872?cxt=HHwWgICx4ZqT46AuAAAA
https://www.bestforbritain.org/mrp_polling_new_boundaries_june_2023
I don't know. And on balance I don't care either as we'll all be screwed with or without that winter.
Astonishingly, unless you look at the Balance Sheet at the end of the document, you would have no idea of the scale of the Council's debts.
This is a “busy” city of 2m people
As stated, Redfield and other pollsters are also forecasting a Unionist majority at Holyrood in 2026 anyway, which would kill off indyref2 talk indefinitely
British city centres are doing ok because the British need to drink, and therefore need somewhere they can get to without driving. So even if they're not actually working in town, they're coming there afterwards for a drink. But if your evening consists of soft drinks and a drive home, city centres hold no particular advantage.
"Pence opens presidential bid with denunciation of Trump over Jan. 6 insurrection and abortion"
Get the feeling that many UKer PBers - along with many in USA - will be unimpressed by anything other than unequivocal anti-Trump candidate(s) for 2024 Republican nomination.
HOWEVER, while 2022 midterms gave plenty of evidence that swing voters AND many Republicans are of that mindset, they also showed that running AGAINST Trump was NOT a great strategy for winning GOP nomination for whatever.
THUS the reluctance (or at least major share of it) to do a Lynn Cheney for 2024.
Note that goodly chunk of Republicans (including leaners (who either oppose Trump outright, or are seriously allergic to him, are skeptical (for some reason) that it's possible for 1001% anti-45er to win the Republican nomination.
Just sayin'.
But this is an enormous problem and I’m encountering it everywhere. Denver last year. Cincinnati now. Multiple other places
It’s desolate. Ffs this is a city twice the size of Manchester and this is the buzzing heart. On a beautiful balmy evening of about 25C
I remember visiting LA in 1999, being downtown, and thinking "wait, wtf?"
AND empty downtowns in US cities after working hours is NOT a new development. Many decades old.
Ain't saying it's a plus. But not sign of impending doom.
ADDENDUM - So WHY are you hanging around in downtown this evening, when the REAL Cincinnati is clearly elsewhere.
Suggest you head up the hill, toward the U of Cincinnati, AND check out Taft's bathtub!
A pedant notes, however, that the Cincinnati metropolitan area is has a population of 1.7m. So smaller than Manchester, whose Metropolitan population is approaching 3m. Closer to Glasgow, I think. Still, your point stands.
https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aac7549
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Over-the-Rhine
Dodgy as heck when I used to visit but since gentrified
All the offices are empty. For Lease
Open your eyes. Urban America is dying
https://urbanaxes.com/locations/cincinnati
(I saw people doing this in a storefront in St Louis, beer in hand).
But empty downtown storefronts and building in America cities and towns large, small and inbetween is NOT novel.