Of course - I am being provocative. You can define winners and losers in many different ways. But many people (Tories especially you would think) define winners as the rich and those in upper social groups.
Has anyone found a representative organisation of a business, trade or profession in favour of Leave yet?
Can you show us any of those business, trade or professions that have a vote?
Mr. Eagles, well. Some men bet on things with a 77% chance of happening. Some men bet on things that are 250/1.
I leave the site to decide who the manlier fellow is
Dr. Prasannan, find it hard to buy books like that for children, because it's been a while since I was one and my reading age was always advanced, so I can't tell if I'll miss the target completely. Dinosaur books, at least, always have great pictures too.
Incidentally, I went for Sunset Over Abendau, a grimdark sci-fi story.
The Common Market became the Economic Community became the European Union, just as Global Warming became Climate Change. And if we have an ice age next year, it will become Climate Instability (keep bringing in the research money, whatever you do).
Why do the Old Gits tend to be Leavers? Experience-related cynicism? We've seen it all before. When you're had several governments say "Don't worry, we can always change the direction of travel" and then either fail, or fail to try, you do tend to lose your North Korean levels of enthusiasm.
In some ways it's a pity. As Piggy laments in the William Golding novel ... "He cried for their loss of innocence."
We'll look back in a few years time and say. "Ah, bless, they had no idea, did they?"
My hypothesis is that Old Gits tend to be anti-EU and anti-AGW because they have been less successful in life than they would have liked, but are unable to accept that this is due to their own shortcomings. This leads them place the blame for their perceived lack of success on some form of collusion against them, thus giving rise to a mentality that is conditioned to reject any form of authoritative information. It's one step down from full-blown conspiracy theorist.
I think there's a lot in that. The social groups most likely to support Leave are primarily those who (unkindly perhaps) could be characterised as society's losers. Poorer, less educated, insecure lower-level jobs.
Well given that two eastern european couriers have made deliveries today, one a cheerful chappie and the other a dour soul (perhaps because he was delivering a massive amount of Vote Leave literature) I am sure UK citizens who might wish to become couriers could feel inclined to vote Out as well. I am not sure where such jobs fit within your elitist world view.
All the polling evidence shows that social groups ABC1 - society's winners - are overwhelmingly in favour of Remain. C2DE are in favour of Leave.
Can anyone name a national organisation representing any business, profession or trade association that favours Leave?
Your categorising of lower social groups as 'losers' is highly pejorative.
Of course - I am being provocative. You can define winners and losers in many different ways. But many people (Tories especially you would think) define winners as the rich and those in upper social groups.
Ht?
It is best that a man does not project his own prejudice onto others.
Of course - I am being provocative. You can define winners and losers in many different ways. But many people (Tories especially you would think) define winners as the rich and those in upper social groups.
Has anyone found a representative organisation of a business, trade or profession in favour of Leave yet?
Can you show us any of those business, trade or professions that have a vote?
No. Just bodies trying to buy voters.
And frequently in receipt of EU funds. What a shock.
Of course - I am being provocative. You can define winners and losers in many different ways. But many people (Tories especially you would think) define winners as the rich and those in upper social groups.
Has anyone found a representative organisation of a business, trade or profession in favour of Leave yet?
Can you show us any of those business, trade or professions that have a vote?
No. Just bodies trying to buy voters.
And frequently in receipt of EU funds.
There is no such thing as "EU Money". There is only taxpayer's money!
Of course - I am being provocative. You can define winners and losers in many different ways. But many people (Tories especially you would think) define winners as the rich and those in upper social groups.
Has anyone found a representative organisation of a business, trade or profession in favour of Leave yet?
Can you show us any of those business, trade or professions that have a vote?
No. Just bodies trying to buy voters.
On the bodies being for remain, it's interesting that the farmers union is backing remain, yet all the signs in farmers fields are for leave. Perhaps the farmers backing remain are really shy.
If there was a bomb on MS804 with a 12 hour timer, then it would have been set one hour before the plane left Eritrea airport. About the time it would have been put in the hold.
Although how luggage still stays on after four stops, I have no idea.
Of course - I am being provocative. You can define winners and losers in many different ways. But many people (Tories especially you would think) define winners as the rich and those in upper social groups.
Has anyone found a representative organisation of a business, trade or profession in favour of Leave yet?
Can you show us any of those business, trade or professions that have a vote?
No. Just bodies trying to buy voters.
On the bodies being for remain, it's interesting that the farmers union is backing remain, yet all the signs in farmers fields are for leave. Perhaps the farmers backing remain are really shy.
Most small farmers are sick to death, sadly sometimes literally, with the CAP.
We'll look back in a few years time and say. "Ah, bless, they had no idea, did they?"
My h
I think there's a lot in that. The social groups most likely to support Leave are primarily those who (unkindly perhaps) could be characterised as society's losers. Poorer, less educated, insecure lower-level jobs.
Well given that two eastern european couriers have made deliveries today, one a cheerful chappie and the other a dour soul (perhaps because he was delivering a massive amount of Vote Leave literature) I am sure UK citizens who might wish to become couriers could feel inclined to vote Out as well. I am not sure where such jobs fit within your elitist world view.
I see no evidence that there are hordes of UK citizens queuing up to become couriers - unemployment is at a record low.
All the polling evidence shows that social groups ABC1 - society's winners - are overwhelmingly in favour of Remain. C2DE are in favour of Leave.
Can anyone name a national organisation representing any business, profession or trade association that favours Leave?
Losers?
I'm in Cornwall, writing for The Times. Specifically I'm in St Mawes, staying in one of the four hotels on my trip.
This morning I woke up to two emails telling me I had totally unexpected royalty cheques from Holland and France. If you said the phrase "high five figures" you would be in the vicinity of the truth.
Am I a LOSER? Hmm. Don't think so. Vulgar, narcissistic wanker, sure, but loser?
But you've shagged Boris' 'sister and Frostrop IIRC - so bit of a luvvie lover too.
"I think there's a lot in that. The social groups most likely to support Leave are primarily those who (unkindly perhaps) could be characterised as society's losers. Poorer, less educated, insecure lower-level jobs."
Losers? Losers??
I'm in Cornwall, writing for The Times. Specifically I'm in St Mawes, staying in one of the four hotels on my trip.
This morning I woke up to two emails telling me I had totally unexpected royalty cheques from Holland and France. If you said the phrase "high five figures" you would be in the vicinity of the truth.
Am I a LOSER? Hmm. Vulgar, narcissistic wanker, sure, but loser?
The Common Market became the Economic Community became the European Union, just as Global Warming became Climate Change. And if we have an ice age next year, it will become Climate Instability (keep bringing in the research money, whatever you do).
Why do the Old Gits tend to be Leavers? Experience-related cynicism? We've seen it all before. When you're had several governments say "Don't worry, we can always change the direction of travel" and then either fail, or fail to try, you do tend to lose your North Korean levels of enthusiasm.
In some ways it's a pity. As Piggy laments in the William Golding novel ... "He cried for their loss of innocence."
We'll look back in a few years time and say. "Ah, bless, they had no idea, did they?"
My hypothesis is that Old Gits tend to be anti-EU and anti-AGW because they have been less successful in life than they would have liked, but are unable to accept that this is due to
I think there's a lot in that. The social groups most likely to support Leave are primarily those who (unkindly perhaps) could be characterised as society's losers. Poorer, less educated, insecure lower-level jobs.
Not unkindly. Inaccurately.
I refuse to allow "loser" to be added to the plethora of insults Leavers have to suffer. I know plenty of Brexiteers who are life's winners. Often self-made too.
It would be just as valid to suggest that Remainers were all life's scaredy-cats, those who wouldn't say boo to a goose, all those who can't cope with change because they are safely stuck in a groove.
No, I don't think that either.
This is going to turn into non competitive sports day isn't it?
We're all winners here. Even the losers.
The more I see of Remainers, the more I think it would do them a power of good to be losers for once. They do seem all too often to express the views of people who have had life handed to them on a plate - and hate the notion of anything that would put that at risk...
Are you really saying life was handed to me on a plate? I'm a working class Northener.
I said you expressed the views of those who have had life handed to them on a plate. But if you want to play Four Yorkshiremen....
Unlike Leave who are led by the Old Etonian and Oxford educated former editor of the Spectator or the Dulwich educated former City trader?
So, you attended a comprehensive and your father was a bus driver?
Of course - I am being provocative. You can define winners and losers in many different ways. But many people (Tories especially you would think) define winners as the rich and those in upper social groups.
Has anyone found a representative organisation of a business, trade or profession in favour of Leave yet?
Can you show us any of those business, trade or professions that have a vote?
No. Just bodies trying to buy voters.
On the bodies being for remain, it's interesting that the farmers union is backing remain, yet all the signs in farmers fields are for leave. Perhaps the farmers backing remain are really shy.
Most small farmers are sick to death, sadly sometimes literally, with the CAP.
My two closest small farming friends are for Leave, they detest CAP.
This morning I woke up to two emails telling me I had totally unexpected royalty cheques from Holland and France. If you said the phrase "high five figures" you would be in the vicinity of the truth.
Am I a LOSER? Hmm. Vulgar, narcissistic wanker, sure, but loser?
Of course - I am being provocative. You can define winners and losers in many different ways. But many people (Tories especially you would think) define winners as the rich and those in upper social groups.
Has anyone found a representative organisation of a business, trade or profession in favour of Leave yet?
Can you show us any of those business, trade or professions that have a vote?
No. Just bodies trying to buy voters.
To answer my own question there is at least one national representative body backing Leave.
Of course - I am being provocative. You can define winners and losers in many different ways. But many people (Tories especially you would think) define winners as the rich and those in upper social groups.
Has anyone found a representative organisation of a business, trade or profession in favour of Leave yet?
Can you show us any of those business, trade or professions that have a vote?
No. Just bodies trying to buy voters.
To answer my own question there is at least one national representative body backing Leave.
Of course - I am being provocative. You can define winners and losers in many different ways. But many people (Tories especially you would think) define winners as the rich and those in upper social groups.
Has anyone found a representative organisation of a business, trade or profession in favour of Leave yet?
Can you show us any of those business, trade or professions that have a vote?
No. Just bodies trying to buy voters.
On the bodies being for remain, it's interesting that the farmers union is backing remain, yet all the signs in farmers fields are for leave. Perhaps the farmers backing remain are really shy.
Most small farmers are sick to death, sadly sometimes literally, with the CAP.
My two closest small farming friends are for Leave, they detest CAP.
The "farmers" for Remain are agri-mega-corporations.
Of course - I am being provocative. You can define winners and losers in many different ways. But many people (Tories especially you would think) define winners as the rich and those in upper social groups.
Has anyone found a representative organisation of a business, trade or profession in favour of Leave yet?
Can you show us any of those business, trade or professions that have a vote?
No. Just bodies trying to buy voters.
On the bodies being for remain, it's interesting that the farmers union is backing remain, yet all the signs in farmers fields are for leave. Perhaps the farmers backing remain are really shy.
I suspect the NFU has significant funding from the EU and access to lobbying them on CAP as well. Further its council members will dress to the Left.
Some ordinary farmers will favour the EU for the subsidies but I'd imagine more either wouldn't, or believe the UK would establish its own agricultural policy in the event of Brexit, or are motivated mainly by the politics.
Of course - I am being provocative. You can define winners and losers in many different ways. But many people (Tories especially you would think) define winners as the rich and those in upper social groups.
Has anyone found a representative organisation of a business, trade or profession in favour of Leave yet?
Can you show us any of those business, trade or professions that have a vote?
No. Just bodies trying to buy voters.
And frequently in receipt of EU funds.
There is no such thing as "EU Money". There is only taxpayer's money!
UKIP MEPs have shown themselves to be very fond of EU money.
Of course - I am being provocative. You can define winners and losers in many different ways. But many people (Tories especially you would think) define winners as the rich and those in upper social groups.
Has anyone found a representative organisation of a business, trade or profession in favour of Leave yet?
Can you show us any of those business, trade or professions that have a vote?
No. Just bodies trying to buy voters.
And frequently in receipt of EU funds.
There is no such thing as "EU Money". There is only taxpayer's money!
UKIP MEPs have shown themselves to be very fond of EU money.
"I think there's a lot in that. The social groups most likely to support Leave are primarily those who (unkindly perhaps) could be characterised as society's losers. Poorer, less educated, insecure lower-level jobs."
Losers? Losers??
I'm in Cornwall, writing for The Times. Specifically I'm in St Mawes, staying in one of the four hotels on my trip.
This morning I woke up to two emails telling me I had totally unexpected royalty cheques from Holland and France. If you said the phrase "high five figures" you would be in the vicinity of the truth.
Am I a LOSER? Hmm. Vulgar, narcissistic wanker, sure, but loser?
Getting a room at that hotel is about as rare as a hotel near the Arc de Triomphe with a pool ;-) Hasn't it been reviewed to death though, sure I have read reviews of it in the Telegraph, Guardian etc in past year or so.
Of course - I am being provocative. You can define winners and losers in many different ways. But many people (Tories especially you would think) define winners as the rich and those in upper social groups.
Has anyone found a representative organisation of a business, trade or profession in favour of Leave yet?
Can you show us any of those business, trade or professions that have a vote?
No. Just bodies trying to buy voters.
On the bodies being for remain, it's interesting that the farmers union is backing remain, yet all the signs in farmers fields are for leave. Perhaps the farmers backing remain are really shy.
Most small farmers are sick to death, sadly sometimes literally, with the CAP.
My two closest small farming friends are for Leave, they detest CAP.
Of course - I am being provocative. You can define winners and losers in many different ways. But many people (Tories especially you would think) define winners as the rich and those in upper social groups.
Has anyone found a representative organisation of a business, trade or profession in favour of Leave yet?
Can you show us any of those business, trade or professions that have a vote?
No. Just bodies trying to buy voters.
The EU gains a lot of third sector, trade union and business support both directly with grants and indirectly by privileged lobby access and through regulations creating entry barriers for smaller enterprises.
This makes up for its lack of enthusiastic democratic support.
Of course - I am being provocative. You can define winners and losers in many different ways. But many people (Tories especially you would think) define winners as the rich and those in upper social groups.
Has anyone found a representative organisation of a business, trade or profession in favour of Leave yet?
Can you show us any of those business, trade or professions that have a vote?
No. Just bodies trying to buy voters.
And frequently in receipt of EU funds.
There is no such thing as "EU Money". There is only taxpayer's money!
UKIP MEPs have shown themselves to be very fond of EU money.
Of course - I am being provocative. You can define winners and losers in many different ways. But many people (Tories especially you would think) define winners as the rich and those in upper social groups.
Has anyone found a representative organisation of a business, trade or profession in favour of Leave yet?
Can you show us any of those business, trade or professions that have a vote?
No. Just bodies trying to buy voters.
And frequently in receipt of EU funds.
There is no such thing as "EU Money". There is only taxpayer's money!
UKIP MEPs have shown themselves to be very fond of EU money.
How about Labour and Tory MEPs?
Point made - and missed
Remember, we UK taxpayers are net contributors to the EU, to the tune of £8.5 billion in 2015!
The Common Market became the Economic Community became the European Union, just as Global Warming became Climate Change. And if we have an ice age next year, it will become Climate Instability (keep bringing in the research money, whatever you do).
Why do the Old Gits tend to be Leavers? Experience-related cynicism? We've seen it all before. When you're had several governments say "Don't worry, we can always change the direction of travel" and then either fail, or fail to try, you do tend to lose your North Korean levels of enthusiasm.
In some ways it's a pity. As Piggy laments in the William Golding novel ... "He cried for their loss of innocence."
We'll look back in a few years time and say. "Ah, bless, they had no idea, did they?"
My hypothesis is that Old Gits tend to be anti-EU and anti-AGW because they have been less successful in life than they would have liked, but are unable to accept that this is due to their own shortcomings. This leads them place the blame for their perceived lack of success on some form of collusion against them, thus giving rise to a mentality that is conditioned to reject any form of authoritative information. It's one step down from full-blown conspiracy theorist.
I think there's a lot in that. The social groups most likely to support Leave are primarily those who (unkindly perhaps) could be characterised as society's losers. Poorer, less educated, insecure lower-level jobs.
Not unkindly. Inaccurately.
I refuse to allow "loser" to be added to the plethora of insults Leavers have to suffer. I know plenty of Brexiteers who are life's winners. Often self-made too.
It would be just as valid to suggest that Remainers were all life's scaredy-cats, those who wouldn't say boo to a goose, all those who can't cope with change because they are safely stuck in a groove.
No, I don't think that either.
This is going to turn into non competitive sports day isn't it?
We're all winners here. Even the losers.
The more I see of Remainers, the more I think it would do them a power of good to be losers for once. They do seem all too often to express the views of people who have had life handed to them on a plate - and hate the notion of anything that would put that at risk...
As a Spurs supporting, anti-Corbynista soft leftist I resent that. I lose all the time.
This morning I woke up to two emails telling me I had totally unexpected royalty cheques from Holland and France. If you said the phrase "high five figures" you would be in the vicinity of the truth.
Am I a LOSER? Hmm. Vulgar, narcissistic wanker, sure, but loser?
This morning I woke up to two emails telling me I had totally unexpected royalty cheques from Holland and France. If you said the phrase "high five figures" you would be in the vicinity of the truth.
Am I a LOSER? Hmm. Vulgar, narcissistic wanker, sure, but loser?
The Common Market became the Economic Community became the European Union, just as Global Warming became Climate Change. And if we have an ice age next year, it will become Climate Instability (keep bringing in the research money, whatever you do).
Why do the Old Gits tend to be Leavers? Experience-related cynicism? We've seen it all before. When you're had several governments say "Don't worry, we can always change the direction of travel" and then either fail, or fail to try, you do tend to lose your North Korean levels of enthusiasm.
In some ways it's a pity. As Piggy laments in the William Golding novel ... "He cried for their loss of innocence."
We'll look back in a few years time and say. "Ah, bless, they had no idea, did they?"
My hypothesis is that Old Gits tend to be anti-EU and anti-AGW because they have been less successful in life than they would have liked, but are unable to accept that this is due to their own shortcomings. This leads them place the blame for their perceived lack of success on some form of collusion against them, thus giving rise to a mentality that is conditioned to reject any form of authoritative information. It's one step down from full-blown conspiracy theorist.
I think there's a lot in that. The social groups most likely to support Leave are primarily those who (unkindly perhaps) could be characterised as society's losers. Poorer, less educated, insecure lower-level jobs.
Not unkindly. Inaccurately.
I refuse to allow "loser" to be added to the plethora of insults Leavers have to suffer. I know plenty of Brexiteers who are life's winners. Often self-made too.
It would be just as valid to suggest that Remainers were all life's scaredy-cats, those who wouldn't say boo to a goose, all those who can't cope with change because they are safely stuck in a groove.
No, I don't think that either.
This is going to turn into non competitive sports day isn't it?
We're all winners here. Even the losers.
The more I see of Remainers, the more I think it would do them a power of good to be losers for once. They do seem all too often to express the views of people who have had life handed to them on a plate - and hate the notion of anything that would put that at risk...
As a Spurs supporting, anti-Corbynista soft leftist I resent that. I lose all the time.
At least you finished higher in the League than the Hammers (or TSE's Liverpool!).
This morning I woke up to two emails telling me I had totally unexpected royalty cheques from Holland and France. If you said the phrase "high five figures" you would be in the vicinity of the truth.
Am I a LOSER? Hmm. Vulgar, narcissistic wanker, sure, but loser?
Of course - I am being provocative. You can define winners and losers in many different ways. But many people (Tories especially you would think) define winners as the rich and those in upper social groups.
Has anyone found a representative organisation of a business, trade or profession in favour of Leave yet?
Can you show us any of those business, trade or professions that have a vote?
No. Just bodies trying to buy voters.
And frequently in receipt of EU funds.
There is no such thing as "EU Money". There is only taxpayer's money!
UKIP MEPs have shown themselves to be very fond of EU money.
How about Labour and Tory MEPs?
Point made - and missed
Remember, we UK taxpayers are net contributors to the EU, to the tune of £8.5 billion in 2015!
Happy to pay - proves we are relatively rich within the UK.
Of course - I am being provocative. You can define winners and losers in many different ways. But many people (Tories especially you would think) define winners as the rich and those in upper social groups.
Has anyone found a representative organisation of a business, trade or profession in favour of Leave yet?
Can you show us any of those business, trade or professions that have a vote?
No. Just bodies trying to buy voters.
To answer my own question there is at least one national representative body backing Leave.
It's called ... er ... the RMT.
With friends like that.....
Gerry Adams and Ken Livingstone back Remain!
Yes but so do the current PM, all living former PMs. all living former party leaders bar IDS and "something of the night" Howard, about 75% of MPs, all other EU, NATO and Commonwealth leaders, the CBI, the TUC, the City, universities, the scientific community etc etc etc.
Of course - I am being provocative. You can define winners and losers in many different ways. But many people (Tories especially you would think) define winners as the rich and those in upper social groups.
Has anyone found a representative organisation of a business, trade or profession in favour of Leave yet?
Can you show us any of those business, trade or professions that have a vote?
No. Just bodies trying to buy voters.
And frequently in receipt of EU funds.
There is no such thing as "EU Money". There is only taxpayer's money!
UKIP MEPs have shown themselves to be very fond of EU money.
How about Labour and Tory MEPs?
Point made - and missed
Remember, we UK taxpayers are net contributors to the EU, to the tune of £8.5 billion in 2015!
Happy to pay - proves we are relatively rich within the UK.
How about the government puts in a few more tax bands? Maybe 30p between 30k and 40k, would that be alright with you?
Of course - I am being provocative. You can define winners and losers in many different ways. But many people (Tories especially you would think) define winners as the rich and those in upper social groups.
Has anyone found a representative organisation of a business, trade or profession in favour of Leave yet?
Can you show us any of those business, trade or professions that have a vote?
No. Just bodies trying to buy voters.
And frequently in receipt of EU funds.
There is no such thing as "EU Money". There is only taxpayer's money!
UKIP MEPs have shown themselves to be very fond of EU money.
How about Labour and Tory MEPs?
Point made - and missed
Remember, we UK taxpayers are net contributors to the EU, to the tune of £8.5 billion in 2015!
Happy to pay - proves we are relatively rich within the UK.
Of course - I am being provocative. You can define winners and losers in many different ways. But many people (Tories especially you would think) define winners as the rich and those in upper social groups.
Has anyone found a representative organisation of a business, trade or profession in favour of Leave yet?
Can you show us any of those business, trade or professions that have a vote?
No. Just bodies trying to buy voters.
To answer my own question there is at least one national representative body backing Leave.
It's called ... er ... the RMT.
With friends like that.....
Gerry Adams and Ken Livingstone back Remain!
Yes but so do the current PM, all living former PMs. all living former party leaders bar IDS and "something of the night" Howard, about 75% of MPs, all other EU, NATO and Commonwealth leaders, the CBI, the TUC, the City, universities, the scientific community etc etc etc.
Of all the things wrong with the BBC, it would be hard to argue that a shortage of gay people making and presenting programmes is one of them. As Andrew Marr observed a decade ago: ‘The BBC is not impartial or neutral. It’s a publicly funded, urban organisation with an abnormally large number of young people, ethnic minorities, and gay people. It has a liberal bias, not so much a party-political bias. It is better expressed as a cultural liberal bias.’
Why, then, is the government intent on making the BBC even more gay? In one of the less-reported sections of this week’s white paper on the future of the corporation, John Whittingdale lays down a target that 10 per cent of senior leadership roles at the BBC be filled by LGBT staff by 2020.
The argument from authority can take several forms. A legitimate argument from authority can take the general form:
X holds that A is true. X is an authority on the subject. The consensus of authorities agrees with X. There is a presumption that A is true.[10]
The argument is fallacious if one or more of the premises are false, or if it is claimed that the conclusion must be true on the basis of authority, rather than only probably true.[10]
Other logicians have claimed that the argument from authority is a statistical syllogism:
Most of what authority a has to say on subject matter S is correct. a says p about S. p is correct.[11]
John Hardwig stated in an article published in the Journal of Philosophy that the appeal to an expert is not evidence of the truth of the expert's claim, but rather evidence that experts have conducted an inquiry into the matter and come to a conclusion. He wrote that this makes the appeal a reason to believe a statement.[12]
The Common Market became the Economic Community became the European Union, just as Global Warming became Climate Change. And if we have an ice age next year, it will become Climate Instability (keep bringing in the research money, whatever you do).
Why do the Old Gits tend to be Leavers? Experience-related cynicism? We've seen it all before. When you're had several governments say "Don't worry, we can always change the direction of travel" and then either fail, or fail to try, you do tend to lose your North Korean levels of enthusiasm.
In some ways it's a pity. As Piggy laments in the William Golding novel ... "He cried for their loss of innocence."
We'll look back in a few years time and say. "Ah, bless, they had no idea, did they?"
My hypothesis is that Old Gits tend to be anti-EU and anti-AGW because they have been less successful in life than they would have liked, but are unable to accept that this is due to their own shortcomings. This leads them place the blame for their perceived lack of success on some form of collusion against them, thus giving rise to a mentality that is conditioned to reject any form of authoritative information. It's one step down from full-blown conspiracy theorist.
It wasn't Piggy, by the way, it was of course Ralph who mourned the loss of innocence.
Really? I have been astonishingly successful in everything I have done so far - with the one exception of political campaigns where I always seem to pick the losing side. But since I view politicians as slightly less attractive than scorpions (sorry NickP) I am not too concerned by that one dropped ball.
Good for you! Take no notice of ludicrous psychobabble.
If Richard chooses to self-identify as an Old Git, that's entirely his business :-)
You se I try so hard not to like you and then you say something like that and I go all friendly again. :-)
Of course - I am being provocative. You can define winners and losers in many different ways. But many people (Tories especially you would think) define winners as the rich and those in upper social groups.
Has anyone found a representative organisation of a business, trade or profession in favour of Leave yet?
Can you show us any of those business, trade or professions that have a vote?
No. Just bodies trying to buy voters.
To answer my own question there is at least one national representative body backing Leave.
It's called ... er ... the RMT.
With friends like that.....
Gerry Adams and Ken Livingstone back Remain!
Yes but so do the current PM, all living former PMs. all living former party leaders bar IDS and "something of the night" Howard, about 75% of MPs, all other EU, NATO and Commonwealth leaders, the CBI, the TUC, the City, universities, the scientific community etc etc etc.
Of all the things wrong with the BBC, it would be hard to argue that a shortage of gay people making and presenting programmes is one of them. As Andrew Marr observed a decade ago: ‘The BBC is not impartial or neutral. It’s a publicly funded, urban organisation with an abnormally large number of young people, ethnic minorities, and gay people. It has a liberal bias, not so much a party-political bias. It is better expressed as a cultural liberal bias.’
Why, then, is the government intent on making the BBC even more gay? In one of the less-reported sections of this week’s white paper on the future of the corporation, John Whittingdale lays down a target that 10 per cent of senior leadership roles at the BBC be filled by LGBT staff by 2020.
Mr. Eagles, well. Some men bet on things with a 77% chance of happening. Some men bet on things that are 250/1.
I leave the site to decide who the manlier fellow is
Dr. Prasannan, find it hard to buy books like that for children, because it's been a while since I was one and my reading age was always advanced, so I can't tell if I'll miss the target completely. Dinosaur books, at least, always have great pictures too.
Incidentally, I went for Sunset Over Abendau, a grimdark sci-fi story.
Have you considered Coprolites?
I am yet to meet a dinosaur loving boy who was not delighted by having a dinosaur poo.
Mr. Eagles, well. Some men bet on things with a 77% chance of happening. Some men bet on things that are 250/1.
I leave the site to decide who the manlier fellow is
Dr. Prasannan, find it hard to buy books like that for children, because it's been a while since I was one and my reading age was always advanced, so I can't tell if I'll miss the target completely. Dinosaur books, at least, always have great pictures too.
Incidentally, I went for Sunset Over Abendau, a grimdark sci-fi story.
Have you considered Coprolites?
I am yet to meet a dinosaur loving boy who was not delighted by having a dinosaur poo.
Shadow Europe minister Pat Glass has described a voter as a "horrible racist" during an EU referendum campaign visit - and vowed to boycott his neighbourhood, describing it as "wherever this is".
If WHITTINDALE wants 10% of upper management at the BBC to be Gay by 2020 ..he will have to sack a few of the present staff to get the numbers down to that level
We had the explosive poll a week ago showing that two thirds of Germans don't want Merkel to serve another term as leader, she responded by sort of backtracking on her "all are welcome" stance but not really enough. At around the same time AfD declared themselves an openly anti-Islam party saying that Islamic people are rolling back equality for men and women in Germany and are a threat to national security. They have begun campaigning on an openly anti-Islamic basis, they want no new Mosques built in Germany, no new Muslim immigrants and a repatriation of all recent migrants/refugees back to their home countries. In all other areas they are not fussed by immigration it seems. Their agenda, other than immigration, has moved further to the left, economically they are more protectionist, socially they are slightly more liberal than the CDU/CSU on "normal" issues such as women's rights and gay rights. The SPD are nowhere to be seen in all of this. The Greens and Left are both licking their lips at the thought of being invited to next year's grand coalition so are generally keeping quiet.
The latest polls:
YouGov/Bild
CDU/CSU - 30.5 SPD - 19.5 Greens - 13% FDP - 7.5% Left - 10.5% AfD - 15%
Allensbach/Frankfurter Zeitung
CDU/CSU - 33.5% SPD - 21% Greens - 11.5% FDP - 8% Left - 9% AfD - 12.5%
Forsa/RTL
CDU/CSU - 34% SPD - 19% Greens - 14% FPD - 7% Left - 9% AfD - 11%
It is interesting to note that AfD are at or near their all time high with pretty much all German pollsters, and that last time there were real elections they outperformed the polling by as much as 6% in some regions.
Going back to an earlier post, the current expectations within the CDU is for a CDU-SPD-Green coalition which will finish on about 60% combined with the official opposition, AfD, finishing on about 20%. Lots of CDU people believe that AfD have a natural ceiling on their support of about 20%, but then they also said that AfD would suffer if they became openly hostile to Islam as people would abandon them because they wouldn't vote for a "racist" party. That hasn't really happened, if anything AfD are polling better than ever since their anti-Islam declaration.
Shadow Europe minister Pat Glass has described a voter as a "horrible racist" during an EU referendum campaign visit - and vowed to boycott his neighbourhood, describing it as "wherever this is".
Of course - I am being provocative. You can define winners and losers in many different ways. But many people (Tories especially you would think) define winners as the rich and those in upper social groups.
Has anyone found a representative organisation of a business, trade or profession in favour of Leave yet?
Can you show us any of those business, trade or professions that have a vote?
No. Just bodies trying to buy voters.
To answer my own question there is at least one national representative body backing Leave.
It's called ... er ... the RMT.
With friends like that.....
Gerry Adams and Ken Livingstone back Remain!
Yes but so do the current PM, all living former PMs. all living former party leaders bar IDS and "something of the night" Howard, about 75% of MPs, all other EU, NATO and Commonwealth leaders, the CBI, the TUC, the City, universities, the scientific community etc etc etc.
Of all the things wrong with the BBC, it would be hard to argue that a shortage of gay people making and presenting programmes is one of them. As Andrew Marr observed a decade ago: ‘The BBC is not impartial or neutral. It’s a publicly funded, urban organisation with an abnormally large number of young people, ethnic minorities, and gay people. It has a liberal bias, not so much a party-political bias. It is better expressed as a cultural liberal bias.’
Why, then, is the government intent on making the BBC even more gay? In one of the less-reported sections of this week’s white paper on the future of the corporation, John Whittingdale lays down a target that 10 per cent of senior leadership roles at the BBC be filled by LGBT staff by 2020.
Perhaps, we'll have a good turnout of Ministers in nice frocks at the next Tory conference.
The ONS says c1% is gay.
I think I've said this before on here, but it is a shame that the ONS didn't include the sexuality question in the 2011 Census. The reason was that tests showed completion rates fell when the question was included. I don't know if there are plans to include it in the 2021 Census, but given these sorts of policies, I think that it's only right and proper that efforts are made to have a good understanding of the numbers, in the same way we know about gender, ethnicity and religion.
Shadow Europe minister Pat Glass has described a voter as a "horrible racist" during an EU referendum campaign visit - and vowed to boycott his neighbourhood, describing it as "wherever this is".
Thanks. Those look like interesting papers, but they don't actually dispute AGW, do they?
The first paper discusses variability in the temperature of Greenland snow, while the second is limited to changes in the French Alps. We know that the temperature of Greenland tends to swing all over the place, and Europe is also thought to undergo major regional changes in climate. Neither paper claims that these variations in climate were on a global scale, though, and nobody disputes that chaotic fluctuations in local climate occur.
As for the third paper, yes, climatologists are fully aware that small changes in solar output are likely to be responsible for triggering fluctuations in global temperature. By themselves, though, these fluctuations are far too small to account for the large changes global in temperature evident in the paloeclimatatic record. The corresponding fluctuations in CO2 very strongly suggest that greenhouse feedback was a major amplifying factor.
That is that fallacy that is perpetuated by the AGW crowd. There are a tiny number of papers that set out to directly refute AGW because that is not the way science works. Now the people who try to claim that 97% of scientists support AGW do so by looking at papers and any paper that does not say 'I refute AGW' they class as being supportive. Even though the subject matter of the paper is the same whether AGW is occurring or not.
The response you give to the first two papers is a classic example of misdirection. Because you asked for a couple of papers I gave you a couple dealing with one aspect that shows higher temperatures in the two periods concerned. You then use the fact that they are geographically limited to undermine them. So I could if you like produce another dozen papers that show that there is not geographical limit to the effect. No one paper will show it of course. But taken as a whole they will show it. Michael Mann tried this with the MWP when he tried to claim it was geographically limited or didn't exist at all. Doing so ignored the evidence and papers from South America, North America, Antarctica, Greenland, Japan, Africa and central Asia as well as from Europe.
On the third paper I am afraid you have not read it correctly. It does indeed claim that the fluctuations are large enough to cause the variations we have seen.
Of all the things wrong with the BBC, it would be hard to argue that a shortage of gay people making and presenting programmes is one of them. As Andrew Marr observed a decade ago: ‘The BBC is not impartial or neutral. It’s a publicly funded, urban organisation with an abnormally large number of young people, ethnic minorities, and gay people. It has a liberal bias, not so much a party-political bias. It is better expressed as a cultural liberal bias.’
Why, then, is the government intent on making the BBC even more gay? In one of the less-reported sections of this week’s white paper on the future of the corporation, John Whittingdale lays down a target that 10 per cent of senior leadership roles at the BBC be filled by LGBT staff by 2020.
Of all the things wrong with the BBC, it would be hard to argue that a shortage of gay people making and presenting programmes is one of them. As Andrew Marr observed a decade ago: ‘The BBC is not impartial or neutral. It’s a publicly funded, urban organisation with an abnormally large number of young people, ethnic minorities, and gay people. It has a liberal bias, not so much a party-political bias. It is better expressed as a cultural liberal bias.’
Why, then, is the government intent on making the BBC even more gay? In one of the less-reported sections of this week’s white paper on the future of the corporation, John Whittingdale lays down a target that 10 per cent of senior leadership roles at the BBC be filled by LGBT staff by 2020.
Perhaps, we'll have a good turnout of Ministers in nice frocks at the next Tory conference.
The ONS says c1% is gay.
I think I've said this before on here, but it is a shame that the ONS didn't include the sexuality question in the 2011 Census. The reason was that tests showed completion rates fell when the question was included. I don't know if there are plans to include it in the 2021 Census, but given these sorts of policies, I think that it's only right and proper that efforts are made to have a good understanding of the numbers, in the same way we know about gender, ethnicity and religion.
I would say that the figure is more than 1%, with many in the closet, in denial or bisexual, but less than the 10% cited in the Kinsey reports.
Cutting it down to 10% in showbusiness would involve mass sackings though!
If WHITTINDALE wants 10% of upper management at the BBC to be Gay by 2020 ..he will have to sack a few of the present staff to get the numbers down to that level
Presumably, there is no allowance for personal privacy in these matters - the policy could only be enacted if individuals were forced to reveal their sexual preferences (and some may prefer celibacy).
Of all the things wrong with the BBC, it would be hard to argue that a shortage of gay people making and presenting programmes is one of them. As Andrew Marr observed a decade ago: ‘The BBC is not impartial or neutral. It’s a publicly funded, urban organisation with an abnormally large number of young people, ethnic minorities, and gay people. It has a liberal bias, not so much a party-political bias. It is better expressed as a cultural liberal bias.’
Why, then, is the government intent on making the BBC even more gay? In one of the less-reported sections of this week’s white paper on the future of the corporation, John Whittingdale lays down a target that 10 per cent of senior leadership roles at the BBC be filled by LGBT staff by 2020.
If WHITTINDALE wants 10% of upper management at the BBC to be Gay by 2020 ..he will have to sack a few of the present staff to get the numbers down to that level
Presumably, there is no allowance for personal privacy in these matters - the policy could only be enacted if individuals were forced to reveal their sexual preferences (and some may prefer celibacy).
I fail to see what possible reason there is today to puff up being gay as an employment quota. It's like employing vegans. Only they love to tell us about it. And Matthew Parris who twaddles on about it endlessly.
Of course - I am being provocative. You can define winners and losers in many different ways. But many people (Tories especially you would think) define winners as the rich and those in upper social groups.
Has anyone found a representative organisation of a business, trade or profession in favour of Leave yet?
Can you show us any of those business, trade or professions that have a vote?
No. Just bodies trying to buy voters.
And frequently in receipt of EU funds.
There is no such thing as "EU Money". There is only taxpayer's money!
UKIP MEPs have shown themselves to be very fond of EU money.
How about Labour and Tory MEPs?
Point made - and missed
Remember, we UK taxpayers are net contributors to the EU, to the tune of £8.5 billion in 2015!
Happy to pay - proves we are relatively rich within the UK.
How about the government puts in a few more tax bands? Maybe 30p between 30k and 40k, would that be alright with you?
Why - I'm a Tory who is very happy with the way the govt has cut taxes year on year - and increased tax collection as a result. Win, win.
If WHITTINDALE wants 10% of upper management at the BBC to be Gay by 2020 ..he will have to sack a few of the present staff to get the numbers down to that level
I find it genuinely apalling that politicians these days are saying percentages of professional bodies should be gay, black, female or anything else. Remove the barriers and prejudices that are preventing people from operating on a level playing field, then let merit do the rest.
If WHITTINDALE wants 10% of upper management at the BBC to be Gay by 2020 ..he will have to sack a few of the present staff to get the numbers down to that level
Presumably, there is no allowance for personal privacy in these matters - the policy could only be enacted if individuals were forced to reveal their sexual preferences (and some may prefer celibacy).
Another proof that the Tories are now a sick organization. It's time that Cammo changed the Tory icon from a green tree to a transgender Bra and nickers.
Boris has won The Spectator’s President Erdogan Offensive Poetry competition, and here it is:
There was a young fellow from Ankara Who was a terrific wankerer Till he sowed his wild oats With the help of a goat But he didn’t even stop to thankera.
If WHITTINDALE wants 10% of upper management at the BBC to be Gay by 2020 ..he will have to sack a few of the present staff to get the numbers down to that level
Presumably, there is no allowance for personal privacy in these matters - the policy could only be enacted if individuals were forced to reveal their sexual preferences (and some may prefer celibacy).
I fail to see what possible reason there is today to puff up being gay as an employment quota. It's like employing vegans.
If WHITTINDALE wants 10% of upper management at the BBC to be Gay by 2020 ..he will have to sack a few of the present staff to get the numbers down to that level
As Karen of Will and Grace fame used to say "It's funny cos it's true"
Of all the things wrong with the BBC, it would be hard to argue that a shortage of gay people making and presenting programmes is one of them. As Andrew Marr observed a decade ago: ‘The BBC is not impartial or neutral. It’s a publicly funded, urban organisation with an abnormally large number of young people, ethnic minorities, and gay people. It has a liberal bias, not so much a party-political bias. It is better expressed as a cultural liberal bias.’
Why, then, is the government intent on making the BBC even more gay? In one of the less-reported sections of this week’s white paper on the future of the corporation, John Whittingdale lays down a target that 10 per cent of senior leadership roles at the BBC be filled by LGBT staff by 2020.
Of all the things wrong with the BBC, it would be hard to argue that a shortage of gay people making and presenting programmes is one of them. As Andrew Marr observed a decade ago: ‘The BBC is not impartial or neutral. It’s a publicly funded, urban organisation with an abnormally large number of young people, ethnic minorities, and gay people. It has a liberal bias, not so much a party-political bias. It is better expressed as a cultural liberal bias.’
Why, then, is the government intent on making the BBC even more gay? In one of the less-reported sections of this week’s white paper on the future of the corporation, John Whittingdale lays down a target that 10 per cent of senior leadership roles at the BBC be filled by LGBT staff by 2020.
Its a bit like saying '10% of the population has ever been drunk (I'm sure its a lot higher - but must be wary of self projection ;-)) so we need to have 10% of management drunks....
Of all the things wrong with the BBC, it would be hard to argue that a shortage of gay people making and presenting programmes is one of them. As Andrew Marr observed a decade ago: ‘The BBC is not impartial or neutral. It’s a publicly funded, urban organisation with an abnormally large number of young people, ethnic minorities, and gay people. It has a liberal bias, not so much a party-political bias. It is better expressed as a cultural liberal bias.’
Why, then, is the government intent on making the BBC even more gay? In one of the less-reported sections of this week’s white paper on the future of the corporation, John Whittingdale lays down a target that 10 per cent of senior leadership roles at the BBC be filled by LGBT staff by 2020.
Of all the things wrong with the BBC, it would be hard to argue that a shortage of gay people making and presenting programmes is one of them. As Andrew Marr observed a decade ago: ‘The BBC is not impartial or neutral. It’s a publicly funded, urban organisation with an abnormally large number of young people, ethnic minorities, and gay people. It has a liberal bias, not so much a party-political bias. It is better expressed as a cultural liberal bias.’
Why, then, is the government intent on making the BBC even more gay? In one of the less-reported sections of this week’s white paper on the future of the corporation, John Whittingdale lays down a target that 10 per cent of senior leadership roles at the BBC be filled by LGBT staff by 2020.
Shadow Europe minister Pat Glass has described a voter as a "horrible racist" during an EU referendum campaign visit - and vowed to boycott his neighbourhood, describing it as "wherever this is".
If WHITTINDALE wants 10% of upper management at the BBC to be Gay by 2020 ..he will have to sack a few of the present staff to get the numbers down to that level
Presumably, there is no allowance for personal privacy in these matters - the policy could only be enacted if individuals were forced to reveal their sexual preferences (and some may prefer celibacy).
I fail to see what possible reason there is today to puff up being gay as an employment quota. It's like employing vegans. Only they love to tell us about it. And Matthew Parris who twaddles on about it endlessly.
If WHITTINDALE wants 10% of upper management at the BBC to be Gay by 2020 ..he will have to sack a few of the present staff to get the numbers down to that level
I find it genuinely apalling that politicians these days are saying percentages of professional bodies should be gay, black, female or anything else. Remove the barriers and prejudices that are preventing people from operating on a level playing field, then let merit do the rest.
I can remember when the rise of the 'Meritocracy' was our great aspiration. No longer. God, I despise Cameron, and Osborne.
They're not due to be given the Open again until 2023 so I guess there is still a bit of time for them to change their minds on this. I had wondered if Turnberry would be snubbed given its controversial owner but I suspect it will get 202.
The more I see of Remainers, the more I think it would do them a power of good to be losers for once. They do seem all too often to express the views of people who have had life handed to them on a plate - and hate the notion of anything that would put that at risk...
The Common Market became the Economic Community became the European Union, just as Global Warming became Climate Change. And if we have an ice age next year, it will become Climate Instability (keep bringing in the research money, whatever you do).
Why do the Old Gits tend to be Leavers? Experience-related cynicism? We've seen it all before. When you're had several governments say "Don't worry, we can always change the direction of travel" and then either fail, or fail to try, you do tend to lose your North Korean levels of enthusiasm.
In some ways it's a pity. As Piggy laments in the William Golding novel ... "He cried for their loss of innocence."
We'll look back in a few years time and say. "Ah, bless, they had no idea, did they?"
My hypothesis is that Old Gits tend to be anti-EU and anti-AGW because they have been less successful in life than they would have liked, but are unable to accept that this is due to their own shortcomings. This leads them place the blame for their perceived lack of success on some form of collusion against them, thus giving rise to a mentality that is conditioned to reject any form of authoritative information. It's one step down from full-blown conspiracy theorist.
I think there's a lot in that. The social groups most likely to support Leave are primarily those who (unkindly perhaps) could be characterised as society's losers. Poorer, less educated, insecure lower-level jobs.
All the polling evidence shows that social groups ABC1 - society's winners - are overwhelmingly in favour of Remain. C2DE are in favour of Leave.
Can anyone name a national organisation representing any business, profession or trade association that favours Leave?
Your categorising of lower social groups as 'losers' is highly pejorative.
Of course - I am being provocative. You can define winners and losers in many different ways. But many people (Tories especially you would think) define winners as the rich and those in upper social groups.
Ht?
It is best that a man does not project his own prejudice onto others.
Yes , usually they have little willies and/or inferiority complexes and have to big themselves up by boasting of their cash and how that makes them important and better than others. Ones who have climbed ( allegedly ) the greasy pole tend to be the worst as well.
The more I see of Remainers, the more I think it would do them a power of good to be losers for once. They do seem all too often to express the views of people who have had life handed to them on a plate - and hate the notion of anything that would put that at risk...
I'm also an admirer of not repeating the same mistakes.
This is all very reminiscent of the Tory Eurosceptics voting in favour of the Social Chapter amendment back in 1993, and that turned out so well for them in 1997
"Along the way he’s thrown his lot in with almost all those economists who were his opponents in the austerity debate. The IMF, academic economists, Ed Balls — all those who declared him economically illiterate over the past six years have suddenly become, in his mind and rhetoric, economic gurus, infallible purveyors of “facts” about the future."
Of course - I am being provocative. You can define winners and losers in many different ways. But many people (Tories especially you would think) define winners as the rich and those in upper social groups.
Has anyone found a representative organisation of a business, trade or profession in favour of Leave yet?
Can you show us any of those business, trade or professions that have a vote?
No. Just bodies trying to buy voters.
To answer my own question there is at least one national representative body backing Leave.
It's called ... er ... the RMT.
With friends like that.....
Gerry Adams and Ken Livingstone back Remain!
Yes but so do the current PM, all living former PMs. all living former party leaders bar IDS and "something of the night" Howard, about 75% of MPs, all other EU, NATO and Commonwealth leaders, the CBI, the TUC, the City, universities, the scientific community etc etc etc.
Comments
Might be about to place my first bet on Leave..
Shame I'm doing virtual betting for this one, out of cash until the end of the month.
No. Just bodies trying to buy voters.
But didn't >< !
I leave the site to decide who the manlier fellow is
Dr. Prasannan, find it hard to buy books like that for children, because it's been a while since I was one and my reading age was always advanced, so I can't tell if I'll miss the target completely. Dinosaur books, at least, always have great pictures too.
Incidentally, I went for Sunset Over Abendau, a grimdark sci-fi story.
Although how luggage still stays on after four stops, I have no idea.
Love the first comment in the comment section, it was cos of Labour's massive (and infamous on PB) ground game...
UUP will go into opposition. SDLP and Alliance are making their minds up.
It's called ... er ... the RMT.
With friends like that.....
Some ordinary farmers will favour the EU for the subsidies but I'd imagine more either wouldn't, or believe the UK would establish its own agricultural policy in the event of Brexit, or are motivated mainly by the politics.
This makes up for its lack of enthusiastic democratic support.
I wish the more moderate Leavers would have a word with them
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3598477/ISIS-execute-25-people-lowering-NITRIC-ACID-Iraqi-spies-tied-rope-dropped-vat-public-warning-others.html
About 20% of "E" are pensioners with outright ownership of property, while 15% have private pensions.
Generally speaking:
ABC1 - people in offices
C2DE - people who work other places, plus non-working
Of all the things wrong with the BBC, it would be hard to argue that a shortage of gay people making and presenting programmes is one of them. As Andrew Marr observed a decade ago: ‘The BBC is not impartial or neutral. It’s a publicly funded, urban organisation with an abnormally large number of young people, ethnic minorities, and gay people. It has a liberal bias, not so much a party-political bias. It is better expressed as a cultural liberal bias.’
Why, then, is the government intent on making the BBC even more gay? In one of the less-reported sections of this week’s white paper on the future of the corporation, John Whittingdale lays down a target that 10 per cent of senior leadership roles at the BBC be filled by LGBT staff by 2020.
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/05/why-does-the-government-want-to-make-the-bbc-even-more-gay/
Perhaps, we'll have a good turnout of Ministers in nice frocks at the next Tory conference.
X holds that A is true.
X is an authority on the subject.
The consensus of authorities agrees with X.
There is a presumption that A is true.[10]
The argument is fallacious if one or more of the premises are false, or if it is claimed that the conclusion must be true on the basis of authority, rather than only probably true.[10]
Other logicians have claimed that the argument from authority is a statistical syllogism:
Most of what authority a has to say on subject matter S is correct.
a says p about S.
p is correct.[11]
John Hardwig stated in an article published in the Journal of Philosophy that the appeal to an expert is not evidence of the truth of the expert's claim, but rather evidence that experts have conducted an inquiry into the matter and come to a conclusion. He wrote that this makes the appeal a reason to believe a statement.[12]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority
I am yet to meet a dinosaur loving boy who was not delighted by having a dinosaur poo.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coprolite?wprov=sfla1
They are cheap and surprisingly pretty...
BBC political correspondent
Posted at 12:35
Shadow Europe minister Pat Glass has described a voter as a "horrible racist" during an EU referendum campaign visit - and vowed to boycott his neighbourhood, describing it as "wherever this is".
We had the explosive poll a week ago showing that two thirds of Germans don't want Merkel to serve another term as leader, she responded by sort of backtracking on her "all are welcome" stance but not really enough. At around the same time AfD declared themselves an openly anti-Islam party saying that Islamic people are rolling back equality for men and women in Germany and are a threat to national security. They have begun campaigning on an openly anti-Islamic basis, they want no new Mosques built in Germany, no new Muslim immigrants and a repatriation of all recent migrants/refugees back to their home countries. In all other areas they are not fussed by immigration it seems. Their agenda, other than immigration, has moved further to the left, economically they are more protectionist, socially they are slightly more liberal than the CDU/CSU on "normal" issues such as women's rights and gay rights. The SPD are nowhere to be seen in all of this. The Greens and Left are both licking their lips at the thought of being invited to next year's grand coalition so are generally keeping quiet.
The latest polls:
YouGov/Bild
CDU/CSU - 30.5
SPD - 19.5
Greens - 13%
FDP - 7.5%
Left - 10.5%
AfD - 15%
Allensbach/Frankfurter Zeitung
CDU/CSU - 33.5%
SPD - 21%
Greens - 11.5%
FDP - 8%
Left - 9%
AfD - 12.5%
Forsa/RTL
CDU/CSU - 34%
SPD - 19%
Greens - 14%
FPD - 7%
Left - 9%
AfD - 11%
It is interesting to note that AfD are at or near their all time high with pretty much all German pollsters, and that last time there were real elections they outperformed the polling by as much as 6% in some regions.
Going back to an earlier post, the current expectations within the CDU is for a CDU-SPD-Green coalition which will finish on about 60% combined with the official opposition, AfD, finishing on about 20%. Lots of CDU people believe that AfD have a natural ceiling on their support of about 20%, but then they also said that AfD would suffer if they became openly hostile to Islam as people would abandon them because they wouldn't vote for a "racist" party. That hasn't really happened, if anything AfD are polling better than ever since their anti-Islam declaration.
The response you give to the first two papers is a classic example of misdirection. Because you asked for a couple of papers I gave you a couple dealing with one aspect that shows higher temperatures in the two periods concerned. You then use the fact that they are geographically limited to undermine them. So I could if you like produce another dozen papers that show that there is not geographical limit to the effect. No one paper will show it of course. But taken as a whole they will show it. Michael Mann tried this with the MWP when he tried to claim it was geographically limited or didn't exist at all. Doing so ignored the evidence and papers from South America, North America, Antarctica, Greenland, Japan, Africa and central Asia as well as from Europe.
On the third paper I am afraid you have not read it correctly. It does indeed claim that the fluctuations are large enough to cause the variations we have seen.
The lack of that is a fundamental problem with its lack of balance.
Cutting it down to 10% in showbusiness would involve mass sackings though!
Imagine if the BBC had a target of 13% Kippers (to reflect national vote share)...
I must confess that idea never occurred to me.
Believe in BRITAIN!
Be LEAVE!
There was a young fellow from Ankara
Who was a terrific wankerer
Till he sowed his wild oats
With the help of a goat
But he didn’t even stop to thankera.
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/05/boris-johnson-wins-the-spectators-president-erdogan-offensive-poetry-competition/
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/apr/05/10-per-cent-population-gay-alfred-kinsey-statistics
Its a bit like saying '10% of the population has ever been drunk (I'm sure its a lot higher - but must be wary of self projection ;-)) so we need to have 10% of management drunks....
Luckily, I'm only a vegetarian
Even I think that price is bollocks.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/golf/36331270
They're not due to be given the Open again until 2023 so I guess there is still a bit of time for them to change their minds on this. I had wondered if Turnberry would be snubbed given its controversial owner but I suspect it will get 202.
Until someone does the same to you.
As someone has already said:
This is all very reminiscent of the Tory Eurosceptics voting in favour of the Social Chapter amendment back in 1993, and that turned out so well for them in 1997
"Along the way he’s thrown his lot in with almost all those economists who were his opponents in the austerity debate. The IMF, academic economists, Ed Balls — all those who declared him economically illiterate over the past six years have suddenly become, in his mind and rhetoric, economic gurus, infallible purveyors of “facts” about the future."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/05/17/george-osborne-may-live-to-regret-treating-his-former-friends-wi/