Of course anyone who is eligible to join can join and me resigning would feel like giving up but if there is no party to represent me then so be it.
I have already reached that point. My "political position" has moved to the point where there is no party that represents me or my views. I have a choice of fascists, commies or navel-gazers for the main parties and certifiable, swivel-eye loons for the fringe parties.
Well, this autumn conference season should give a clear picture of the direction of travel of the major parties.
I hope that the LD conference discusses policies other than Brexit rejectionism, and that the other parties have a serious discussion of the #peoplesvote.
Peoples vote funded by the wealthy put forward by the elite and consisting only of sore remainers
Sure, it is the mirror image of the Leave campaign, but quite possibly will be adopted by Labour as policy.
Not a chance according to Barry Gardiner or Corbyn.
Even JRM complimented them for respecting the vote
Nobody should be afraid of a second referendum. Remain Ultras are like Bourbons - they have learned nothing and taste horrible.
(and it should be remembered tt Plato was right - even if I doubt she was right for the right reasons. People on here made money from Trump's win.)
The question of what to do with info supplied by partisan posters has exercised me recently. Plato Provided lots of info for her own motives but it was still useful. You can't automatically discard it.
Your time is limited. And there are plenty of smart people who don't agree with you. So best to ignore the ones who post links to stuff that's frequently obviously wrong and sometimes they didn't even read themselves.
I really hope Plato got/gets the help she needs. She was getting seriously deranged by the end of her posting career here.
It was like someone else had hijacked her account and started posting in her absence. The change was very noticeable.
Russian bots....
The thing is people off PB met her in real life (prior trump conversion) and I don’t think people thought she particular odd or anything.
I followed her on twitter after she got banned here and then on GAB once she got banned on twitter. A few months ago she just stopped posting, going from many a day to nothing, which is worrying. I found the links to other twitter and GAB accounts of others of a like mind very interesting. The posts did seem to have the feel of a cult follower.
What’s GAB?
I'm no expert but it seems like twitter, but more freedom to express views. An awful lot of the At-right were posting about it on Twitter as they were getting banned one by one as an alternative platform. The accounts that Plato was linked to all sprung up here and carried on where they left off on Twitter.
I do hope those last 3 posts made sense. My use of commas seemed limited and when used, a bit random.
I wouldn't worry about it - unless you go crazy with hyphens, diversions (usually in the form of parenthetical statements) and semi-colons then I think you'll be fine; fortunately there are not many like that.
(and it should be remembered tt Plato was right - even if I doubt she was right for the right reasons. People on here made money from Trump's win.)
The question of what to do with info supplied by partisan posters has exercised me recently. Plato Provided lots of info for her own motives but it was still useful. You can't automatically discard it.
The trouble is identifying the wheat from the chaff. When following the threads Plato was involved in on twitter and GAB, it appears all Alt-right conspiracy nonsense, but of course that doesn't mean that they don't pick up on something that just might be genuine. Because of the rest you automatically dismiss it all. But they were months and months ahead on the London stabbings and the issues within Sweden (covered extensively on Newsnight last night).
(and it should be remembered tt Plato was right - even if I doubt she was right for the right reasons. People on here made money from Trump's win.)
The question of what to do with info supplied by partisan posters has exercised me recently. Plato Provided lots of info for her own motives but it was still useful. You can't automatically discard it.
You can when some of it is demonstrably wrong, and the poster refuses to accept. The classic one was Clinton selling Americas Plutonium stocks.
In that case, it becomes a case of sorting the wheat from the chaff, and there was a heck of a lot of chaff. Or, to use a different metaphor, the signal to noise ratio was very low.
At least we don't have Scott Adams' ramblings posted here daily anymore...
I do hope those last 3 posts made sense. My use of commas seemed limited and when used, a bit random.
I wouldn't worry about it - unless you go crazy with hyphens, diversions (usually in the form of parenthetical statements) and semi-colons then I think you'll be fine; fortunately there are not many like that.
My advice to my son, if he is lucky enough to get that sort of result will be *not* to get involved in any publicity in the media. Nowadays there's too many people who will see it, it will linger, and there's no real advantage to it.
A large proportion of his voters are already revolting.
Oh, is that not what Rudy meant?
Betting tip. There’s absolutely zero chance of a Trump impeachment now. Democrats rather come up against him than Pence in the next election.
Further betting tip. Warren is the Democratic nominee. Two reasons, the high command are filing in around her, and she’s building a policy platform, such as how to properly drain swamp, whilst others who will run are just smiling like gimps without building platform
My advice to my son, if he is lucky enough to get that sort of result will be *not* to get involved in any publicity in the media. Nowadays there's too many people who will see it, it will linger, and there's no real advantage to it.
Personally I quite enjoyed the Daily Star mocking me, but there you go.
My advice to my son, if he is lucky enough to get that sort of result will be *not* to get involved in any publicity in the media. Nowadays there's too many people who will see it, it will linger, and there's no real advantage to it.
Edit: but congratulations to him.
Based on the pupils at my school who got straight nines, there was not much luck involved but an awful lot of hard work and skill. Having the ability could be described as luck I suppose, but the hard work certainly isn’t.
Of course anyone who is eligible to join can join and me resigning would feel like giving up but if there is no party to represent me then so be it.
I have already reached that point. My "political position" has moved to the point where there is no party that represents me or my views. I have a choice of fascists, commies or navel-gazers for the main parties and certifiable, swivel-eye loons for the fringe parties.
Well, this autumn conference season should give a clear picture of the direction of travel of the major parties.
I hope that the LD conference discusses policies other than Brexit rejectionism, and that the other parties have a serious discussion of the #peoplesvote.
A large proportion of his voters are already revolting.
Oh, is that not what Rudy meant?
Betting tip. There’s absolutely zero chance of a Trump impeachment now. Democrats rather come up against him than Pence in the next election.
Further betting tip. Warren is the Democratic nominee. Two reasons, the high command are filing in around her, and she’s building a policy platform, such as how to properly drain swamp, whilst others who will run are just smiling like gimps without building platform
I tend to agree with the first proposition, but not the second.
There are a number of Democrats who are looking to run, and once we start having debates, then everything changes. (Remember, we're probably only six to nine months from the first debates.) Someone will have a good night, that someone will start to build momentum.
I can't think of any challenger Primary season where there hasn't been pretty serious competition.
So, I think you have to reckon that when the first debate starts you will have at least four or five of:
Cory Booker Mitch Landrieu Andrew Cuomo Terry McAuliffe Elizabeth Warren Deval Patrick Kirsten Gillibgrand John Hickenlooper Joe Biden Kamala Harris Bernie Sanders
Now, I suspect neither Joe nor Bernie will end up running. So of the remainder, I'd suggest people take a look at impressive but slightly under the radar candidates: i.e. Mitch Landrieu, John Hickenlooper, or Terry McAuliffe.
I would also suggest that you learn about the PDO (Pacific Decadal Oscillation) and the AMO (Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation) which are both now in the cooling part of their cycles
I've seen both of those two videos in the past, as I've done extensive personal research on this topic. Neither of them addresses the issue that I have. Both of them are about the extent and thinkness of sea ice, which is an interesting topic but not the one I'm looking at.
However, my issue is that the overall heat content of the oceans seems to have risen. This measured via thermal expansion, via probes, and via IR readings from satellites. It is also corroborated by data on the ocean becoming more acidic (although there might be other factors at play, so I wouldn't read too much into them.)
Do you believe that the oceans have warmed? If not, what do you think the disconnect is? Where are we getting it wrong?
With the oncoming grand solar minimum, historically those conditions have lined up with more volcanic / seismic activity, which in some areas of the world is hugely significant such as West Antarctica, particularly the ridge going up to South America. There is a lot of volcanic activity going on along the northern edge of the mid-Atlantic ridge which goes up between Svalbard and then wraps around west to the the north of Greenland. When Northern America was under 2 miles of ice at the height of the last ice age around 22-23,000 years ago the Arctic was under much less thickness of ice, mainly as a result of all the underwater volcanic activity. It's postulated that all that sulphur dioxide is behind more acidification that you mention, but I'd like to see further definitive research done on it.
I would also suggest that you learn about the PDO (Pacific Decadal Oscillation) and the AMO (Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation) which are both now in the cooling part of their cycles
I've seen both of those two videos in the past, as I've done extensive personal research on this topic. Neither of them addresses the issue that I have. Both of them are about the extent and thinkness of sea ice, which is an interesting topic but not the one I'm looking at.
However, my issue is that the overall heat content of the oceans seems to have risen. This measured via thermal expansion, via probes, and via IR readings from satellites. It is also corroborated by data on the ocean becoming more acidic (although there might be other factors at play, so I wouldn't read too much into them.)
Do you believe that the oceans have warmed? If not, what do you think the disconnect is? Where are we getting it wrong?
With the oncoming grand solar minimum, historically those conditions have lined up with more volcanic / seismic activity, which in some areas of the world is hugely significant such as West Antarctica, particularly the ridge going up to South America. There is a lot of volcanic activity going on along the northern edge of the mid-Atlantic ridge which goes up between Svalbard and then wraps around west to the the north of Greenland. When Northern America was under 2 miles of ice at the height of the last ice age around 22-23,000 years ago the Arctic was under much less thickness of ice, mainly as a result of all the underwater volcanic activity. It's postulated that all that sulphur dioxide is behind more acidification that you mention, but I'd like to see further definitive research done on it.
Do we have any way to measure the quantity/size of underwater volcanic activity? It could easily be distorting ocean numbers - but we need to have data to confirm/reject the hypothesis.
I would also suggest that you learn about the PDO (Pacific Decadal Oscillation) and the AMO (Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation) which are both now in the cooling part of their cycles
I've seen both of those two videos in the past, as I've done extensive personal research on this topic. Neither of them addresses the issue that I have. Both of them are about the extent and thinkness of sea ice, which is an interesting topic but not the one I'm looking at.
However, my issue is that the overall heat content of the oceans seems to have risen. This measured via thermal expansion, via probes, and via IR readings from satellites. It is also corroborated by data on the ocean becoming more acidic (although there might be other factors at play, so I wouldn't read too much into them.)
Do you believe that the oceans have warmed? If not, what do you think the disconnect is? Where are we getting it wrong?
With the oncoming grand solar minimum, historically those conditions have lined up with more volcanic / seismic activity, which in some areas of the world is hugely significant such as West Antarctica, particularly the ridge going up to South America. There is a lot of volcanic activity going on along the northern edge of the mid-Atlantic ridge which goes up between Svalbard and then wraps around west to the the north of Greenland. When Northern America was under 2 miles of ice at the height of the last ice age around 22-23,000 years ago the Arctic was under much less thickness of ice, mainly as a result of all the underwater volcanic activity. It's postulated that all that sulphur dioxide is behind more acidification that you mention, but I'd like to see further definitive research done on it.
God, I've missed your gibberish. Welcome back darling.
A large proportion of his voters are already revolting.
Oh, is that not what Rudy meant?
Betting tip. There’s absolutely zero chance of a Trump impeachment now. Democrats rather come up against him than Pence in the next election.
Further betting tip. Warren is the Democratic nominee. Two reasons, the high command are filing in around her, and she’s building a policy platform, such as how to properly drain swamp, whilst others who will run are just smiling like gimps without building platform
"Pocahontas" would probably be Trump's choice of opponent though. Easy to portray as Hillary on steroids and fire up his base.
A large proportion of his voters are already revolting.
Oh, is that not what Rudy meant?
Betting tip. There’s absolutely zero chance of a Trump impeachment now. Democrats rather come up against him than Pence in the next election.
Further betting tip. Warren is the Democratic nominee. Two reasons, the high command are filing in around her, and she’s building a policy platform, such as how to properly drain swamp, whilst others who will run are just smiling like gimps without building platform
"Pocahontas" would probably be Trump's choice of opponent though. Easy to portray as Hillary on steroids and fire up his base.
I agree, she would be Trump's dream opponent.
I think the people he would struggle against would be:
Eric Holder (ex NY Attorney General, could hammer Trump on corruption) John Hickenlooper (popular governor of Colorado, successful businessman, very difficult to rile)
Why don't you think a political party would pay corporation tax?
Because it is not:
The Conservative Party Ltd or The Conservative Party PLC
Instead it (probably) is
The Conservative Party (Charity Number xxx)
Well, OK, I see your reasoning but no, none of the main political parties are registered charities. Some have charities that support them though. They are mainly unincorporated associations.
Even so, Boris does seem to strike a chord with many of your fellows, can Hunt/Javid/Unknown stop him if he gets to the final two?
Boris and his acolytes know he's got a lack of support of MPs that there's a very strong chance he won't make the final two.
That's why they are trying to change the rules.
You're not concerned at a backlash from that faction if he doesn't make the final two?
No.
Wrong. There will be a huge write-in for Boris if he stands but doesn't make the final two.
No there won't. That is not how any UK forms of voting has ever worked.
We chose between the candidates listed or spoil the ballot paper.
A write-in campaign, if it got any traction, would just lead to some ballot spoiling. It would not propel Boris (or any other written-in name) to the leadership.
If the voting is electronic - as is not impossible - there is no scope for writing-in at all!
And if say half the ballots got spoilt by people writing in for Boris? You have a leader who the members don't believe in.....why should the wider electorate?
EDIT: and electronic voting? For the Tory members? lol!
I would also suggest that you learn about the PDO (Pacific Decadal Oscillation) and the AMO (Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation) which are both now in the cooling part of their cycles
I've seen both of those two videos in the past, as I've done extensive personal research on this topic. Neither of them addresses the issue that I have. Both of them are about the extent and thinkness of sea ice, which is an interesting topic but not the one I'm looking at.
However, my issue is that the overall heat content of the oceans seems to have risen. This measured via thermal expansion, via probes, and via IR readings from satellites. It is also corroborated by data on the ocean becoming more acidic (although there might be other factors at play, so I wouldn't read too much into them.)
Do you believe that the oceans have warmed? If not, what do you think the disconnect is? Where are we getting it wrong?
With the oncoming grand solar minimum, historically those conditions have lined up with more volcanic / seismic activity, which in some areas of the world is hugely significant such as West Antarctica, particularly the ridge going up to South America. There is a lot of volcanic activity going on along the northern edge of the mid-Atlantic ridge which goes up between Svalbard and then wraps around west to the the north of Greenland. When Northern America was under 2 miles of ice at the height of the last ice age around 22-23,000 years ago the Arctic was under much less thickness of ice, mainly as a result of all the underwater volcanic activity. It's postulated that all that sulphur dioxide is behind more acidification that you mention, but I'd like to see further definitive research done on it.
The solar minimum would also tie up with Svensmark's Cosmic Ray hypothesis since the reduced solar magnetosphere would allow more high energy cosmic rays to impinge on the Earth's atmosphere inducing cloud seeding at low altitudes which would have a cooling effect on the planet.
I have no doubt that the climate changes and, therefore, by definition, Climate Change exists and happens. I do doubt that it has a single cause.
Personally, my biggest worry is ocean floor clathrates
Even so, Boris does seem to strike a chord with many of your fellows, can Hunt/Javid/Unknown stop him if he gets to the final two?
Boris and his acolytes know he's got a lack of support of MPs that there's a very strong chance he won't make the final two.
That's why they are trying to change the rules.
You're not concerned at a backlash from that faction if he doesn't make the final two?
No.
Wrong. There will be a huge write-in for Boris if he stands but doesn't make the final two.
No there won't. That is not how any UK forms of voting has ever worked.
We chose between the candidates listed or spoil the ballot paper.
A write-in campaign, if it got any traction, would just lead to some ballot spoiling. It would not propel Boris (or any other written-in name) to the leadership.
If the voting is electronic - as is not impossible - there is no scope for writing-in at all!
And if say half the ballots got spoilt by people writing in for Boris? You have a leader who the members don't believe in.....why should the wider electorate?
EDIT: and electronic voting? For the Tory members? lol!
Well quite. I've known Tory members who hadn't yet got to grips with the automobile.
Every high profile US legal investigation reminds me how glad I am not to live there. Especially if the Feds are really out to get you. Plea deals and granted immunity are like an administrative version of extracting evidence by torture. Make up something good or you go down for literally decades. Before you even get onto the partisan appointments, or the size of the legal fees.
As it happens, I visited an erstwhile underwater volcano today.
I've decided volcanoes are pretty scary. I was recently in Pompeii and there was something or other happening - I have no idea what it was, and everyone else seemed relaxed. Not for me. However if I can see remotely what's going on then I'm hugely interested.
I would also suggest that you learn about the PDO (Pacific Decadal Oscillation) and the AMO (Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation) which are both now in the cooling part of their cycles
I've seen both of those two videos in the past, as I've done extensive personal research on this topic. Neither of them addresses the issue that I have. Both of them are about the extent and thinkness of sea ice, which is an interesting topic but not the one I'm looking at.
However, my issue is that the overall heat content of the oceans seems to have risen. This measured via thermal expansion, via probes, and via IR readings from satellites. It is also corroborated by data on the ocean becoming more acidic (although there might be other factors at play, so I wouldn't read too much into them.)
Do you believe that the oceans have warmed? If not, what do you think the disconnect is? Where are we getting it wrong?
With the oncoming grand solar minimum, historically those conditions have lined up with more volcanic / seismic activity, which in some areas of the world is hugely significant such as West Antarctica, particularly the ridge going up to South America. There is a lot of volcanic activity going on along the northern edge of the mid-Atlantic ridge which goes up between Svalbard and then wraps around west to the the north of Greenland. When Northern America was under 2 miles of ice at the height of the last ice age around 22-23,000 years ago the Arctic was under much less thickness of ice, mainly as a result of all the underwater volcanic activity. It's postulated that all that sulphur dioxide is behind more acidification that you mention, but I'd like to see further definitive research done on it.
The solar minimum would also tie up with Svensmark's Cosmic Ray hypothesis since the reduced solar magnetosphere would allow more high energy cosmic rays to impinge on the Earth's atmosphere inducing cloud seeding at low altitudes which would have a cooling effect on the planet.
I have no doubt that the climate changes and, therefore, by definition, Climate Change exists and happens. I do doubt that it has a single cause.
Personally, my biggest worry is ocean floor clathrates
You mean methane trapped as ice? That's the power source of the future, that is.
Even so, Boris does seem to strike a chord with many of your fellows, can Hunt/Javid/Unknown stop him if he gets to the final two?
Boris and his acolytes know he's got a lack of support of MPs that there's a very strong chance he won't make the final two.
That's why they are trying to change the rules.
You're not concerned at a backlash from that faction if he doesn't make the final two?
No.
Wrong. There will be a huge write-in for Boris if he stands but doesn't make the final two.
No there won't. That is not how any UK forms of voting has ever worked.
We chose between the candidates listed or spoil the ballot paper.
A write-in campaign, if it got any traction, would just lead to some ballot spoiling. It would not propel Boris (or any other written-in name) to the leadership.
If the voting is electronic - as is not impossible - there is no scope for writing-in at all!
And if say half the ballots got spoilt by people writing in for Boris? You have a leader who the members don't believe in.....why should the wider electorate?
EDIT: and electronic voting? For the Tory members? lol!
They won’t be voting for they will be voting against. How else do you explain IDS?
My advice to my son, if he is lucky enough to get that sort of result will be *not* to get involved in any publicity in the media. Nowadays there's too many people who will see it, it will linger, and there's no real advantage to it.
Edit: but congratulations to him.
Based on the pupils at my school who got straight nines, there was not much luck involved but an awful lot of hard work and skill. Having the ability could be described as luck I suppose, but the hard work certainly isn’t.
Even so, Boris does seem to strike a chord with many of your fellows, can Hunt/Javid/Unknown stop him if he gets to the final two?
Boris and his acolytes know he's got a lack of support of MPs that there's a very strong chance he won't make the final two.
That's why they are trying to change the rules.
You're not concerned at a backlash from that faction if he doesn't make the final two?
No.
Wrong. There will be a huge write-in for Boris if he stands but doesn't make the final two.
No there won't. That is not how any UK forms of voting has ever worked.
We chose between the candidates listed or spoil the ballot paper.
A write-in campaign, if it got any traction, would just lead to some ballot spoiling. It would not propel Boris (or any other written-in name) to the leadership.
If the voting is electronic - as is not impossible - there is no scope for writing-in at all!
And if say half the ballots got spoilt by people writing in for Boris? You have a leader who the members don't believe in.....why should the wider electorate?
EDIT: and electronic voting? For the Tory members? lol!
I don’t think you know much about the Tory Party if you think our members would ‘write-in’ somebody who wasn’t eligible under the rules. That’s just not how we are.
It’s the kind of thing silly people who belong to silly parties would do.
My advice to my son, if he is lucky enough to get that sort of result will be *not* to get involved in any publicity in the media. Nowadays there's too many people who will see it, it will linger, and there's no real advantage to it.
Edit: but congratulations to him.
Based on the pupils at my school who got straight nines, there was not much luck involved but an awful lot of hard work and skill. Having the ability could be described as luck I suppose, but the hard work certainly isn’t.
Good point, well put.
Thanks. It irritates me a bit when doing well at school is regarded as ‘luck’.
On the other hand doing badly in a particular subject can be down to bad luck, if incompetent exam boards (or possibly even teachers) count as such.
Sweden: Pre-election voting started in Sweden and for Swedish voters abroad with expectations that half of the voters will cast their vote, will do it before the actual election date (9 September). #val2018 #valet2018 #Sweden #svpol
One is one of the most successful sitcoms of all time the other hardly watched, but because Big Bang theory is “regressive” it gets the thumbs down where as right in Brooklyn 99 got all its so unfair cos it’s so good.
IMO Big Bang should have got canned 3-4 seasons ago. Brooklyn 99 was just shit.
My advice to my son, if he is lucky enough to get that sort of result will be *not* to get involved in any publicity in the media. Nowadays there's too many people who will see it, it will linger, and there's no real advantage to it.
Edit: but congratulations to him.
Based on the pupils at my school who got straight nines, there was not much luck involved but an awful lot of hard work and skill. Having the ability could be described as luck I suppose, but the hard work certainly isn’t.
Good point, well put.
Thanks. It irritates me a bit when doing well at school is regarded as ‘luck’.
On the other hand doing badly in a particular subject can be down to bad luck, if incompetent exam boards (or possibly even teachers) count as such.
My GCSEs were utterly mucked up by long-term ill health. As the ill-health was not self-inflicted, I see it as luck, albeit bad luck. That was kind-of what I was referring to, especially as he might have inherited the problem.
A large proportion of his voters are already revolting.
Oh, is that not what Rudy meant?
Betting tip. There’s absolutely zero chance of a Trump impeachment now. Democrats rather come up against him than Pence in the next election.
Further betting tip. Warren is the Democratic nominee. Two reasons, the high command are filing in around her, and she’s building a policy platform, such as how to properly drain swamp, whilst others who will run are just smiling like gimps without building platform
"Pocahontas" would probably be Trump's choice of opponent though. Easy to portray as Hillary on steroids and fire up his base.
I agree, she would be Trump's dream opponent.
I think the people he would struggle against would be:
Eric Holder (ex NY Attorney General, could hammer Trump on corruption) John Hickenlooper (popular governor of Colorado, successful businessman, very difficult to rile)
I am yet to be convinced that Dems have an answer to Trump, or indeed to their own identity politics/Occupy Wall Street politics.
One is one of the most successful sitcoms of all time the other hardly watched, but because Big Bang theory is “regressive” it gets the thumbs down where as right in Brooklyn 99 got all its so unfair cos it’s so good.
IMO Big Bang should have got canned 3-4 seasons ago.
I think Big Bang Theory in unbearable, I enjoy Brooklyn 99
I would also suggest that you learn about the PDO (Pacific Decadal Oscillation) and the AMO (Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation) which are both now in the cooling part of their cycles
I've seen both of those two videos in the past, as I've done extensive personal research on this topic. Neither of them addresses the issue that I have. Both of them are about the extent and thinkness of sea ice, which is an interesting topic but not the one I'm looking at.
However, my issue is that the overall heat content of the oceans seems to have risen. This measured via thermal expansion, via probes, and via IR readings from satellites. It is also corroborated by data on the ocean becoming more acidic (although there might be other factors at play, so I wouldn't read too much into them.)
Do you believe that the oceans have warmed? If not, what do you think the disconnect is? Where are we getting it wrong?
With the oncoming grand solar minimum, historically those conditions have lined up with more volcanic / seismic activity, which in some areas of the world is hugely significant such as West Antarctica, particularly the ridge going up to South America. There is a lot of volcanic activity going on along the northern edge of the mid-Atlantic ridge which goes up between Svalbard and then wraps around west to the the north of Greenland. When Northern America was under 2 miles of ice at the height of the last ice age around 22-23,000 years ago the Arctic was under much less thickness of ice, mainly as a result of all the underwater volcanic activity. It's postulated that all that sulphur dioxide is behind more acidification that you mention, but I'd like to see further definitive research done on it.
Solar impact is negligible when compared to anthropogenic forcing.
2019 will be another hot one (*maybe* even the hottest ever) if the predicted El-Nino takes hold over the winter.
I really hope Plato got/gets the help she needs. She was getting seriously deranged by the end of her posting career here.
It was like someone else had hijacked her account and started posting in her absence. The change was very noticeable.
Russian bots....
The thing is people off PB met her in real life (prior trump conversion) and I don’t think people thought she particular odd or anything.
I followed her on twitter after she got banned here and then on GAB once she got banned on twitter. A few months ago she just stopped posting, going from many a day to nothing, which is worrying. I found the links to other twitter and GAB accounts of others of a like mind very interesting. The posts did seem to have the feel of a cult follower.
I would also suggest that you learn about the PDO (Pacific Decadal Oscillation) and the AMO (Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation) which are both now in the cooling part of their cycles
I've seen both of those two videos in the past, as I've done extensive personal research on this topic. Neither of them addresses the issue that I have. Both of them are about the extent and thinkness of sea ice, which is an interesting topic but not the one I'm looking at.
However, my issue is that the overall heat content of the oceans seems to have risen. This measured via thermal expansion, via probes, and via IR readings from satellites. It is also corroborated by data on the ocean becoming more acidic (although there might be other factors at play, so I wouldn't read too much into them.)
Do you believe that the oceans have warmed? If not, what do you think the disconnect is? Where are we getting it wrong?
With the oncoming grand solar minimum, historically those conditions have lined up with more volcanic / seismic activity, which in some areas of the world is hugely significant such as West Antarctica, particularly the ridge going up to South America. There is a lot of volcanic activity going on along the northern edge of the mid-Atlantic ridge which goes up between Svalbard and then wraps around west to the the north of Greenland. When Northern America was under 2 miles of ice at the height of the last ice age around 22-23,000 years ago the Arctic was under much less thickness of ice, mainly as a result of all the underwater volcanic activity. It's postulated that all that sulphur dioxide is behind more acidification that you mention, but I'd like to see further definitive research done on it.
Solar impact is negligible when compared to anthropogenic forcing.
2019 will be another hot one (*maybe* even the hottest ever) if the predicted El-Nino takes hold over the winter.
Hottest on record. The Earth has undoubtedly been warmer in the past.
I would also suggest that you learn about the PDO (Pacific Decadal Oscillation) and the AMO (Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation) which are both now in the cooling part of their cycles
I've seen both of those two videos in the past, as I've done extensive personal research on this topic. Neither of them addresses the issue that I have. Both of them are about the extent and thinkness of sea ice, which is an interesting topic but not the one I'm looking at.
However, my issue is that the overall heat content of the oceans seems to have risen. This measured via thermal expansion, via probes, and via IR readings from satellites. It is also corroborated by data on the ocean becoming more acidic (although there might be other factors at play, so I wouldn't read too much into them.)
Do you believe that the oceans have warmed? If not, what do you think the disconnect is? Where are we getting it wrong?
With the oncoming grand solar minimum, historically those conditions have lined up with more volcanic / seismic activity, which in some areas of the world is hugely significant such as West Antarctica, particularly the ridge going up to South America. There is a lot of volcanic activity going on along the northern edge of the mid-Atlantic ridge which goes up between Svalbard and then wraps around west to the the north of Greenland. When Northern America was under 2 miles of ice at the height of the last ice age around 22-23,000 years ago the Arctic was under much less thickness of ice, mainly as a result of all the underwater volcanic activity. It's postulated that all that sulphur dioxide is behind more acidification that you mention, but I'd like to see further definitive research done on it.
Solar impact is negligible when compared to anthropogenic forcing.
2019 will be another hot one (*maybe* even the hottest ever) if the predicted El-Nino takes hold over the winter.
Hottest on record. The Earth has undoubtedly been warmer in the past.
One is one of the most successful sitcoms of all time the other hardly watched, but because Big Bang theory is “regressive” it gets the thumbs down where as right in Brooklyn 99 got all its so unfair cos it’s so good.
IMO Big Bang should have got canned 3-4 seasons ago.
I think Big Bang Theory in unbearable, I enjoy Brooklyn 99
The market suggests you are most definitely in the minority.
One is one of the most successful sitcoms of all time the other hardly watched, but because Big Bang theory is “regressive” it gets the thumbs down where as right in Brooklyn 99 got all its so unfair cos it’s so good.
IMO Big Bang should have got canned 3-4 seasons ago.
I think Big Bang Theory in unbearable, I enjoy Brooklyn 99
The market suggests you are most definitely in the minority.
I suspect the canned laughter players better in American than it does in my ears
Every high profile US legal investigation reminds me how glad I am not to live there. Especially if the Feds are really out to get you. Plea deals and granted immunity are like an administrative version of extracting evidence by torture. Make up something good or you go down for literally decades. Before you even get onto the partisan appointments, or the size of the legal fees.
A large proportion of his voters are already revolting.
Oh, is that not what Rudy meant?
Betting tip. There’s absolutely zero chance of a Trump impeachment now. Democrats rather come up against him than Pence in the next election.
Further betting tip. Warren is the Democratic nominee. Two reasons, the high command are filing in around her, and she’s building a policy platform, such as how to properly drain swamp, whilst others who will run are just smiling like gimps without building platform
"Pocahontas" would probably be Trump's choice of opponent though. Easy to portray as Hillary on steroids and fire up his base.
I agree, she would be Trump's dream opponent.
I think the people he would struggle against would be:
Eric Holder (ex NY Attorney General, could hammer Trump on corruption) John Hickenlooper (popular governor of Colorado, successful businessman, very difficult to rile)
I am yet to be convinced that Dems have an answer to Trump, or indeed to their own identity politics/Occupy Wall Street politics.
Where is their JFK or even Clinton?
Don't forget that Carter won in '76, and he wasn't exactly Mr Charisma.
Really, the issue that Trump has is that he only won very narrowly last time around, the people benefiting from his economics policies are mostly in California and Texas, and the drip-drip of ethics stories discourage independents and moderate Republicans from being as enthused as they might be.
Now, it's possible the economy will be actually booming in November 2020, in which case he probably wins on a wave of economic optimism, irrespective. But otherwise, I think so long as Dems avoid picking someone who plays the identity politics card, then they're in with a shout.
I would also suggest that you learn about the PDO (Pacific Decadal Oscillation) and the AMO (Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation) which are both now in the cooling part of their cycles
I've seen both of those two videos in the past, as I've done extensive personal research on this topic. Neither of them addresses the issue that I have. Both of them are about the extent and thinkness of sea ice, which is an interesting topic but not the one I'm looking at.
However, my issue is that the overall heat content of the oceans seems to have risen. This measured via thermal expansion, via probes, and via IR readings from satellites. It is also corroborated by data on the ocean becoming more acidic (although there might be other factors at play, so I wouldn't read too much into them.)
Do you believe that the oceans have warmed? If not, what do you think the disconnect is? Where are we getting it wrong?
With the oncoming grand solar minimum, historically those conditions have lined up with more volcanic / seismic activity, which in some areas of the world is hugely significant such as West Antarctica, particularly the ridge going up to South America. There is a lot of volcanic activity going on along the northern edge of the mid-Atlantic ridge which goes up between Svalbard and then wraps around west to the the north of Greenland. When Northern America was under 2 miles of ice at the height of the last ice age around 22-23,000 years ago the Arctic was under much less thickness of ice, mainly as a result of all the underwater volcanic activity. It's postulated that all that sulphur dioxide is behind more acidification that you mention, but I'd like to see further definitive research done on it.
God, I've missed your gibberish. Welcome back darling.
Join the anti-MMR jokers, only 40,000 measles cases so far this year, with 39 deaths compared with 38 for the entire 2017. Pity so many believe they know more than scientists and specialists. As for the theory of global warming, I can remember reading in New Scientist, that the cycle of ice ages last around 100,000 years, while the temperate periods last around 10,000 years in between. Um! The last ice age is considered to have ended 11,000 years ago....
Imagine if any politician made that statement about any other monority group in the UK, they would be finished. All those corbynistas who hate Kipling at Manchester university for saying similar kind of things about Indians 100 years ago, wonder what they make of it?
Not consistent with Gardiner or Corbyn - wishful thinking
Corbyn seems to be playing a blinder on that score - lots of remainers will believe Labour are totally in favour of a referendum, even as he does not piss off leavers.
Imagine if any politician made that statement about any other monority group in the UK, they would be finished. All those corbynistas who hate Kipling at Manchester university for saying similar kind of things about Indians 100 years ago, wonder what they make of it?
Smear, misquoted, out of context, what about killing children, smears, won noble prize, fought racism all his life, smears, jesus come to earth again, smears, jews jews jews, smears.
One is one of the most successful sitcoms of all time the other hardly watched, but because Big Bang theory is “regressive” it gets the thumbs down where as right in Brooklyn 99 got all its so unfair cos it’s so good.
IMO Big Bang should have got canned 3-4 seasons ago.
I think Big Bang Theory in unbearable, I enjoy Brooklyn 99
I saw a couple of seasons, it was...ok, but leaned too hard on annoying humour. Brooklyn Nine Nine's first couple of episodes were not very good, so I didn't keep watching, but when I went back I fell in love with the show, much funnier, with great characters.
One is one of the most successful sitcoms of all time the other hardly watched, but because Big Bang theory is “regressive” it gets the thumbs down where as right in Brooklyn 99 got all its so unfair cos it’s so good.
IMO Big Bang should have got canned 3-4 seasons ago.
I think Big Bang Theory in unbearable, I enjoy Brooklyn 99
The market suggests you are most definitely in the minority.
I suspect the canned laughter players better in American than it does in my ears
It's something that never used to bother me but now makes it hard to watch things with it.
Freakonomics had a recent episode on this. One of the people they talked to was a Brit ex-pat and she basically said that is how it felt for several years (especially coming from London), but now is happier than ever. The ability to leave at 4pm and pick up her kids and then spend the rest of the day with them / doing hobbies being a massive plus.
If party figures are permitted to go around saying the PM's attempted deal is a sell out and a shambles I don't see what the big deal is if someone senior says no deal is bad (even though I believe the official position is 'deal is better than no deal, though we would survive a no deal')
If party figures are permitted to go around saying the PM's attempted deal is a sell out and a shambles I don't see what the big deal is if someone senior says no deal is bad (even though I believe the official position is 'deal is better than no deal, though we would survive a no deal')
Ryanair will no longer let passengers take a small suitcase on its planes for free, with charges for a 10kg case to be introduced in November
Is this the end to even free carry on across the industry? In addition to the cost, the best thing about carry on is speed of departure when you get to the other end.
Ryanair will no longer let passengers take a small suitcase on its planes for free, with charges for a 10kg case to be introduced in November
Is this the end to even free carry on across the industry? In addition to the cost, the best thing about carry on is speed of departure when you get to the other end.
Personally, my biggest worry is ocean floor clathrates
You mean methane trapped as ice? That's the power source of the future, that is.
Yes - that is what I mean. Methane barely trapped as "ice" which releases the methane in vast quantities at the slightest disturbance or increase in temperature.
Clathrates are believed to be the cause of the Permain / Triassic exteinction event which wiped out 96% of species.
And we are proposing to mine them..... you might as well tell humanity "Here is some petrol and matches, now go play on the motorway...."
Every high profile US legal investigation reminds me how glad I am not to live there. Especially if the Feds are really out to get you. Plea deals and granted immunity are like an administrative version of extracting evidence by torture. Make up something good or you go down for literally decades. Before you even get onto the partisan appointments, or the size of the legal fees.
You saying large legal fees are a bad thing? Asking for a friend.
Comments
- Probably not Nick Clegg
- Roy Hattersley
In that case, it becomes a case of sorting the wheat from the chaff, and there was a heck of a lot of chaff. Or, to use a different metaphor, the signal to noise ratio was very low.
At least we don't have Scott Adams' ramblings posted here daily anymore...
Thank you!
Why don't you think a political party would pay corporation tax?
Edit: but congratulations to him.
Further betting tip. Warren is the Democratic nominee. Two reasons, the high command are filing in around her, and she’s building a policy platform, such as how to properly drain swamp, whilst others who will run are just smiling like gimps without building platform
Having the ability could be described as luck I suppose, but the hard work certainly isn’t.
whereas the Conservatives are chargeable to income tax (http://search.electoralcommission.org.uk/Api/Accounts/Documents/16472) at the basic rate. I'm not sure why it should be basic rate. Famously CCHQ was also an unincorporated association.
Hardline Leavers in a different life would be hardline anti-Zionists.
There are a number of Democrats who are looking to run, and once we start having debates, then everything changes. (Remember, we're probably only six to nine months from the first debates.) Someone will have a good night, that someone will start to build momentum.
I can't think of any challenger Primary season where there hasn't been pretty serious competition.
So, I think you have to reckon that when the first debate starts you will have at least four or five of:
Cory Booker
Mitch Landrieu
Andrew Cuomo
Terry McAuliffe
Elizabeth Warren
Deval Patrick
Kirsten Gillibgrand
John Hickenlooper
Joe Biden
Kamala Harris
Bernie Sanders
Now, I suspect neither Joe nor Bernie will end up running. So of the remainder, I'd suggest people take a look at impressive but slightly under the radar candidates: i.e. Mitch Landrieu, John Hickenlooper, or Terry McAuliffe.
The Conservative Party Ltd or
The Conservative Party PLC
Instead it (probably) is
The Conservative Party (Charity Number xxx)
As you were.
I think the people he would struggle against would be:
Eric Holder (ex NY Attorney General, could hammer Trump on corruption)
John Hickenlooper (popular governor of Colorado, successful businessman, very difficult to rile)
EDIT: https://www.thirdsector.co.uk/political-parties-able-claim-gift-aid-says-tory-co-chairman/finance/article/1057851
https://twitter.com/BuzzFeedNews/status/1032709971979452416
EDIT: and electronic voting? For the Tory members? lol!
I have no doubt that the climate changes and, therefore, by definition, Climate Change exists and happens. I do doubt that it has a single cause.
Personally, my biggest worry is ocean floor clathrates
Plea deals and granted immunity are like an administrative version of extracting evidence by torture. Make up something good or you go down for literally decades.
Before you even get onto the partisan appointments, or the size of the legal fees.
We're so insignificant against these things.
It’s the kind of thing silly people who belong to silly parties would do.
On the other hand doing badly in a particular subject can be down to bad luck, if incompetent exam boards (or possibly even teachers) count as such.
https://tinyurl.com/yc2abuax
https://twitter.com/EuropeElects
https://amp.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2018/aug/23/big-bang-theory-finally-ending-after-twelve-seasons
One is one of the most successful sitcoms of all time the other hardly watched, but because Big Bang theory is “regressive” it gets the thumbs down where as right in Brooklyn 99 got all its so unfair cos it’s so good.
IMO Big Bang should have got canned 3-4 seasons ago. Brooklyn 99 was just shit.
Where is their JFK or even Clinton?
2019 will be another hot one (*maybe* even the hottest ever) if the predicted El-Nino takes hold over the winter.
I'm tempted to say "well, that's alright then."
Why do we have an extradition treaty with the US?
I'm a lot like Raj, shy and innocent around women (well I used to be)
I'm a lot like Howard, I know this will come as a shock to you all, but I do say some outrageous things.
I'm a lot like Leonard, a nerd/geek who fell in love with a hot woman well out of my league.
I do share some traits with Sheldon.
Really, the issue that Trump has is that he only won very narrowly last time around, the people benefiting from his economics policies are mostly in California and Texas, and the drip-drip of ethics stories discourage independents and moderate Republicans from being as enthused as they might be.
Now, it's possible the economy will be actually booming in November 2020, in which case he probably wins on a wave of economic optimism, irrespective. But otherwise, I think so long as Dems avoid picking someone who plays the identity politics card, then they're in with a shout.
http://hurryupharry.org/2018/08/23/corbyn-on-british-zionists/
I've had it with C****n.
And I agree with SeanT's verbal histrionical description of him.
But, political parties have legislated for themselves similar tax exemptions to charities.
https://twitter.com/thomasknox/status/1032627470581882881
https://twitter.com/abcnews/status/1032501198983581696
For Progressives, your privilege damns you for all eternity. There is no possibility of redemption.
Is this the end to even free carry on across the industry? In addition to the cost, the best thing about carry on is speed of departure when you get to the other end.
NEW THREAD
Clathrates are believed to be the cause of the Permain / Triassic exteinction event which wiped out 96% of species.
And we are proposing to mine them..... you might as well tell humanity "Here is some petrol and matches, now go play on the motorway...."