HurstLlama said:

@Topping

"Hurst if you are unsure of whether you are bored of something or not then sadly I cannot help you. Why not test your boredom threshold first on a couple of simpler propositions."

Well, old chap, I am not bored of parliamentary democracy, so I am in fact the counter- example that proves your original statement false. It was in the hope that you had something more to offer that I asked, "Who are these "leavers" of whom you speak?"

I am, I am sorry to say, very bored of PB.com. Thread after thread of the same small number of people saying what they have said goodness knows how many times before has become tedious beyond endurance. I hope that the site will pick-up in the new year and revert to something it used to be.

Perhaps you could pick from some alternate subjects:

a) Do you prefer cheese with crackers, cake, or alcohol?

b) If the abominable snowman was real, would it just be another "normal" creature like an elephant and therefore of no particular interest?

c) Which TV series did you keep watching because you thought something interesting would happen - but it never did?

CD13 said:

Ho-hum, a few of the very extreme Remoaners still spitting out dummies. Ah, diddums.

You lost, these things happen. Wailing and sobs of despair won't help you.

The moving finger has writ. Man-up (or whatever the current phrase is).

You seem to have this quaint notion that remainers are "wailing sobs of despair" whereas most remainers I talk to are thoroughly enjoying watching you lot wriggle and squirm whilst trying to put your money where your campaigning mouth is. For the next couple of years it is undoubtedly Remainers that will sitting in the front row with the popcorn. Most of the Leavers on here are already so touchy and aggressive and that's before the fun's even started.

MarkHopkins said:

HurstLlama said:

@Topping

"Hurst if you are unsure of whether you are bored of something or not then sadly I cannot help you. Why not test your boredom threshold first on a couple of simpler propositions."

Well, old chap, I am not bored of parliamentary democracy, so I am in fact the counter- example that proves your original statement false. It was in the hope that you had something more to offer that I asked, "Who are these "leavers" of whom you speak?"

I am, I am sorry to say, very bored of PB.com. Thread after thread of the same small number of people saying what they have said goodness knows how many times before has become tedious beyond endurance. I hope that the site will pick-up in the new year and revert to something it used to be.

Perhaps you could pick from some alternate subjects:

a) Do you prefer cheese with crackers, cake, or alcohol?

b) If the abominable snowman was real, would it just be another "normal" creature like an elephant and therefore of no particular interest?

c) Which TV series did you keep watching because you thought something interesting would happen - but it never did?

d) What wine would you serve, with the cheese, to the abominable snowman if he turned up?

MarkHopkins said:

a) Do you prefer cheese with crackers, cake, or alcohol?

b) If the abominable snowman was real, would it just be another "normal" creature like an elephant and therefore of no particular interest?

c) Which TV series did you keep watching because you thought something interesting would happen - but it never did?

a) It's not an either/or. Stilton with Ryvita Thins and claret goes down very well with me. Cheese with cake is a bit weird.
b) Yes.
c) Lost.

Malmesbury said:

MarkHopkins said:

HurstLlama said:

@Topping

"Hurst if you are unsure of whether you are bored of something or not then sadly I cannot help you. Why not test your boredom threshold first on a couple of simpler propositions."

Well, old chap, I am not bored of parliamentary democracy, so I am in fact the counter- example that proves your original statement false. It was in the hope that you had something more to offer that I asked, "Who are these "leavers" of whom you speak?"

I am, I am sorry to say, very bored of PB.com. Thread after thread of the same small number of people saying what they have said goodness knows how many times before has become tedious beyond endurance. I hope that the site will pick-up in the new year and revert to something it used to be.

Perhaps you could pick from some alternate subjects:

a) Do you prefer cheese with crackers, cake, or alcohol?

b) If the abominable snowman was real, would it just be another "normal" creature like an elephant and therefore of no particular interest?

c) Which TV series did you keep watching because you thought something interesting would happen - but it never did?

d) What wine would you serve, with the cheese, to the abominable snowman if he turned up?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_wine

On TV shows that should've been interesting: I watched two and a bit series of Lost. Too much skirt, not enough thigh. I don't mind tantalising, but there has to be a pay-off at some point.

If Lost were a porn film, it'd be a man arriving to fix a housewife's sink. And then fixing her sink and leaving. Then returning, because he forgot his plunger. Then leaving. Then we'd see a flashback of him going to plumbing school. The plunger would remind him of his dead brother, who died on the toilet.

Malmesbury said:

MarkHopkins said:

HurstLlama said:

@Topping

"Hurst if you are unsure of whether you are bored of something or not then sadly I cannot help you. Why not test your boredom threshold first on a couple of simpler propositions."

Well, old chap, I am not bored of parliamentary democracy, so I am in fact the counter- example that proves your original statement false. It was in the hope that you had something more to offer that I asked, "Who are these "leavers" of whom you speak?"

I am, I am sorry to say, very bored of PB.com. Thread after thread of the same small number of people saying what they have said goodness knows how many times before has become tedious beyond endurance. I hope that the site will pick-up in the new year and revert to something it used to be.

Perhaps you could pick from some alternate subjects:

a) Do you prefer cheese with crackers, cake, or alcohol?

b) If the abominable snowman was real, would it just be another "normal" creature like an elephant and therefore of no particular interest?

c) Which TV series did you keep watching because you thought something interesting would happen - but it never did?

d) What wine would you serve, with the cheese, to the abominable snowman if he turned up?

Most people in that region seem to drink spirits rather than wine. Which might or might not be appropriate.

MTimT said:

@ david herdson "In terms of the respective effects, Iraq was far more damaging than Suez."

LOL. One ended our nation's pretentions to be a top world power and pushed us firmly down to the second table, while simultaneously ending any international defence of colonialism, giving rise to a US-dominated international order, particularly in international organizations.

The other ... ??? Messed up and already messed up Middle East? Removed Labour from power (after a delay) for 3, 4, 5 elections/ever?

Just don't get how Iraq even comes close in significance, either to Britain or the world.

Suez simply demonstrated an underlying reality. Domestically, it got rid of a PM and that was about it (it only realigned foreign policy indirectly due to the replacement of Eden with Macmillan).

By contrast, Iraq destroyed trust in politics for a huge number of people. It set of a whirlwind of chaos in the Middle East - to say it "messed up an already messed up" region is trite: it didn't have civil wars raging across it in 2003 - the instability that our intervention brought did that. It distracted from the war in Afghanistan and let that drag on. It enabled Islamic extremists to flourish when they should have been snuffed out. It did serious damage to Britain's position in Europe and the wider world. It demonstrated a complete unwillingness to even consider a foreign policy independent of the US.

Suez revealed the post-war world as it was; Iraq created a new and much worse one.

williamglenn said:

david_herdson said:

williamglenn said:

david_herdson said:

I don't quite understand you. In what way is Trump necessary for Brexit?

Because of the psychological blow it will deal to Farage and the loonier Atlanticists in the Tory party if Trump turns out not to share their disdain for the EU.

That still makes no sense (not least the notion that Trump is a closet Europhile).

But even if he did decide along the lines you suggest, do you really think that the government, MPs and the Leave electorate will shrug and say "oh well, Trump's against it; that's that"?

It's death by a thousand cuts. If the Anglosphere proves to be worthless even with 'Mr Brexit' in the White House, what Brexit vision is left?

The desperation with which this wholly unlikely story is being shored up and fettled is beginning to sound like the products of a fevered mind You might want to lie down in a dark room until after Article 50 is enacted

david_herdson said:

MTimT said:

@ david herdson "In terms of the respective effects, Iraq was far more damaging than Suez."

LOL. One ended our nation's pretentions to be a top world power and pushed us firmly down to the second table, while simultaneously ending any international defence of colonialism, giving rise to a US-dominated international order, particularly in international organizations.

The other ... ??? Messed up and already messed up Middle East? Removed Labour from power (after a delay) for 3, 4, 5 elections/ever?

Just don't get how Iraq even comes close in significance, either to Britain or the world.

Suez simply demonstrated an underlying reality. Domestically, it got rid of a PM and that was about it (it only realigned foreign policy indirectly due to the replacement of Eden with Macmillan).

By contrast, Iraq destroyed trust in politics for a huge number of people. It set of a whirlwind of chaos in the Middle East - to say it "messed up an already messed up" region is trite: it didn't have civil wars raging across it in 2003 - the instability that our intervention brought did that. It distracted from the war in Afghanistan and let that drag on. It enabled Islamic extremists to flourish when they should have been snuffed out. It did serious damage to Britain's position in Europe and the wider world. It demonstrated a complete unwillingness to even consider a foreign policy independent of the US.

Suez revealed the post-war world as it was; Iraq created a new and much worse one.

Well said Hurst, a clusterfcuk of epic proportions

Moses_ said:

Errrr.......


FTSE 100 share index ends 2016 at an all-time record high
The London exchange is Europe's best performing major stock market in 2016, ending the year 14% up.
13:54, UK,
Friday 30 December 2016

http://news.sky.com/story/ftse-100-share-index-ends-2016-at-an-all-time-record-high-10711892

Despite BrExit...

david_herdson said:

MTimT said:

@ david herdson "In terms of the respective effects, Iraq was far more damaging than Suez."

LOL. One ended our nation's pretentions to be a top world power and pushed us firmly down to the second table, while simultaneously ending any international defence of colonialism, giving rise to a US-dominated international order, particularly in international organizations.

The other ... ??? Messed up and already messed up Middle East? Removed Labour from power (after a delay) for 3, 4, 5 elections/ever?

Just don't get how Iraq even comes close in significance, either to Britain or the world.

Suez simply demonstrated an underlying reality. Domestically, it got rid of a PM and that was about it (it only realigned foreign policy indirectly due to the replacement of Eden with Macmillan).

By contrast, Iraq destroyed trust in politics for a huge number of people. It set of a whirlwind of chaos in the Middle East - to say it "messed up an already messed up" region is trite: it didn't have civil wars raging across it in 2003 - the instability that our intervention brought did that. It distracted from the war in Afghanistan and let that drag on. It enabled Islamic extremists to flourish when they should have been snuffed out. It did serious damage to Britain's position in Europe and the wider world. It demonstrated a complete unwillingness to even consider a foreign policy independent of the US.

Suez revealed the post-war world as it was; Iraq created a new and much worse one.

Excellent post.

I would also add that it destroyed the goodwill that existed towards the US/West from the early-period Putin administration and set us on the path to the events we see this very day.

david_herdson said:

williamglenn said:

david_herdson said:

williamglenn said:

david_herdson said:

I don't quite understand you. In what way is Trump necessary for Brexit?

Because of the psychological blow it will deal to Farage and the loonier Atlanticists in the Tory party if Trump turns out not to share their disdain for the EU.

That still makes no sense (not least the notion that Trump is a closet Europhile).

But even if he did decide along the lines you suggest, do you really think that the government, MPs and the Leave electorate will shrug and say "oh well, Trump's against it; that's that"?

It's death by a thousand cuts. If the Anglosphere proves to be worthless even with 'Mr Brexit' in the White House, what Brexit vision is left?

That the EU is an undemocratic, bureaucratic, sclerotic federalising bullying monster that eats up £10bn of British contributions a year and that freedom from it might be a good thing.

And I say that as someone who voted Remain.

But that's a negative position that only works if your argument is to reform or abolish it, not to leave it. Leaving requires a viable alternative national strategy.

SeanT said:

To grasp the scale of the Iraq disaster (which I idiotically supported at the time), you just have to imagine a world where it never happened.

There. Almost everything is better, apart from - maybe - the life of the average Iraqi, and even that is debatable.

Iraq was probably a more significant error than Vietnam. You might have to go back to the Great War to find a geopolitical blunder of greater profundity.

And we may have not seen the worst of the consequences yet. It's still unfolding.

A nice happy thought for 2017.

HurstLlama said:

@Topping

"Hurst if you are unsure of whether you are bored of something or not then sadly I cannot help you. Why not test your boredom threshold first on a couple of simpler propositions."

Well, old chap, I am not bored of parliamentary democracy, so I am in fact the counter- example that proves your original statement false. It was in the hope that you had something more to offer that I asked, "Who are these "leavers" of whom you speak?"

I am, I am sorry to say, very bored of PB.com. Thread after thread of the same small number of people saying what they have said goodness knows how many times before has become tedious beyond endurance. I hope that the site will pick-up in the new year and revert to something it used to be.

Sorry to hear you are bored of PB. Have you applied to the authorities to be released from needing to read or post here? Should take a couple of weeks to come through.

As for Brexit, it's the only political game in town and we're stuck with it.

Perhaps Soldier magazine or even arrse is where you should spend your time.

It wasn't only the cack-handed invasion of Iraq that helped lead to the current Iraq/Syria situation, but also the so-called Arab Spring, which came out of nowhere.

Of course, the UK could've taken a different course in Libya, or Syria. I'm not sure any viable option would've made anything any better, though.

TOPPING said:

HurstLlama said:

@Topping

"Hurst if you are unsure of whether you are bored of something or not then sadly I cannot help you. Why not test your boredom threshold first on a couple of simpler propositions."

Well, old chap, I am not bored of parliamentary democracy, so I am in fact the counter- example that proves your original statement false. It was in the hope that you had something more to offer that I asked, "Who are these "leavers" of whom you speak?"

I am, I am sorry to say, very bored of PB.com. Thread after thread of the same small number of people saying what they have said goodness knows how many times before has become tedious beyond endurance. I hope that the site will pick-up in the new year and revert to something it used to be.

Sorry to hear you are bored of PB. Have you applied to the authorities to be released from needing to read or post here? Should take a couple of weeks to come through.

As for Brexit, it's the only political game in town and we're stuck with it.

Perhaps Soldier magazine or even arrse is where you should spend your time.

PB reflects the state of our politics. Which is currently dire.

Indigo

"You mean adrift from the administration and Secretary of State that will be down the Job Centre in three weeks ? "

Wiser council might have suggested that trying to ingratiate herself with an off the wall president-elect (who could change his mind at any moment) rather the 99% of the other countries in the world (or even keeping quiet) was not very bright

Moses_ said:

However we all know that had remain won with even the tiniest and most slimmest of margins then the vote would have been considered decisive and for ever over as a " once in a lifetime / hundred years / insert value here " type of vote.

Really? The saloon bar sage thought otherwise.

"In a 52-48 referendum this would be unfinished business by a long way. If the Remain campaign win two-thirds to one-third that ends it."

Perhaps you're one of those Leavers who thinks Nige has nuffink to do with you.

williamglenn said:

david_herdson said:

williamglenn said:

david_herdson said:

williamglenn said:

david_herdson said:

I don't quite understand you. In what way is Trump necessary for Brexit?

Because of the psychological blow it will deal to Farage and the loonier Atlanticists in the Tory party if Trump turns out not to share their disdain for the EU.

That still makes no sense (not least the notion that Trump is a closet Europhile).

But even if he did decide along the lines you suggest, do you really think that the government, MPs and the Leave electorate will shrug and say "oh well, Trump's against it; that's that"?

It's death by a thousand cuts. If the Anglosphere proves to be worthless even with 'Mr Brexit' in the White House, what Brexit vision is left?

That the EU is an undemocratic, bureaucratic, sclerotic federalising bullying monster that eats up £10bn of British contributions a year and that freedom from it might be a good thing.

And I say that as someone who voted Remain.

But that's a negative position that only works if your argument is to reform or abolish it, not to leave it. Leaving requires a viable alternative national strategy.

Given that neither abolition nor reform are possible and that the rest of the EU membetd do not advocate those solutions it seems that leaving is the only viable and sensible course of action.

Theuniondivvie said:

isam said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Moses_ said:

However we all know that had remain won with even the tiniest and most slimmest of margins then the vote would have been considered decisive and for ever over as a " once in a lifetime / hundred years / insert value here " type of vote.

Really? The saloon bar sage thought otherwise.

"In a 52-48 referendum this would be unfinished business by a long way. If the Remain campaign win two-thirds to one-third that ends it."

Perhaps you're one of those Leavers who thinks Nige has nuffink to do with you.

It is utterly ridiculous to compare Farage's promise to keep on campaigning, in other words not disbanding UKIP, if the result was a close Remain, and the attempt to block/slow down/reverse the decision from some referendum losers.

I don't think anyone is saying that campaigning to re enter the EU at some stage is not allowed. The difference is, had Remain won, we would still be in the EU and so there wouldn't be the option to delay or ignore the vote as some are doing because we voted to Leave

Ah how wonderful that is to type.. "we voted to Leave"

Your 'we' is entirely different from mine.

I suppose you mean because I am English and you are Scottish. Well I can sympathise with your plight, I feel bad for Scottish Nationalists who want to be governed by Scotland not London, and if I were Scottish I would no doubt be a Nat, though doubt I'd want to be ruled by Brussels instead. I would never say I was British before English.

But, as it stands, we are one country, and "we" voted to Leave.

OldKingCole said:

Malmesbury said:

MarkHopkins said:

HurstLlama said:

@Topping

"Hurst if you are unsure of whether you are bored of something or not then sadly I cannot help you. Why not test your boredom threshold first on a couple of simpler propositions."

Well, old chap, I am not bored of parliamentary democracy, so I am in fact the counter- example that proves your original statement false. It was in the hope that you had something more to offer that I asked, "Who are these "leavers" of whom you speak?"

I am, I am sorry to say, very bored of PB.com. Thread after thread of the same small number of people saying what they have said goodness knows how many times before has become tedious beyond endurance. I hope that the site will pick-up in the new year and revert to something it used to be.

Perhaps you could pick from some alternate subjects:

a) Do you prefer cheese with crackers, cake, or alcohol?

b) If the abominable snowman was real, would it just be another "normal" creature like an elephant and therefore of no particular interest?

c) Which TV series did you keep watching because you thought something interesting would happen - but it never did?

d) What wine would you serve, with the cheese, to the abominable snowman if he turned up?

Most people in that region seem to drink spirits rather than wine. Which might or might not be appropriate.

The local rum is er... abominable

Mind you, the local guide quite like Baron de Sigognac 1950. So I shared the bottle with him.

Miss Plato, that's a rather disturbing move by Chicago Review of Books.

viewcode said:

PlatoSaid said:

Any PB pedant challenge this one ?

QI Elves
‘Auld Lang Syne’ only became a New Year’s Eve tradition after the Royal Canadian orchestra's live broadcasts from a NYC hotel began in 1929.

I don't know unfortunately...

I instinctively distrust QI: its assertion that Cruithne is a moon of Earth is pure gibberish, and Stephen Fry's tweaking of Dara O'Briain over a 0.01 degree error in the definition of the triple point of water was jawdroppingly patronising. Fry is a genuinely nice guy but his reputation as a polymath is undeserved: "The Register" used to keep a list of his mistakes. I don't know if QI's any better now Toksvig is in post.

It's got less funny. Shouldn't have let a woman in (never mind chairing it). Yes, that's terribly sexist (amusingly so given Toksvig's hypocritical political party), but breaking up the boys' club changes the dynamic. It just does.

"Iraq was probably a more significant error than Vietnam. You might have to go back to the Great War to find a geopolitical blunder of greater profundity"

I was working in Beirut when the US were marshalling their forces on the Iraqi border. The Lebanese producer said "if the Americans invade Iraq and they think the 20 year Lebanese war was bad this will be twenty times worse!" He then listed the factions.

My question is this; If a Lebanese producer who is 1. Christian 2. Far more interested in money than geopolitical trifles 3. Disliked the Muslims even more than the Israelis. knew this why didn't British and US intelligence?

PS this was the job I was doing for him (for the Lebanese Government)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cL6AVWLPJD0&feature=youtu.be

Just finished watching it last night! Agree it's well worth the 10 hours - my only reservation was that HM is depicted as making a series of quick decisions and then changing her mind later when effectively overruled by the establishment. I'm not sure that really rings true?
I enjoyed the depiction of Churchill especially the portrait scenes which were particularly well done.
As I'm over in the US with access to high speed broadband and Netflix the 5 series of Boardwalk Empire also beckoned, very different to the Crown but also worth watching - at least the first 3 - tails off a little after that. It portrays politics as utterly corrupt, and many people still believe this over here and back home. Getting past this is a huge challenge for us all.

Malmesbury said:

isam said:

SeanT said:

If anyone is in need of non-Brexit diversion, Times food guy @gilescoren is having a bizarre meltdown on Twitter.

He tweeted this last night, and it went from there

https://twitter.com/gilescoren/status/814604525562712064

A year inside for putting bacon on a mosque. Unreal

And then he dies in his cell.

All those on here who constantly say the prison system is too tough/too many people are sent to jail have yet to pipe up I notice.

Actually a year for boorish behaviour like that sounds about right to me.

Mind you, I am the kind of reactionary who thinks that committing murder should get you 20 years.

A few years back, some the of the "kids" who helped hold down another kid who was then stabbed got 18 months. Literally "out before Christmas - they served 6 months IIRC.

I imagine he wasn't that nice a person, to be bothered to go and do something like that speaks for itself, but a year in prison is too much. I'd say any jail time for that is too much. It is possibly the best opportunity to get someone to do community service, possibly helping the muslim community, there ever was.

Platosaid, US left-wingers seem determined to reinforce failure.

Malmesbury said:

OldKingCole said:

Malmesbury said:

MarkHopkins said:

HurstLlama said:

@Topping

"Hurst if you are unsure of whether you are bored of something or not then sadly I cannot help you. Why not test your boredom threshold first on a couple of simpler propositions."

Well, old chap, I am not bored of parliamentary democracy, so I am in fact the counter- example that proves your original statement false. It was in the hope that you had something more to offer that I asked, "Who are these "leavers" of whom you speak?"

I am, I am sorry to say, very bored of PB.com. Thread after thread of the same small number of people saying what they have said goodness knows how many times before has become tedious beyond endurance. I hope that the site will pick-up in the new year and revert to something it used to be.

Perhaps you could pick from some alternate subjects:

a) Do you prefer cheese with crackers, cake, or alcohol?

b) If the abominable snowman was real, would it just be another "normal" creature like an elephant and therefore of no particular interest?

c) Which TV series did you keep watching because you thought something interesting would happen - but it never did?

d) What wine would you serve, with the cheese, to the abominable snowman if he turned up?

Most people in that region seem to drink spirits rather than wine. Which might or might not be appropriate.

The local rum is er... abominable

Mind you, the local guide quite like Baron de Sigognac 1950. So I shared the bottle with him.

The local rum must be like some Thai ‘whiskies’ then.

Malmsesbury

"Mind you, I am the kind of reactionary who thinks that committing murder should get you 20 years."

That's 20 rashers of bacon

formatting a mess

@SeanT - but what is the point otherwise?

Anyone wanting to watch a surprisingly funny and well done review of the year, I just watched 'Charlie Brooker's 2016 Wipe'. Much more self-aware than expected given the bigger stories, and pretty even-handed at pouring scorn on politicians - with the notable exception of Trump, who got both barrels of course.

Although watching any review of this year does feel like a longer version of Billy Joel's 'We Didn't Start The Fire'!

Happy New Year

@Theuniondivvie

Thats an interesting nugget there on those who self decribe as British vs English. I am not too surprised as Britishness is intrinsically a more diverse and outward looking concept than Englishness.

There is possibly a social class element too.

SeanT said:

SouthamObserver said:

Oh my, I have had a skin full. The finest foods, the choicest wines. A big, fat Cuban now and the Macallan. Five years shaved from my life, but a delicious afternoon.

My big day was yesterday.

Woke at 11.30. Went straight to Hawksmoor Seven Dials. Met my gf. Started on Ruinart champagne. Had scallops, lobster and "the best steak in Britain" (The Times) with a brilliant Argie Malbec.

Went home. Cracked another bottle of champagne (vintage Pol Roger). And another (Perrier Jouet). Had sex in between bottles of bubbly. Finished a bottle of Chateauneuf du Pape. Sent my gf back home at midnight. Opened an Amarone. Watched the Crown. Slipped into a coma around 1am.

Thus ends 2016. I actually wonder if I will make it to the end of 2017.

Hold on. Surely you've previously told us the best steak is at Dinner by Heston? Some of us non-bon viveurs rely on your troughing tips (that barolo you tipped was very well-received btw).

DecrepitJohnL said:

viewcode said:

PlatoSaid said:

Any PB pedant challenge this one ?

QI Elves
‘Auld Lang Syne’ only became a New Year’s Eve tradition after the Royal Canadian orchestra's live broadcasts from a NYC hotel began in 1929.

I don't know unfortunately...

I instinctively distrust QI: its assertion that Cruithne is a moon of Earth is pure gibberish, and Stephen Fry's tweaking of Dara O'Briain over a 0.01 degree error in the definition of the triple point of water was jawdroppingly patronising. Fry is a genuinely nice guy but his reputation as a polymath is undeserved: "The Register" used to keep a list of his mistakes. I don't know if QI's any better now Toksvig is in post.

The QI Dara triple point clip is on Youtube (attempt to link failed).
It all seems harmless enough -- basically the top science boffins changed the official definition.

QI is after all an entertainment, not attempting to be a canon of knowledge.

Fry and Toksvig are presenters, they have a team of writers who update them during the live filming via earpieces.

SeanT said:

And now I am going to buy some pillowslips at John Lewis.

And you wonder why people envy your Rock'n'Roll lifestyle...

DecrepitJohnL said:

viewcode said:

PlatoSaid said:

Any PB pedant challenge this one ?

QI Elves
‘Auld Lang Syne’ only became a New Year’s Eve tradition after the Royal Canadian orchestra's live broadcasts from a NYC hotel began in 1929.

I don't know unfortunately...

I instinctively distrust QI: its assertion that Cruithne is a moon of Earth is pure gibberish, and Stephen Fry's tweaking of Dara O'Briain over a 0.01 degree error in the definition of the triple point of water was jawdroppingly patronising. Fry is a genuinely nice guy but his reputation as a polymath is undeserved: "The Register" used to keep a list of his mistakes. I don't know if QI's any better now Toksvig is in post.

The QI Dara triple point clip is on Youtube (attempt to link failed).
It all seems harmless enough -- basically the top science boffins changed the official definition.

Ah, subtext, it's always subtext. Fry is a man with an undeserved reputation for intelligence who wouldn't know what a triple point was if somebody wasn't feeding him the info via a earpiece. O'Thingy is a physics grad who knew the definition without having to be told, and was only out by the teeniest amount. For the former to twit the latter was undeserved. I got aeriated because it was the old arts vs science argument.

Historical fiction.
How much of it is true?
Does that question mean anything anyway?
I hope we get a play by David Hare centred on Brexit.

Moses_ said:

@OllyT

"But it was enough to give you your 3% victory."

4% actually

I noticed you had to actually round down the amount by almost a quarter to try and make your point. good trolling.

In the referendum a simple majority was required or basically 50% plus 1 would be enough either way. Such an outcome would have resulted in gazillions of recounts of course.

However we all know that had remain won with even the tiniest and most slimmest of margins then the vote would have been considered decisive and for ever over as a " once in a lifetime / hundred years / insert value here " type of vote.

Remain: 16,141,241 (48.1%)
Leave: 17,410,742 (51.9%)

http://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/

I am not disputing that Leave won, my point was that the margin was small enough for the £350m a week for the NHS lie to have been decisive.

Off topic.

Someone just shared this on my Facebook page and, even as an atheist, I can't think of a better message to close the year.

http://deredactie.be/cm/vrtnieuws.english/videozone_ENG/1.2852447