Latest voting split GE2021 CON voters – politicalbetting.com

HYUFD said:

Matthew McConnaughey second in new Texas governor poll.

Abbott 37%, McConaughey 27%, O'Rourke 26%
https://nypost.com/2021/11/22/matthew-mcconaughey-ahead-of-abbott-beto-in-texas-gov-race/

CSS Texas, of course, being the Confederate warship featured in McConaughey's movie "Sahara" (2005).

HYUFD said:

Philip_Thompson said:

RochdalePioneers said:

Without wanting to repeat the tiresome oh yes it is oh no it isn't bullshit about HYUFD's unique perspectives on democracy, the "you can't have it" approach to independence only strengthens the likelihood that when there eventually is another referendum that it votes to leave.

Have the vote now - there is a clear democratic mandate for one. Write into the legislation that if the vote is no that a suitable period has to pass before the parties consider having another one. No will win and it will be legally agreed that there can't be a 3rd one quickly.

Saying that the Scots, having voted for a referendum can't actually have one . . .

. . . is as self-defeating and stupid as Tony Blair, Gordon Brown, Nick Clegg etc saying that despite having been elected promising an EU referendum, we can't actually have one.

All its doing is building up the grievance to the point that eventually the dam will break.

I expect HYUFD to be so silly as to not understand that - I'm surprised though that Leon can't grasp the concept since he can see it so clearly with Europe.

Unlike Nat appeasers like you who would give the Nats a referendum on independence every year until they get the result they want I and Leon fully support telling Nats they had their once in a generation referendum and lost so can suck it up for a generation!!

No means No! At minimum they can wait 15 years for their second like Quebec (which was still a No by the way), Leavers had to wait 41 years for their second EU referendum after the 1975 EEC referendum

I wouldn't "give" anyone anything.

We have elections and people choose what they want to vote for. If they choose to revisit an issue that was deemed settled in the past, even just two years ago, then that's their choice.

Its called democracy. You might want to familiarise yourself with the concept and it isn't a "gift".

MaxPB said:

Leon said:

Anabobazina said:

Chrissy Pagel is almost as excited by this new Gauteng variant as she was by the new series of Love Island.

It is unsettling news. Twitter seems divided on its potential danger. Looks like it might evade vaccines, but has low transmissibility, so Delta Plus should outcompete?

But does Delta Plus provide immunity against this new strain?

FFS. If we get a nasty new variant, that's it. Humanity is done. Switch off the sun

Don't worry about it, I think the key thing to remember is that any variant which has sufficiently diluted binding efficiency to antibodies will also have extremely diluted binding efficiency to the ACE-2 receptor making it much less effective.

Delta seems to be particularly successful because of mutations to the coding for the nucleocapsid protein (it's fantastically more efficient at packaging viable copies of the virus), so beyond getting over the basic hurdle of getting in to the cell, mutations to the spike aren't necessarily the determining factor anyway.

Nigelb said:

LostPassword said:

MaxPB said:

turbotubbs said:

MaxPB said:

Leon said:

rottenborough said:

Leon said:

MaxPB said:

Leon said:

Pretty bloody ropey after my Moderna booster jab. Seriously sore and frozen arm, general malaise and fatigue. Much worse than AZ, which caused a tiny bit of tenderness in the shoulder...

That's a sign that you've probably previously had COVID.

I am now near-certain that I did have Covid way back in January 2020, caught in Thailand. That's what Public Health England thought, that's why they sent me to be tested in UCLH, tho a SNAFU prevented any actual test

It would also explain why I haven't caught Covid since, despite taking many risks in recent months: pubs, bars, restaurants, planes, the works

"That's a sign that you've probably previously had COVID."

Is it? First I've heard of that idea.

Yes it has been punted before, by proper scientists, tho there are also other explanations, ofc

Hey, my Chemistry degree still just about qualifies me as a "proper scientist" just not a practicing one.

You never lose the scientific training.

You know a junior asked me earlier this year whether or not I thought my degree was useful, I was going to say "not really" as always but actually after having a short think about it, I think it is pretty useful. Not the chemistry because fuck that noise, but the methodology of being a scientist and being open to any and all criticism of a theory, idea or model. I think a lot of our more public scientists, especially those in iSAGE, seem to have forgotten that a big part of science is having regular retrospectives on current theories vs real life data. It's something I've noticed myself doing over the course of this pandemic, go back on old ideas and make sure they are still relevant.

Too many of the public scientific advisors aren't doing that exercise right now. Just today I read that some SAGE scientists are calling for the immediate implementation of plan b, despite there being not very much evidence to support that. They're stuck in a timeloop of a political agenda that lockdown measures are the only way to combat this. I'm sure when Germany, France and other major European countries go into a full lockdown in two weeks those same voices will condemn the government as irresponsible and callous for not doing the same here and in the process completely ignore the available real world data on infection rates, testing and hospitalisation.

I'm a recovering former scientist, and what is notable is that science works more on a collective level than on an individual level.

Individual scientists are human, and most of them become wedded to particular ideas and find it hard to abandon those ideas. The hardest thing in science I had to do was to abandon months of work that just wasn't working as I'd hoped it would. If it had initially worked well enough to publish a paper on it I would have found it a lot harder to give up on it later.

But collectively science works because other scientists don't share the emotional attachment and cognitive biases that have individual scientists stick to a dead end, because they don't have the history with that idea. They'll get attached to some other ideas in time.

So I have a lot of faith in Science, but am more wary of individual scientists...

The medical establishment seems particularly susceptible to unjustified attachments to dogma, for some reason.

An increased attachment to dogma is understandable when dealing with life and death issues, because of the cognitive bias that penalizes change that results in harm more than not avoiding harm by not making a change.

RochdalePioneers said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Leon said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Leon said:

Fairliered said:

HYUFD said:

SandyRentool said:

HYUFD said:

Carnyx said:

HYUFD said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Sleazy broken Scottish Nationalism on the slide

A poll by YouGov for The Times finds that 40 per cent of people say they would vote yes in another referendum, a drop of one point compared with the company’s last survey in May.

The proportion of people who would vote no remained at 46 per cent, while 9 per cent said they were unsure, up by one point. The remainder would not vote or refused to say.



https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/voters-lose-interest-on-union-question-25mzsz3r8

Astonishing that despite Brexit and PM Boris Sturgeon has actually managed to see Yes fall by 5% below the 45% it got in the 2014 referendum.

No wonder Salmond and Alba are so furious and of course no prospect of a legal indyref2 under this Tory government either

The actual Yes figure is 46.5% - which is above the 2014 referendum figure.

But of course you are muddling figures which include and which exclude DKs.

Professor Curtice would not be impressed.

It is 40% including DKs, so in terms of all voters below the 45% from 2014 as I said

Here we go again. So you agree that a majority do not explicitly support the Union?

The majority explicitly supported the Union in 2014 in a once in a generation referendum and this Tory government as long as it remains in power will not allow another indyref2 for at least a generation until 2014 has elapsed

So democracy doesn’t apply to Scotland. The very essence of colonialism.

No, colonialism is when a foreign power occupies your land, without your permission, and then rules it without giving you equal representation in the legislature

Scotland willingly entered the Union with England, and it is fully represented at Westminster, as WELL as having highly significant autonomous powers at Holyrood. Indeed Scots are able to vote on some English laws when the opposite is not the case. If there is any hint of colonialism here, it is Scottish power over the English

That's true as long as its a voluntary union.

If Scotland can not vote its way out of the union, it ceases to be voluntary.

Scotland can vote itself out of the union by persuading MPs at Westminster, which is Scotland's own sovereign, shared parliament, where Scotland is equally and fully represented, that Scotland needs an indy referendum

We know this works because the Scots thus persuaded Westminster in 2014. A referendum was granted, the Scots said No, that is the end of the matter for a generation UNLESS Westminster can be persuaded, again. Perhaps the Nats should try that instead of moaning

48 of the 59 MPs Scotland elects were elected on a manifesto of having another referendum. That is a very clear overwhelming majority of their MPs in Westminster.

Unless you're saying it doesn't matter a jot what the Scottish voters say, their future in the union can only be changed if the English MPs agree. Is that what you're saying?

Yep. You can have whatever you want if we agree with you. If we disagree you can do one.

When the union was formed it was mutual - like a marriage. What Leon and HYUFD are saying is that Scotland can't have a divorce unless the husband agrees.

In many countries you can't have a divorce unless the husband agrees, especially in the Middle East. The Roman Catholic church also greatly discourages divorce.

Certainly constant demands for divorce are not helpful, especially when it was already agreed to stay together once only a few years ago, divorce should be a last resort

Leon said:

boulay said:

eek said:

Leon said:

Exactly as I predicted downthread

"Chris Philp
@CPhilpOfficial
·
5h
I’m deeply concerned by this photo of French law enforcement officers standing by doing nothing while migrants embark on a dangerous, illegal and unnecessary Channel crossing - putting lives at risk as we tragically saw yesterday"


Headline: Why Didn't France Stop Them

The migrants are actually carrying a toddler. Les Gendarmes do F all

https://twitter.com/CPhilpOfficial/status/1463789440468410373?s=20

So you have 2 French policemen and 30 refugees carrying a boat - what exactly can those 2 policemen actually do?

Walk up to boat, draw guns, back the refugees away, shoot the engine, shoot the boat to puncture it on the beach so it can’t go in the sea, return to call and radio in a report….!

Not overly serious but If the French govt is about to pay French fishers who haven’t been given licences €60m to compensate them then maybe instead they could hire them to patrol the coast and radio in if they see dinghies on the beach so the French navy/coastguard can intercept them in time….. as there are apparently so many French fishermen unable to fish then between them covering the 200 mile coastline isn’t much of an ask.

The videos - multiple - of armed French cops in numbers doing sod all as tiny children are loaded onto these boats are absolutely appalling, in retrospect. How is that not manslaughter by negligence?

They can stop the boats and save innocent lives, they do not. Surely that is a crime?

Because it is the view of most French people that if asylum seekers wish to self deport by boat, the government should not seek to stop them.

France breaks no treaty by allowing them to board the boat, nor any international law, nor any French law.

HYUFD said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

HYUFD said:

Leon said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Leon said:

BlancheLivermore said:

Leon said:

Yep, Woke not a problem


"Students at Washington’s Catholic University of America seek to remove George Floyd Jesus"

"Students at a Catholic university are petitioning to remove a “heretical” painting that depicts George Floyd as Jesus.

"Mama, by Kelly Latimore, shows Floyd being cradled by a maternal figure and evokes Michelangelo’s Pietà sculpture of Mary and Jesus after the crucifixion."

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/students-at-washingtons-catholic-university-of-america-seek-to-remove-george-floyd-jesus-7tw69fzgr?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1637847470

I can't work out who's meant to be woke here..

Is the painting woke?

Or are those "cancelling" it woke because it upsets them?

The painting is Woke.

Woke is becoming a religion. There was an excellent essay on this exact phenomenon in the Spectator, quite recently

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/what-if-wokeness-really-is-the-new-christianity-

So you're on the side of those in favour of cancellations?

Cancellation culture is good now?

I am shocked! Shocked! At this revelation. 😱

It is genuinely fascinating how Woke is infesting the Christian church. And again it is an uncanny echo of Christianity's own genesis

When the early Christians wished to convert some heathen tribe, they often kept the pagan shrines intact, and simply imposed their own symbols and buildings thereupon, thus absorbing the spiritual power of the Old Faith into the New. That's why so many churches in the UK and beyond are built on pagan sites, which can sometimes still be recognised - yew trees are a telling presence. The same happened with Gods - Isis nursing Horus became Mother Mary nursing the baby Jesus.

See here, the exact same iconography


https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/545961


Turning George Floyd into Jesus is Wokeness doing to Christianity what Christianity did to Zeus, Woden, Osiris and Valhalla. A pleasing symmetry, but a menacing development, which completely vindicates the prediction made in that superb Spectator essay by an ex PB-er

Leaving aside the George Floyd Jesus it is a good thing there are more black Jesus images, especially as the average Christian worldwide is more likely to be black than white now in the 21st century.

Jesus himself was Middle Eastern not European of course

SOCIALISM = RELIGION

therefore:

RELIGION = SOCIALISM!

What utter rubbish, when the main socialist nations left on earth eg North Korea, China and Cuba are headed by atheists and religion actually means less reliance on state welfare with more religious provision instead.

Socialism is state control of most of the economy, please check your definition next time, it has zilch to do with religion

Socialism IS a religion in itself.

Therefore it is legitimate to say:

RELIGION = SOCIALISM!

On vaccine efficacy dilution, the more detailed version - one for @Leon:

The reason COVID is so deadly is that it is almost perfectly adapted to the ACE-2 receptor and it enters the cell by using the spike protein which binds with very, very high efficiency to those ACE-2 sites on human cells. That's not something we normally see with this kind of virus, hence the "novel"Coronavirus name at the beginning, it was essentially a completely new type of coronavirus with ACE-2 binding. The reason all of our vaccines, AZ, Pfizer, Moderna and others, are still so highly effective is that they essentially replicate the same ACE-2 receptor sites but in neutralising antibodies which allows them to bind very efficiently to the virus in the bloodstream before they enter (m)any cells.

If the virus mutates to an extent that antibodies can no longer bind to the spike protein with the same high efficiency as now, it means the spike protein will also not easily bind to the ACE-2 site present on human cells. If it can't easily bind to the ACE-2 site then it can't put it's genetic material into the cell and create virus replication factories out of those cells.

One of the Delta subvariants seems to have a minor mutation to the spike protein that has decreased ACE-2 binding efficiency by a small amount and this seems to have actually made it less deadly, it's looking like the first example of the viral evolutionary path leading to a more transmissive but less deadly variation. Happily that subvariant still has very good binding efficiency to neutralising antibodies so there's nothing to worry about in regards to immunity.

Anyway, that's the extent of my understanding on the subject, my speciality in chemistry was very much on the other side of it in creating novel types of semi-conductor!

Anabobazina said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

HYUFD said:

Matthew McConnaughey second in new Texas governor poll.

Abbott 37%, McConaughey 27%, O'Rourke 26%
https://nypost.com/2021/11/22/matthew-mcconaughey-ahead-of-abbott-beto-in-texas-gov-race/

CSS Texas, of course, being the Confederate warship featured in McConaughey's movie "Sahara" (2005).

Ideally he’d run as a Republican, win, then beat the odious Trump to the GOP nomination in 2024. That’s the dream scenario.

Not sure the Republicans would fall for that, but I like it.
If he does run as a Dem, then his numbers would probably slide.

HYUFD said:

RochdalePioneers said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Leon said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Leon said:

Fairliered said:

HYUFD said:

SandyRentool said:

HYUFD said:

Carnyx said:

HYUFD said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Sleazy broken Scottish Nationalism on the slide

A poll by YouGov for The Times finds that 40 per cent of people say they would vote yes in another referendum, a drop of one point compared with the company’s last survey in May.

The proportion of people who would vote no remained at 46 per cent, while 9 per cent said they were unsure, up by one point. The remainder would not vote or refused to say.



https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/voters-lose-interest-on-union-question-25mzsz3r8

Astonishing that despite Brexit and PM Boris Sturgeon has actually managed to see Yes fall by 5% below the 45% it got in the 2014 referendum.

No wonder Salmond and Alba are so furious and of course no prospect of a legal indyref2 under this Tory government either

The actual Yes figure is 46.5% - which is above the 2014 referendum figure.

But of course you are muddling figures which include and which exclude DKs.

Professor Curtice would not be impressed.

It is 40% including DKs, so in terms of all voters below the 45% from 2014 as I said

Here we go again. So you agree that a majority do not explicitly support the Union?

The majority explicitly supported the Union in 2014 in a once in a generation referendum and this Tory government as long as it remains in power will not allow another indyref2 for at least a generation until 2014 has elapsed

So democracy doesn’t apply to Scotland. The very essence of colonialism.

No, colonialism is when a foreign power occupies your land, without your permission, and then rules it without giving you equal representation in the legislature

Scotland willingly entered the Union with England, and it is fully represented at Westminster, as WELL as having highly significant autonomous powers at Holyrood. Indeed Scots are able to vote on some English laws when the opposite is not the case. If there is any hint of colonialism here, it is Scottish power over the English

That's true as long as its a voluntary union.

If Scotland can not vote its way out of the union, it ceases to be voluntary.

Scotland can vote itself out of the union by persuading MPs at Westminster, which is Scotland's own sovereign, shared parliament, where Scotland is equally and fully represented, that Scotland needs an indy referendum

We know this works because the Scots thus persuaded Westminster in 2014. A referendum was granted, the Scots said No, that is the end of the matter for a generation UNLESS Westminster can be persuaded, again. Perhaps the Nats should try that instead of moaning

48 of the 59 MPs Scotland elects were elected on a manifesto of having another referendum. That is a very clear overwhelming majority of their MPs in Westminster.

Unless you're saying it doesn't matter a jot what the Scottish voters say, their future in the union can only be changed if the English MPs agree. Is that what you're saying?

Yep. You can have whatever you want if we agree with you. If we disagree you can do one.

When the union was formed it was mutual - like a marriage. What Leon and HYUFD are saying is that Scotland can't have a divorce unless the husband agrees.

In many countries you can't have a divorce unless the husband agrees, especially in the Middle East.

Certainly constant demands for divorce are not helpful, especially when it was already agreed to stay together once only a few years ago, divorce should be a last resort

A future HYUFD classic, on a par with the Francoist shite.

On the 'constant demands' thing, how many Scottish indy referendums have there been in the last 314 years?

Nigelb said:

MaxPB said:

Leon said:

Anabobazina said:

Chrissy Pagel is almost as excited by this new Gauteng variant as she was by the new series of Love Island.

It is unsettling news. Twitter seems divided on its potential danger. Looks like it might evade vaccines, but has low transmissibility, so Delta Plus should outcompete?

But does Delta Plus provide immunity against this new strain?

FFS. If we get a nasty new variant, that's it. Humanity is done. Switch off the sun

Don't worry about it, I think the key thing to remember is that any variant which has sufficiently diluted binding efficiency to antibodies will also have extremely diluted binding efficiency to the ACE-2 receptor making it much less effective.

Delta seems to be particularly successful because of mutations to the coding for the nucleocapsid protein (it's fantastically more efficient at packaging viable copies of the virus), so beyond getting over the basic hurdle of getting in to the cell, mutations to the spike aren't necessarily the determining factor anyway.

That's what becomes the issue, if it can't easily get into cells then it can't easily start replicating, mutations to the spike protein will inhibit cell invasion, ideally to the extent that it becomes inert as seems to have happened in Japan.

HYUFD said:

RochdalePioneers said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Leon said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Leon said:

Fairliered said:

HYUFD said:

SandyRentool said:

HYUFD said:

Carnyx said:

HYUFD said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Sleazy broken Scottish Nationalism on the slide

A poll by YouGov for The Times finds that 40 per cent of people say they would vote yes in another referendum, a drop of one point compared with the company’s last survey in May.

The proportion of people who would vote no remained at 46 per cent, while 9 per cent said they were unsure, up by one point. The remainder would not vote or refused to say.



https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/voters-lose-interest-on-union-question-25mzsz3r8

Astonishing that despite Brexit and PM Boris Sturgeon has actually managed to see Yes fall by 5% below the 45% it got in the 2014 referendum.

No wonder Salmond and Alba are so furious and of course no prospect of a legal indyref2 under this Tory government either

The actual Yes figure is 46.5% - which is above the 2014 referendum figure.

But of course you are muddling figures which include and which exclude DKs.

Professor Curtice would not be impressed.

It is 40% including DKs, so in terms of all voters below the 45% from 2014 as I said

Here we go again. So you agree that a majority do not explicitly support the Union?

The majority explicitly supported the Union in 2014 in a once in a generation referendum and this Tory government as long as it remains in power will not allow another indyref2 for at least a generation until 2014 has elapsed

So democracy doesn’t apply to Scotland. The very essence of colonialism.

No, colonialism is when a foreign power occupies your land, without your permission, and then rules it without giving you equal representation in the legislature

Scotland willingly entered the Union with England, and it is fully represented at Westminster, as WELL as having highly significant autonomous powers at Holyrood. Indeed Scots are able to vote on some English laws when the opposite is not the case. If there is any hint of colonialism here, it is Scottish power over the English

That's true as long as its a voluntary union.

If Scotland can not vote its way out of the union, it ceases to be voluntary.

Scotland can vote itself out of the union by persuading MPs at Westminster, which is Scotland's own sovereign, shared parliament, where Scotland is equally and fully represented, that Scotland needs an indy referendum

We know this works because the Scots thus persuaded Westminster in 2014. A referendum was granted, the Scots said No, that is the end of the matter for a generation UNLESS Westminster can be persuaded, again. Perhaps the Nats should try that instead of moaning

48 of the 59 MPs Scotland elects were elected on a manifesto of having another referendum. That is a very clear overwhelming majority of their MPs in Westminster.

Unless you're saying it doesn't matter a jot what the Scottish voters say, their future in the union can only be changed if the English MPs agree. Is that what you're saying?

Yep. You can have whatever you want if we agree with you. If we disagree you can do one.

When the union was formed it was mutual - like a marriage. What Leon and HYUFD are saying is that Scotland can't have a divorce unless the husband agrees.

In many countries you can't have a divorce unless the husband agrees, especially in the Middle East.

We aren't in the Middle East!

Leon said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Leon said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Leon said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Leon said:

Fairliered said:

HYUFD said:

SandyRentool said:

HYUFD said:

Carnyx said:

HYUFD said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Sleazy broken Scottish Nationalism on the slide

A poll by YouGov for The Times finds that 40 per cent of people say they would vote yes in another referendum, a drop of one point compared with the company’s last survey in May.

The proportion of people who would vote no remained at 46 per cent, while 9 per cent said they were unsure, up by one point. The remainder would not vote or refused to say.



https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/voters-lose-interest-on-union-question-25mzsz3r8

Astonishing that despite Brexit and PM Boris Sturgeon has actually managed to see Yes fall by 5% below the 45% it got in the 2014 referendum.

No wonder Salmond and Alba are so furious and of course no prospect of a legal indyref2 under this Tory government either

The actual Yes figure is 46.5% - which is above the 2014 referendum figure.

But of course you are muddling figures which include and which exclude DKs.

Professor Curtice would not be impressed.

It is 40% including DKs, so in terms of all voters below the 45% from 2014 as I said

Here we go again. So you agree that a majority do not explicitly support the Union?

The majority explicitly supported the Union in 2014 in a once in a generation referendum and this Tory government as long as it remains in power will not allow another indyref2 for at least a generation until 2014 has elapsed

So democracy doesn’t apply to Scotland. The very essence of colonialism.

No, colonialism is when a foreign power occupies your land, without your permission, and then rules it without giving you equal representation in the legislature

Scotland willingly entered the Union with England, and it is fully represented at Westminster, as WELL as having highly significant autonomous powers at Holyrood. Indeed Scots are able to vote on some English laws when the opposite is not the case. If there is any hint of colonialism here, it is Scottish power over the English

That's true as long as its a voluntary union.

If Scotland can not vote its way out of the union, it ceases to be voluntary.

Scotland can vote itself out of the union by persuading MPs at Westminster, which is Scotland's own sovereign, shared parliament, where Scotland is equally and fully represented, that Scotland needs an indy referendum

We know this works because the Scots thus persuaded Westminster in 2014. A referendum was granted, the Scots said No, that is the end of the matter for a generation UNLESS Westminster can be persuaded, again. Perhaps the Nats should try that instead of moaning

48 of the 59 MPs Scotland elects were elected on a manifesto of having another referendum. That is a very clear overwhelming majority of their MPs in Westminster.

Unless you're saying it doesn't matter a jot what the Scottish voters say, their future in the union can only be changed if the English MPs agree. Is that what you're saying?

No, their future in the union can only be changed if the BRITISH parliament - including Scotland - agrees. This is far from impossible, it happened in 2014. I am sure it will happen again, at some point, just as it did in Quebec

But a generation needs to elapse. The fundamental structure of the nation cannot be constantly menaced

Of course the future can be constantly menaced every time we have an election. That's democracy. We don't wait a generation between elections, we wait no more than five years as a maximum.

So if the Scots want, they can have a referendum every year? Every six years? Why five? Because that's one parliament? But why not every other year during the parliament? Once a week?

No nation can endure such a constant endangerment, it's bad for business, for a start

Quebec waited a generation: 15 years, they have not had one since. That is the correct timescale

But you and I are never going to agree on this, and you have never been known to change your mind, so I suggest we talk about something less boring. Even my state of post-vax malaise is more interesting than this endlessly repeating debate

If every Parliament elects a government pledging a referendum then you can have a referendum every Parliament, yes. That's what the people voted for.

If people decide they don't want to be constantly bothered by new referenda, if they think "oh not another one" then they can vote against the party pledging to have one at the next election.

That is what happened with Quebec. The Quebecois voted down the second referendum and then ultimately voted out the PQ who have never won a majority this century.

kinabalu said:

HYUFD said:

Leon said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Leon said:

BlancheLivermore said:

Leon said:

Yep, Woke not a problem


"Students at Washington’s Catholic University of America seek to remove George Floyd Jesus"

"Students at a Catholic university are petitioning to remove a “heretical” painting that depicts George Floyd as Jesus.

"Mama, by Kelly Latimore, shows Floyd being cradled by a maternal figure and evokes Michelangelo’s Pietà sculpture of Mary and Jesus after the crucifixion."

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/students-at-washingtons-catholic-university-of-america-seek-to-remove-george-floyd-jesus-7tw69fzgr?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1637847470

I can't work out who's meant to be woke here..

Is the painting woke?

Or are those "cancelling" it woke because it upsets them?

The painting is Woke.

Woke is becoming a religion. There was an excellent essay on this exact phenomenon in the Spectator, quite recently

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/what-if-wokeness-really-is-the-new-christianity-

So you're on the side of those in favour of cancellations?

Cancellation culture is good now?

I am shocked! Shocked! At this revelation. 😱

It is genuinely fascinating how Woke is infesting the Christian church. And again it is an uncanny echo of Christianity's own genesis

When the early Christians wished to convert some heathen tribe, they often kept the pagan shrines intact, and simply imposed their own symbols and buildings thereupon, thus absorbing the spiritual power of the Old Faith into the New. That's why so many churches in the UK and beyond are built on pagan sites, which can sometimes still be recognised - yew trees are a telling presence. The same happened with Gods - Isis nursing Horus became Mother Mary nursing the baby Jesus.

See here, the exact same iconography


https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/545961


Turning George Floyd into Jesus is Wokeness doing to Christianity what Christianity did to Zeus, Woden, Osiris and Valhalla. A pleasing symmetry, but a menacing development, which completely vindicates the prediction made in that superb Spectator essay by an ex PB-er

Leaving aside the George Floyd Jesus it is a good thing there are more black Jesus images, especially as the average Christian worldwide is more likely to be black than white now in the 21st century.

Jesus himself was Middle Eastern not European of course

I see him as looking like Robert Powell. I try to conjur up other visions in a quest for diversity but none of them will stick.

Jesus wouldn’t have looked black at all. I remember when small people coming to the school to tell us Jesus was not white he was black, and I argued with them he was more white than black. He wouldn’t even have looked like a North African?

Would he ever have heard the word Jesus in his life, or only Yeshua?

HYUFD said:

Theuniondivvie said:

HYUFD said:

RochdalePioneers said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Leon said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Leon said:

Fairliered said:

HYUFD said:

SandyRentool said:

HYUFD said:

Carnyx said:

HYUFD said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Sleazy broken Scottish Nationalism on the slide

A poll by YouGov for The Times finds that 40 per cent of people say they would vote yes in another referendum, a drop of one point compared with the company’s last survey in May.

The proportion of people who would vote no remained at 46 per cent, while 9 per cent said they were unsure, up by one point. The remainder would not vote or refused to say.



https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/voters-lose-interest-on-union-question-25mzsz3r8

Astonishing that despite Brexit and PM Boris Sturgeon has actually managed to see Yes fall by 5% below the 45% it got in the 2014 referendum.

No wonder Salmond and Alba are so furious and of course no prospect of a legal indyref2 under this Tory government either

The actual Yes figure is 46.5% - which is above the 2014 referendum figure.

But of course you are muddling figures which include and which exclude DKs.

Professor Curtice would not be impressed.

It is 40% including DKs, so in terms of all voters below the 45% from 2014 as I said

Here we go again. So you agree that a majority do not explicitly support the Union?

The majority explicitly supported the Union in 2014 in a once in a generation referendum and this Tory government as long as it remains in power will not allow another indyref2 for at least a generation until 2014 has elapsed

So democracy doesn’t apply to Scotland. The very essence of colonialism.

No, colonialism is when a foreign power occupies your land, without your permission, and then rules it without giving you equal representation in the legislature

Scotland willingly entered the Union with England, and it is fully represented at Westminster, as WELL as having highly significant autonomous powers at Holyrood. Indeed Scots are able to vote on some English laws when the opposite is not the case. If there is any hint of colonialism here, it is Scottish power over the English

That's true as long as its a voluntary union.

If Scotland can not vote its way out of the union, it ceases to be voluntary.

Scotland can vote itself out of the union by persuading MPs at Westminster, which is Scotland's own sovereign, shared parliament, where Scotland is equally and fully represented, that Scotland needs an indy referendum

We know this works because the Scots thus persuaded Westminster in 2014. A referendum was granted, the Scots said No, that is the end of the matter for a generation UNLESS Westminster can be persuaded, again. Perhaps the Nats should try that instead of moaning

48 of the 59 MPs Scotland elects were elected on a manifesto of having another referendum. That is a very clear overwhelming majority of their MPs in Westminster.

Unless you're saying it doesn't matter a jot what the Scottish voters say, their future in the union can only be changed if the English MPs agree. Is that what you're saying?

Yep. You can have whatever you want if we agree with you. If we disagree you can do one.

When the union was formed it was mutual - like a marriage. What Leon and HYUFD are saying is that Scotland can't have a divorce unless the husband agrees.

In many countries you can't have a divorce unless the husband agrees, especially in the Middle East.

Certainly constant demands for divorce are not helpful, especially when it was already agreed to stay together once only a few years ago, divorce should be a last resort

A future HYUFD classic, on a par with the Francoist shite.

On the 'constant demands' thing, how many Scottish indy referendums have there been in the last 314 years?

One less than a decade ago

That's not the question he asked.

Who do you think you are? Boris Johnson?

Leon said:

Sandpit said:

Leon said:

Yep, Woke not a problem


"Students at Washington’s Catholic University of America seek to remove George Floyd Jesus"

"Students at a Catholic university are petitioning to remove a “heretical” painting that depicts George Floyd as Jesus.

"Mama, by Kelly Latimore, shows Floyd being cradled by a maternal figure and evokes Michelangelo’s Pietà sculpture of Mary and Jesus after the crucifixion."

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/students-at-washingtons-catholic-university-of-america-seek-to-remove-george-floyd-jesus-7tw69fzgr?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1637847470

Let them argue with each other.

We used to cal this ‘debate’, or even ‘freedom of speech’.

But the Woke do not do debate. That's the whole bloody point. They impose their belief, heresy is not allowed, and blasphemy will get you cancelled. That is one way it is akin to a religion.

But you're the one backing artwork being cancelled because you don't like it? Because you find it blasphemous?

You object to one religion yet back the other?

Nigelb said:

Anabobazina said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

HYUFD said:

Matthew McConnaughey second in new Texas governor poll.

Abbott 37%, McConaughey 27%, O'Rourke 26%
https://nypost.com/2021/11/22/matthew-mcconaughey-ahead-of-abbott-beto-in-texas-gov-race/

CSS Texas, of course, being the Confederate warship featured in McConaughey's movie "Sahara" (2005).

Ideally he’d run as a Republican, win, then beat the odious Trump to the GOP nomination in 2024. That’s the dream scenario.

Not sure the Republicans would fall for that, but I like it.
If he does run as a Dem, then his numbers would probably slide.

What are his actual politics? I might guess he’s a moderate Republican in the Arnie mould, but I have no idea really.

Richard Madeley has slid head first into a sewer of rotten fruit and vegetables. Fell ill as a result but is going to be ok.

Surely time for this programme - I'm a Celeb - to ask itself some questions.

HYUFD said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Omnium said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

HYUFD said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

HYUFD said:

Leon said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Leon said:

BlancheLivermore said:

Leon said:

Yep, Woke not a problem


"Students at Washington’s Catholic University of America seek to remove George Floyd Jesus"

"Students at a Catholic university are petitioning to remove a “heretical” painting that depicts George Floyd as Jesus.

"Mama, by Kelly Latimore, shows Floyd being cradled by a maternal figure and evokes Michelangelo’s Pietà sculpture of Mary and Jesus after the crucifixion."

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/students-at-washingtons-catholic-university-of-america-seek-to-remove-george-floyd-jesus-7tw69fzgr?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1637847470

I can't work out who's meant to be woke here..

Is the painting woke?

Or are those "cancelling" it woke because it upsets them?

The painting is Woke.

Woke is becoming a religion. There was an excellent essay on this exact phenomenon in the Spectator, quite recently

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/what-if-wokeness-really-is-the-new-christianity-

So you're on the side of those in favour of cancellations?

Cancellation culture is good now?

I am shocked! Shocked! At this revelation. 😱

It is genuinely fascinating how Woke is infesting the Christian church. And again it is an uncanny echo of Christianity's own genesis

When the early Christians wished to convert some heathen tribe, they often kept the pagan shrines intact, and simply imposed their own symbols and buildings thereupon, thus absorbing the spiritual power of the Old Faith into the New. That's why so many churches in the UK and beyond are built on pagan sites, which can sometimes still be recognised - yew trees are a telling presence. The same happened with Gods - Isis nursing Horus became Mother Mary nursing the baby Jesus.

See here, the exact same iconography


https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/545961


Turning George Floyd into Jesus is Wokeness doing to Christianity what Christianity did to Zeus, Woden, Osiris and Valhalla. A pleasing symmetry, but a menacing development, which completely vindicates the prediction made in that superb Spectator essay by an ex PB-er

Leaving aside the George Floyd Jesus it is a good thing there are more black Jesus images, especially as the average Christian worldwide is more likely to be black than white now in the 21st century.

Jesus himself was Middle Eastern not European of course

SOCIALISM = RELIGION

therefore:

RELIGION = SOCIALISM!

What utter rubbish, when the main socialist nations left on earth eg North Korea, China and Cuba are headed by atheists and religion actually means less reliance on state welfare with more religious provision instead.

Socialism is state control of most of the economy, please check your definition next time, it has zilch to do with religion

Socialism IS a religion in itself.

Therefore it is legitimate to say:

RELIGION = SOCIALISM!

I don't think any sensible definition of the 'equals' sign allows your post to make sense.

HYUFD believes in God, therefore he is a Socialist

On your logic Thatcher was a socialist and Mao and Corbyn are capitalists

If you believe in God, you are a Socialist! Just accept it!

Leon said:

Sandpit said:

Leon said:

Yep, Woke not a problem


"Students at Washington’s Catholic University of America seek to remove George Floyd Jesus"

"Students at a Catholic university are petitioning to remove a “heretical” painting that depicts George Floyd as Jesus.

"Mama, by Kelly Latimore, shows Floyd being cradled by a maternal figure and evokes Michelangelo’s Pietà sculpture of Mary and Jesus after the crucifixion."

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/students-at-washingtons-catholic-university-of-america-seek-to-remove-george-floyd-jesus-7tw69fzgr?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1637847470

Let them argue with each other.

We used to cal this ‘debate’, or even ‘freedom of speech’.

But the Woke do not do debate. That's the whole bloody point. They impose their belief, heresy is not allowed, and blasphemy will get you cancelled. That is one way it is akin to a religion.

You don't seem to have been cancelled.

Theuniondivvie said:

HYUFD said:

Theuniondivvie said:

HYUFD said:

RochdalePioneers said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Leon said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Leon said:

Fairliered said:

HYUFD said:

SandyRentool said:

HYUFD said:

Carnyx said:

HYUFD said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Sleazy broken Scottish Nationalism on the slide

A poll by YouGov for The Times finds that 40 per cent of people say they would vote yes in another referendum, a drop of one point compared with the company’s last survey in May.

The proportion of people who would vote no remained at 46 per cent, while 9 per cent said they were unsure, up by one point. The remainder would not vote or refused to say.



https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/voters-lose-interest-on-union-question-25mzsz3r8

Astonishing that despite Brexit and PM Boris Sturgeon has actually managed to see Yes fall by 5% below the 45% it got in the 2014 referendum.

No wonder Salmond and Alba are so furious and of course no prospect of a legal indyref2 under this Tory government either

The actual Yes figure is 46.5% - which is above the 2014 referendum figure.

But of course you are muddling figures which include and which exclude DKs.

Professor Curtice would not be impressed.

It is 40% including DKs, so in terms of all voters below the 45% from 2014 as I said

Here we go again. So you agree that a majority do not explicitly support the Union?

The majority explicitly supported the Union in 2014 in a once in a generation referendum and this Tory government as long as it remains in power will not allow another indyref2 for at least a generation until 2014 has elapsed

So democracy doesn’t apply to Scotland. The very essence of colonialism.

No, colonialism is when a foreign power occupies your land, without your permission, and then rules it without giving you equal representation in the legislature

Scotland willingly entered the Union with England, and it is fully represented at Westminster, as WELL as having highly significant autonomous powers at Holyrood. Indeed Scots are able to vote on some English laws when the opposite is not the case. If there is any hint of colonialism here, it is Scottish power over the English

That's true as long as its a voluntary union.

If Scotland can not vote its way out of the union, it ceases to be voluntary.

Scotland can vote itself out of the union by persuading MPs at Westminster, which is Scotland's own sovereign, shared parliament, where Scotland is equally and fully represented, that Scotland needs an indy referendum

We know this works because the Scots thus persuaded Westminster in 2014. A referendum was granted, the Scots said No, that is the end of the matter for a generation UNLESS Westminster can be persuaded, again. Perhaps the Nats should try that instead of moaning

48 of the 59 MPs Scotland elects were elected on a manifesto of having another referendum. That is a very clear overwhelming majority of their MPs in Westminster.

Unless you're saying it doesn't matter a jot what the Scottish voters say, their future in the union can only be changed if the English MPs agree. Is that what you're saying?

Yep. You can have whatever you want if we agree with you. If we disagree you can do one.

When the union was formed it was mutual - like a marriage. What Leon and HYUFD are saying is that Scotland can't have a divorce unless the husband agrees.

In many countries you can't have a divorce unless the husband agrees, especially in the Middle East.

Certainly constant demands for divorce are not helpful, especially when it was already agreed to stay together once only a few years ago, divorce should be a last resort

A future HYUFD classic, on a par with the Francoist shite.

On the 'constant demands' thing, how many Scottish indy referendums have there been in the last 314 years?

One less than a decade ago

Poor, colonised English, bullied by constant demands into having one referendum in 314 years. The heart bleeds, it really does.

That reminds me, I must put some shallots down on the shopping list.

Omnium said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

HYUFD said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

HYUFD said:

Leon said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Leon said:

BlancheLivermore said:

Leon said:

Yep, Woke not a problem


"Students at Washington’s Catholic University of America seek to remove George Floyd Jesus"

"Students at a Catholic university are petitioning to remove a “heretical” painting that depicts George Floyd as Jesus.

"Mama, by Kelly Latimore, shows Floyd being cradled by a maternal figure and evokes Michelangelo’s Pietà sculpture of Mary and Jesus after the crucifixion."

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/students-at-washingtons-catholic-university-of-america-seek-to-remove-george-floyd-jesus-7tw69fzgr?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1637847470

I can't work out who's meant to be woke here..

Is the painting woke?

Or are those "cancelling" it woke because it upsets them?

The painting is Woke.

Woke is becoming a religion. There was an excellent essay on this exact phenomenon in the Spectator, quite recently

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/what-if-wokeness-really-is-the-new-christianity-

So you're on the side of those in favour of cancellations?

Cancellation culture is good now?

I am shocked! Shocked! At this revelation. 😱

It is genuinely fascinating how Woke is infesting the Christian church. And again it is an uncanny echo of Christianity's own genesis

When the early Christians wished to convert some heathen tribe, they often kept the pagan shrines intact, and simply imposed their own symbols and buildings thereupon, thus absorbing the spiritual power of the Old Faith into the New. That's why so many churches in the UK and beyond are built on pagan sites, which can sometimes still be recognised - yew trees are a telling presence. The same happened with Gods - Isis nursing Horus became Mother Mary nursing the baby Jesus.

See here, the exact same iconography


https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/545961


Turning George Floyd into Jesus is Wokeness doing to Christianity what Christianity did to Zeus, Woden, Osiris and Valhalla. A pleasing symmetry, but a menacing development, which completely vindicates the prediction made in that superb Spectator essay by an ex PB-er

Leaving aside the George Floyd Jesus it is a good thing there are more black Jesus images, especially as the average Christian worldwide is more likely to be black than white now in the 21st century.

Jesus himself was Middle Eastern not European of course

SOCIALISM = RELIGION

therefore:

RELIGION = SOCIALISM!

What utter rubbish, when the main socialist nations left on earth eg North Korea, China and Cuba are headed by atheists and religion actually means less reliance on state welfare with more religious provision instead.

Socialism is state control of most of the economy, please check your definition next time, it has zilch to do with religion

Socialism IS a religion in itself.

Therefore it is legitimate to say:

RELIGION = SOCIALISM!

I don't think any sensible definition of the 'equals' sign allows your post to make sense.

To be fair to Sunil Prasannan point, believing in Marxism is not so that different than believing in Scientology? Marxism is supposed to be scientific?

Though my understanding of dialectic as in Dialectical Marxism is argumentative and contrarian, which to me doesn’t make the phrase much sense

Anabobazina said:

Nigelb said:

Anabobazina said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

HYUFD said:

Matthew McConnaughey second in new Texas governor poll.

Abbott 37%, McConaughey 27%, O'Rourke 26%
https://nypost.com/2021/11/22/matthew-mcconaughey-ahead-of-abbott-beto-in-texas-gov-race/

CSS Texas, of course, being the Confederate warship featured in McConaughey's movie "Sahara" (2005).

Ideally he’d run as a Republican, win, then beat the odious Trump to the GOP nomination in 2024. That’s the dream scenario.

Not sure the Republicans would fall for that, but I like it.
If he does run as a Dem, then his numbers would probably slide.

What are his actual politics? I might guess he’s a moderate Republican in the Arnie mould, but I have no idea really.

"But a voice from the sky is exactly what you found, Dr Arroway!"

Philip_Thompson said:

MaxPB said:

Nigelb said:

LostPassword said:

MaxPB said:

turbotubbs said:

MaxPB said:

Leon said:

rottenborough said:

Leon said:

MaxPB said:

Leon said:

Pretty bloody ropey after my Moderna booster jab. Seriously sore and frozen arm, general malaise and fatigue. Much worse than AZ, which caused a tiny bit of tenderness in the shoulder...

That's a sign that you've probably previously had COVID.

I am now near-certain that I did have Covid way back in January 2020, caught in Thailand. That's what Public Health England thought, that's why they sent me to be tested in UCLH, tho a SNAFU prevented any actual test

It would also explain why I haven't caught Covid since, despite taking many risks in recent months: pubs, bars, restaurants, planes, the works

"That's a sign that you've probably previously had COVID."

Is it? First I've heard of that idea.

Yes it has been punted before, by proper scientists, tho there are also other explanations, ofc

Hey, my Chemistry degree still just about qualifies me as a "proper scientist" just not a practicing one.

You never lose the scientific training.

You know a junior asked me earlier this year whether or not I thought my degree was useful, I was going to say "not really" as always but actually after having a short think about it, I think it is pretty useful. Not the chemistry because fuck that noise, but the methodology of being a scientist and being open to any and all criticism of a theory, idea or model. I think a lot of our more public scientists, especially those in iSAGE, seem to have forgotten that a big part of science is having regular retrospectives on current theories vs real life data. It's something I've noticed myself doing over the course of this pandemic, go back on old ideas and make sure they are still relevant.

Too many of the public scientific advisors aren't doing that exercise right now. Just today I read that some SAGE scientists are calling for the immediate implementation of plan b, despite there being not very much evidence to support that. They're stuck in a timeloop of a political agenda that lockdown measures are the only way to combat this. I'm sure when Germany, France and other major European countries go into a full lockdown in two weeks those same voices will condemn the government as irresponsible and callous for not doing the same here and in the process completely ignore the available real world data on infection rates, testing and hospitalisation.

I'm a recovering former scientist, and what is notable is that science works more on a collective level than on an individual level.

Individual scientists are human, and most of them become wedded to particular ideas and find it hard to abandon those ideas. The hardest thing in science I had to do was to abandon months of work that just wasn't working as I'd hoped it would. If it had initially worked well enough to publish a paper on it I would have found it a lot harder to give up on it later.

But collectively science works because other scientists don't share the emotional attachment and cognitive biases that have individual scientists stick to a dead end, because they don't have the history with that idea. They'll get attached to some other ideas in time.

So I have a lot of faith in Science, but am more wary of individual scientists...

The medical establishment seems particularly susceptible to unjustified attachments to dogma, for some reason.

One of my wife's friends is in obstetrics/gynaecology and she was over recently lamenting the militant attachment that midwives in this country have got to natural birth, often to the detriment of the mother. She's had to step in multiple times and recommend a c-section and fight the midwife on the reasoning, even though she's got 7 years of medical training and another 5 years experience being in the field she's being countermanded by someone who simply can't see beyond "yeah but natural birth is better". She was saying the whole profession has been completely and totally captured by this thinking.

Its the same with breastfeeding.

My wife really, really struggled to feed both our children. It happens to a certain proportion of women but there is so much dogma attached now to "breast is best" that when faced with the need to go for an alternative, it is very hard to get objective information on what alternatives to go for etc

We found there is very little in the way of support for people who can't breastfeed - and immense pressure of "oh you just need to keep at it" as if we hadn't tried that already.

I found that too. I was unable to feed my eldest. The midwife insisted. Eventually, the GP - furious at her behaviour - put my son on bottle feeding and the poor child was starving. I had mastitis by this point and was really quite ill so spent the first few weeks after the birth ill and then on antibiotics. The GP - an old-fashioned but very experienced sort - told me he was fed up with the way young midwives, with no experience of giving birth, bullied mothers into feeling guilty if they could not breast feed. My mother was very supportive but the midwives were no good at all.

HYUFD said:

RochdalePioneers said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Leon said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Leon said:

Fairliered said:

HYUFD said:

SandyRentool said:

HYUFD said:

Carnyx said:

HYUFD said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Sleazy broken Scottish Nationalism on the slide

A poll by YouGov for The Times finds that 40 per cent of people say they would vote yes in another referendum, a drop of one point compared with the company’s last survey in May.

The proportion of people who would vote no remained at 46 per cent, while 9 per cent said they were unsure, up by one point. The remainder would not vote or refused to say.



https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/voters-lose-interest-on-union-question-25mzsz3r8

Astonishing that despite Brexit and PM Boris Sturgeon has actually managed to see Yes fall by 5% below the 45% it got in the 2014 referendum.

No wonder Salmond and Alba are so furious and of course no prospect of a legal indyref2 under this Tory government either

The actual Yes figure is 46.5% - which is above the 2014 referendum figure.

But of course you are muddling figures which include and which exclude DKs.

Professor Curtice would not be impressed.

It is 40% including DKs, so in terms of all voters below the 45% from 2014 as I said

Here we go again. So you agree that a majority do not explicitly support the Union?

The majority explicitly supported the Union in 2014 in a once in a generation referendum and this Tory government as long as it remains in power will not allow another indyref2 for at least a generation until 2014 has elapsed

So democracy doesn’t apply to Scotland. The very essence of colonialism.

No, colonialism is when a foreign power occupies your land, without your permission, and then rules it without giving you equal representation in the legislature

Scotland willingly entered the Union with England, and it is fully represented at Westminster, as WELL as having highly significant autonomous powers at Holyrood. Indeed Scots are able to vote on some English laws when the opposite is not the case. If there is any hint of colonialism here, it is Scottish power over the English

That's true as long as its a voluntary union.

If Scotland can not vote its way out of the union, it ceases to be voluntary.

Scotland can vote itself out of the union by persuading MPs at Westminster, which is Scotland's own sovereign, shared parliament, where Scotland is equally and fully represented, that Scotland needs an indy referendum

We know this works because the Scots thus persuaded Westminster in 2014. A referendum was granted, the Scots said No, that is the end of the matter for a generation UNLESS Westminster can be persuaded, again. Perhaps the Nats should try that instead of moaning

48 of the 59 MPs Scotland elects were elected on a manifesto of having another referendum. That is a very clear overwhelming majority of their MPs in Westminster.

Unless you're saying it doesn't matter a jot what the Scottish voters say, their future in the union can only be changed if the English MPs agree. Is that what you're saying?

Yep. You can have whatever you want if we agree with you. If we disagree you can do one.

When the union was formed it was mutual - like a marriage. What Leon and HYUFD are saying is that Scotland can't have a divorce unless the husband agrees.

In many countries you can't have a divorce unless the husband agrees, especially in the Middle East. The Roman Catholic church also greatly discourages divorce.

Certainly constant demands for divorce are not helpful, especially when it was already agreed to stay together once only a few years ago, divorce should be a last resort

Quite right. No good skank ho's should know their place. Just cos I shagged her best friend and started slapping her round a bit whilst drunk she has no right to ask for a divorce because she already agreed to stay together once only a few years ago,

Her constant demands for divorce are not helpful

MaxPB said:

The reason COVID is so deadly is that it is almost perfectly adapted to the ACE-2 receptor and it enters the cell by using the spike protein which binds with very, very high efficiency to those ACE-2 sites on human cells. That's not something we normally see with this kind of virus, hence the "novel"Coronavirus name at the beginning, it was essentially a completely new type of coronavirus with ACE-2 binding.

"Novel" just means new. It doesn't mean "unusual" or "abnormal". It was called "novel" just because this particular virus hadn't been seen before.

MaxPB said:

Leon said:

MaxPB said:

On vaccine efficacy dilution, the more detailed version - one for @Leon:

The reason COVID is so deadly is that it is almost perfectly adapted to the ACE-2 receptor and it enters the cell by using the spike protein which binds with very, very high efficiency to those ACE-2 sites on human cells. That's not something we normally see with this kind of virus, hence the "novel"Coronavirus name at the beginning, it was essentially a completely new type of coronavirus with ACE-2 binding. The reason all of our vaccines, AZ, Pfizer, Moderna and others, are still so highly effective is that they essentially replicate the same ACE-2 receptor sites but in neutralising antibodies which allows them to bind very efficiently to the virus in the bloodstream before they enter (m)any cells.

If the virus mutates to an extent that antibodies can no longer bind to the spike protein with the same high efficiency as now, it means the spike protein will also not easily bind to the ACE-2 site present on human cells. If it can't easily bind to the ACE-2 site then it can't put it's genetic material into the cell and create virus replication factories out of those cells.

One of the Delta subvariants seems to have a minor mutation to the spike protein that has decreased ACE-2 binding efficiency by a small amount and this seems to have actually made it less deadly, it's looking like the first example of the viral evolutionary path leading to a more transmissive but less deadly variation. Happily that subvariant still has very good binding efficiency to neutralising antibodies so there's nothing to worry about in regards to immunity.

Anyway, that's the extent of my understanding on the subject, my speciality in chemistry was very much on the other side of it in creating novel types of semi-conductor!

That's soothing and enlightening - thanks

Twitter is actually being quite reasonable on this variant - lots of people agreeing with you re low transmissibility. But there are the usual suspects crying FIRE, and they have blue ticks. Irresponsible

Again, those usual suspects are seizing what they think is an opportunity to get everyone in the world locked in their homes again. I don't understand their obsession with lockdowns. They were a necessary evil in 2020 and earlier part of this year, now they are, at least for the UK, completely unnecessary.

Are we talking about the Botswana variant?

Farooq said:

Leon said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Leon said:

Sandpit said:

Leon said:

Yep, Woke not a problem


"Students at Washington’s Catholic University of America seek to remove George Floyd Jesus"

"Students at a Catholic university are petitioning to remove a “heretical” painting that depicts George Floyd as Jesus.

"Mama, by Kelly Latimore, shows Floyd being cradled by a maternal figure and evokes Michelangelo’s Pietà sculpture of Mary and Jesus after the crucifixion."

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/students-at-washingtons-catholic-university-of-america-seek-to-remove-george-floyd-jesus-7tw69fzgr?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1637847470

Let them argue with each other.

We used to cal this ‘debate’, or even ‘freedom of speech’.

But the Woke do not do debate. That's the whole bloody point. They impose their belief, heresy is not allowed, and blasphemy will get you cancelled. That is one way it is akin to a religion.

But you're the one backing artwork being cancelled because you don't like it? Because you find it blasphemous?

You object to one religion yet back the other?

If forced to choose a religion, would I choose Christianity (post-Enlightenment) over Woke? Of course I would. Woke is the antithesis of the Enlightenment, it seeks to crush incredibly valuable freedoms that took many centuries to achieve

Post Enlightenment Christianity is a pretty broad church. I'd have you down as Exclusive Brethren if forced to guess which sect. Either that or a suicide sex cult of 20 people living in a bunker in Nevada.

Well, the former would include Aleister Crowley, Tony Crosland and Haigh the acid-bath chappie. Quite a variety.

Cyclefree said:

Philip_Thompson said:

MaxPB said:

Nigelb said:

LostPassword said:

MaxPB said:

turbotubbs said:

MaxPB said:

Leon said:

rottenborough said:

Leon said:

MaxPB said:

Leon said:

Pretty bloody ropey after my Moderna booster jab. Seriously sore and frozen arm, general malaise and fatigue. Much worse than AZ, which caused a tiny bit of tenderness in the shoulder...

That's a sign that you've probably previously had COVID.

I am now near-certain that I did have Covid way back in January 2020, caught in Thailand. That's what Public Health England thought, that's why they sent me to be tested in UCLH, tho a SNAFU prevented any actual test

It would also explain why I haven't caught Covid since, despite taking many risks in recent months: pubs, bars, restaurants, planes, the works

"That's a sign that you've probably previously had COVID."

Is it? First I've heard of that idea.

Yes it has been punted before, by proper scientists, tho there are also other explanations, ofc

Hey, my Chemistry degree still just about qualifies me as a "proper scientist" just not a practicing one.

You never lose the scientific training.

You know a junior asked me earlier this year whether or not I thought my degree was useful, I was going to say "not really" as always but actually after having a short think about it, I think it is pretty useful. Not the chemistry because fuck that noise, but the methodology of being a scientist and being open to any and all criticism of a theory, idea or model. I think a lot of our more public scientists, especially those in iSAGE, seem to have forgotten that a big part of science is having regular retrospectives on current theories vs real life data. It's something I've noticed myself doing over the course of this pandemic, go back on old ideas and make sure they are still relevant.

Too many of the public scientific advisors aren't doing that exercise right now. Just today I read that some SAGE scientists are calling for the immediate implementation of plan b, despite there being not very much evidence to support that. They're stuck in a timeloop of a political agenda that lockdown measures are the only way to combat this. I'm sure when Germany, France and other major European countries go into a full lockdown in two weeks those same voices will condemn the government as irresponsible and callous for not doing the same here and in the process completely ignore the available real world data on infection rates, testing and hospitalisation.

I'm a recovering former scientist, and what is notable is that science works more on a collective level than on an individual level.

Individual scientists are human, and most of them become wedded to particular ideas and find it hard to abandon those ideas. The hardest thing in science I had to do was to abandon months of work that just wasn't working as I'd hoped it would. If it had initially worked well enough to publish a paper on it I would have found it a lot harder to give up on it later.

But collectively science works because other scientists don't share the emotional attachment and cognitive biases that have individual scientists stick to a dead end, because they don't have the history with that idea. They'll get attached to some other ideas in time.

So I have a lot of faith in Science, but am more wary of individual scientists...

The medical establishment seems particularly susceptible to unjustified attachments to dogma, for some reason.

One of my wife's friends is in obstetrics/gynaecology and she was over recently lamenting the militant attachment that midwives in this country have got to natural birth, often to the detriment of the mother. She's had to step in multiple times and recommend a c-section and fight the midwife on the reasoning, even though she's got 7 years of medical training and another 5 years experience being in the field she's being countermanded by someone who simply can't see beyond "yeah but natural birth is better". She was saying the whole profession has been completely and totally captured by this thinking.

Its the same with breastfeeding.

My wife really, really struggled to feed both our children. It happens to a certain proportion of women but there is so much dogma attached now to "breast is best" that when faced with the need to go for an alternative, it is very hard to get objective information on what alternatives to go for etc

We found there is very little in the way of support for people who can't breastfeed - and immense pressure of "oh you just need to keep at it" as if we hadn't tried that already.

I found that too. I was unable to feed my eldest. The midwife insisted. Eventually, the GP - furious at her behaviour - put my son on bottle feeding and the poor child was starving. I had mastitis by this point and was really quite ill so spent the first few weeks after the birth ill and then on antibiotics. The GP - an old-fashioned but very experienced sort - told me he was fed up with the way young midwives, with no experience of giving birth, bullied mothers into feeling guilty if they could not breast feed. My mother was very supportive but the midwives were no good at all.

That's not nice at all, but I can relate.

Our experience was similar, we ended up with my wife and our eldest daughter both in the hospital but we got some really nasty remarks from some of the younger (and more dogmatic it seems) people working there especially. It was only when we were eventually seen by the head of the unit who was quite reassuring that things became more pleasant, until then we were treated almost like we were deliberately starving our child.

As a first time parent its quite intimidating and nobody ever does anything to prepare you for that possibility. Instead its nine months of "breast is best" dogma but nothing about "what about if you can't?"

When we struggled with the second child feeding again we were much quicker and much more confident to switch to the bottle. Breast may be best, but bottle is better than not feeding.

RochdalePioneers said:

HYUFD said:

RochdalePioneers said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Leon said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Leon said:

Fairliered said:

HYUFD said:

SandyRentool said:

HYUFD said:

Carnyx said:

HYUFD said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Sleazy broken Scottish Nationalism on the slide

A poll by YouGov for The Times finds that 40 per cent of people say they would vote yes in another referendum, a drop of one point compared with the company’s last survey in May.

The proportion of people who would vote no remained at 46 per cent, while 9 per cent said they were unsure, up by one point. The remainder would not vote or refused to say.



https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/voters-lose-interest-on-union-question-25mzsz3r8

Astonishing that despite Brexit and PM Boris Sturgeon has actually managed to see Yes fall by 5% below the 45% it got in the 2014 referendum.

No wonder Salmond and Alba are so furious and of course no prospect of a legal indyref2 under this Tory government either

The actual Yes figure is 46.5% - which is above the 2014 referendum figure.

But of course you are muddling figures which include and which exclude DKs.

Professor Curtice would not be impressed.

It is 40% including DKs, so in terms of all voters below the 45% from 2014 as I said

Here we go again. So you agree that a majority do not explicitly support the Union?

The majority explicitly supported the Union in 2014 in a once in a generation referendum and this Tory government as long as it remains in power will not allow another indyref2 for at least a generation until 2014 has elapsed

So democracy doesn’t apply to Scotland. The very essence of colonialism.

No, colonialism is when a foreign power occupies your land, without your permission, and then rules it without giving you equal representation in the legislature

Scotland willingly entered the Union with England, and it is fully represented at Westminster, as WELL as having highly significant autonomous powers at Holyrood. Indeed Scots are able to vote on some English laws when the opposite is not the case. If there is any hint of colonialism here, it is Scottish power over the English

That's true as long as its a voluntary union.

If Scotland can not vote its way out of the union, it ceases to be voluntary.

Scotland can vote itself out of the union by persuading MPs at Westminster, which is Scotland's own sovereign, shared parliament, where Scotland is equally and fully represented, that Scotland needs an indy referendum

We know this works because the Scots thus persuaded Westminster in 2014. A referendum was granted, the Scots said No, that is the end of the matter for a generation UNLESS Westminster can be persuaded, again. Perhaps the Nats should try that instead of moaning

48 of the 59 MPs Scotland elects were elected on a manifesto of having another referendum. That is a very clear overwhelming majority of their MPs in Westminster.

Unless you're saying it doesn't matter a jot what the Scottish voters say, their future in the union can only be changed if the English MPs agree. Is that what you're saying?

Yep. You can have whatever you want if we agree with you. If we disagree you can do one.

When the union was formed it was mutual - like a marriage. What Leon and HYUFD are saying is that Scotland can't have a divorce unless the husband agrees.

In many countries you can't have a divorce unless the husband agrees, especially in the Middle East. The Roman Catholic church also greatly discourages divorce.

Certainly constant demands for divorce are not helpful, especially when it was already agreed to stay together once only a few years ago, divorce should be a last resort

Quite right. No good skank ho's should know their place. Just cos I shagged her best friend and started slapping her round a bit whilst drunk she has no right to ask for a divorce because she already agreed to stay together once only a few years ago,

Her constant demands for divorce are not helpful

I would not stop the legal right to a divorce, which was not granted in the UK until 1857 with divorce still illegal in Ireland until 1995. However I would leave it as a last resort, not something to be constantly demanded every 5 minutes rather then preserving your union

Carnyx said:

BlancheLivermore said:

I won't be happy until white Jesus has been banned

/woke

Hey, what's this about the colour of Jesus being woke? They were arguing about it in the mid-19th century.

I'm just being silly, like I think Leon is being about the black Jesus painting.

Leon said:

MaxPB said:

Leon said:

MaxPB said:

On vaccine efficacy dilution, the more detailed version - one for @Leon:

The reason COVID is so deadly is that it is almost perfectly adapted to the ACE-2 receptor and it enters the cell by using the spike protein which binds with very, very high efficiency to those ACE-2 sites on human cells. That's not something we normally see with this kind of virus, hence the "novel"Coronavirus name at the beginning, it was essentially a completely new type of coronavirus with ACE-2 binding. The reason all of our vaccines, AZ, Pfizer, Moderna and others, are still so highly effective is that they essentially replicate the same ACE-2 receptor sites but in neutralising antibodies which allows them to bind very efficiently to the virus in the bloodstream before they enter (m)any cells.

If the virus mutates to an extent that antibodies can no longer bind to the spike protein with the same high efficiency as now, it means the spike protein will also not easily bind to the ACE-2 site present on human cells. If it can't easily bind to the ACE-2 site then it can't put it's genetic material into the cell and create virus replication factories out of those cells.

One of the Delta subvariants seems to have a minor mutation to the spike protein that has decreased ACE-2 binding efficiency by a small amount and this seems to have actually made it less deadly, it's looking like the first example of the viral evolutionary path leading to a more transmissive but less deadly variation. Happily that subvariant still has very good binding efficiency to neutralising antibodies so there's nothing to worry about in regards to immunity.

Anyway, that's the extent of my understanding on the subject, my speciality in chemistry was very much on the other side of it in creating novel types of semi-conductor!

That's soothing and enlightening - thanks

Twitter is actually being quite reasonable on this variant - lots of people agreeing with you re low transmissibility. But there are the usual suspects crying FIRE, and they have blue ticks. Irresponsible

Again, those usual suspects are seizing what they think is an opportunity to get everyone in the world locked in their homes again. I don't understand their obsession with lockdowns. They were a necessary evil in 2020 and earlier part of this year, now they are, at least for the UK, completely unnecessary.

Some ominous reportage, however


"Scientists have discovered a new variant of coronavirus with "extremely long branches" and "high amount of spike mutations" that may not be stopped by existing vaccines."

https://twitter.com/SkyNewsAust/status/1463694460626235399?s=20


IF this new variant proves to be dangerous - a mighty IF - then I reckon the pressure for mandatory jabs worldwide will become irresistible, because as long as there are unvaxxed people there is a greater chance of new variants. Worldwide vax mandates will be extremely provocative. Brace

Of course we all hope this is a scare story

That isn't going to make a difference because the virus has animal reservoirs now. Even if we vaccinated every single human three times, there are billions of wild and domesticated animals which have it as well.

And once again, I'm generally very wary of any unscientific reporting of variants and mutations. Sky News exists to drive clicks to their websites or get people watching their news, they give no fucks about the truth.

Carnyx said:

BlancheLivermore said:

I won't be happy until white Jesus has been banned

/woke

Hey, what's this about the colour of Jesus being woke? They were arguing about it in the mid-19th century.

Those who believe that history is All Evul will be doomed to repeat history. Like goldfish.

Fuck... This guy is usually on the we should be calm, things are going ok, no need for more lockdowns end of spectrum:

Prof Francois Balloux
@BallouxFrancois
·
25m
OK, it looks like we may have a Nu Variant of Concern on our hands ... 😕

Endillion said:

MoonRabbit said:

kinabalu said:

HYUFD said:

Leon said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Leon said:

BlancheLivermore said:

Leon said:

Yep, Woke not a problem


"Students at Washington’s Catholic University of America seek to remove George Floyd Jesus"

"Students at a Catholic university are petitioning to remove a “heretical” painting that depicts George Floyd as Jesus.

"Mama, by Kelly Latimore, shows Floyd being cradled by a maternal figure and evokes Michelangelo’s Pietà sculpture of Mary and Jesus after the crucifixion."

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/students-at-washingtons-catholic-university-of-america-seek-to-remove-george-floyd-jesus-7tw69fzgr?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1637847470

I can't work out who's meant to be woke here..

Is the painting woke?

Or are those "cancelling" it woke because it upsets them?

The painting is Woke.

Woke is becoming a religion. There was an excellent essay on this exact phenomenon in the Spectator, quite recently

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/what-if-wokeness-really-is-the-new-christianity-

So you're on the side of those in favour of cancellations?

Cancellation culture is good now?

I am shocked! Shocked! At this revelation. 😱

It is genuinely fascinating how Woke is infesting the Christian church. And again it is an uncanny echo of Christianity's own genesis

When the early Christians wished to convert some heathen tribe, they often kept the pagan shrines intact, and simply imposed their own symbols and buildings thereupon, thus absorbing the spiritual power of the Old Faith into the New. That's why so many churches in the UK and beyond are built on pagan sites, which can sometimes still be recognised - yew trees are a telling presence. The same happened with Gods - Isis nursing Horus became Mother Mary nursing the baby Jesus.

See here, the exact same iconography


https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/545961


Turning George Floyd into Jesus is Wokeness doing to Christianity what Christianity did to Zeus, Woden, Osiris and Valhalla. A pleasing symmetry, but a menacing development, which completely vindicates the prediction made in that superb Spectator essay by an ex PB-er

Leaving aside the George Floyd Jesus it is a good thing there are more black Jesus images, especially as the average Christian worldwide is more likely to be black than white now in the 21st century.

Jesus himself was Middle Eastern not European of course

I see him as looking like Robert Powell. I try to conjur up other visions in a quest for diversity but none of them will stick.

Jesus wouldn’t have looked black at all. I remember when small people coming to the school to tell us Jesus was not white he was black, and I argued with them he was more white than black. He wouldn’t even have looked like a North African?

Would he ever have heard the word Jesus in his life, or only Yeshua?

This is the same logic as Twitter objecting to Gal Gadot playing Cleopatra, on the grounds that Cleo was Egyptian, Egypt is in Africa, and Africans are black. Two of those assumptions are wrong, and the third is only true geographically, not culturally.

Some Eqyptians were black, "Egypt" continued quite far south, into Nubia (now Sudan). But inbred members of the Ptolomy clan... no. They were Greek.

Endillion said:

MoonRabbit said:

kinabalu said:

HYUFD said:

Leon said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Leon said:

BlancheLivermore said:

Leon said:

Yep, Woke not a problem


"Students at Washington’s Catholic University of America seek to remove George Floyd Jesus"

"Students at a Catholic university are petitioning to remove a “heretical” painting that depicts George Floyd as Jesus.

"Mama, by Kelly Latimore, shows Floyd being cradled by a maternal figure and evokes Michelangelo’s Pietà sculpture of Mary and Jesus after the crucifixion."

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/students-at-washingtons-catholic-university-of-america-seek-to-remove-george-floyd-jesus-7tw69fzgr?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1637847470

I can't work out who's meant to be woke here..

Is the painting woke?

Or are those "cancelling" it woke because it upsets them?

The painting is Woke.

Woke is becoming a religion. There was an excellent essay on this exact phenomenon in the Spectator, quite recently

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/what-if-wokeness-really-is-the-new-christianity-

So you're on the side of those in favour of cancellations?

Cancellation culture is good now?

I am shocked! Shocked! At this revelation. 😱

It is genuinely fascinating how Woke is infesting the Christian church. And again it is an uncanny echo of Christianity's own genesis

When the early Christians wished to convert some heathen tribe, they often kept the pagan shrines intact, and simply imposed their own symbols and buildings thereupon, thus absorbing the spiritual power of the Old Faith into the New. That's why so many churches in the UK and beyond are built on pagan sites, which can sometimes still be recognised - yew trees are a telling presence. The same happened with Gods - Isis nursing Horus became Mother Mary nursing the baby Jesus.

See here, the exact same iconography


https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/545961


Turning George Floyd into Jesus is Wokeness doing to Christianity what Christianity did to Zeus, Woden, Osiris and Valhalla. A pleasing symmetry, but a menacing development, which completely vindicates the prediction made in that superb Spectator essay by an ex PB-er

Leaving aside the George Floyd Jesus it is a good thing there are more black Jesus images, especially as the average Christian worldwide is more likely to be black than white now in the 21st century.

Jesus himself was Middle Eastern not European of course

I see him as looking like Robert Powell. I try to conjur up other visions in a quest for diversity but none of them will stick.

Jesus wouldn’t have looked black at all. I remember when small people coming to the school to tell us Jesus was not white he was black, and I argued with them he was more white than black. He wouldn’t even have looked like a North African?

Would he ever have heard the word Jesus in his life, or only Yeshua?

This is the same logic as Twitter objecting to Gal Gadot playing Cleopatra, on the grounds that Cleo was Egyptian, Egypt is in Africa, and Africans are black. Two of those assumptions are wrong, and the third is only true geographically, not culturally.

Cleopatra was Greek and could hardly speak Egyptian? Did they have the same concept of Africa as a continent beginning and ending as we know it today two thousand years ago? Genuine question, because wasn’t the Orient everything from Alexandria to Japan and they didn’t say Far East?

rottenborough said:

Fuck... This guy is usually on the we should be calm, things are going ok, no need for more lockdowns end of spectrum:

Prof Francois Balloux
@BallouxFrancois
·
25m
OK, it looks like we may have a Nu Variant of Concern on our hands ... 😕

We all had this same panic over the beta variant, bloody South Africa chucked out millions of AZ doses over it and ultimately the AZ vaccine was still highly effective against it.

Let's wait for lab tests on antibody binding efficiency first.

Shut the border to SA now!

Now. Not next month. Not after that trade trip that must happen because Brexit or whatever this time's excuse is.

MaxPB said:

Leon said:

MaxPB said:

Leon said:

MaxPB said:

On vaccine efficacy dilution, the more detailed version - one for @Leon:

The reason COVID is so deadly is that it is almost perfectly adapted to the ACE-2 receptor and it enters the cell by using the spike protein which binds with very, very high efficiency to those ACE-2 sites on human cells. That's not something we normally see with this kind of virus, hence the "novel"Coronavirus name at the beginning, it was essentially a completely new type of coronavirus with ACE-2 binding. The reason all of our vaccines, AZ, Pfizer, Moderna and others, are still so highly effective is that they essentially replicate the same ACE-2 receptor sites but in neutralising antibodies which allows them to bind very efficiently to the virus in the bloodstream before they enter (m)any cells.

If the virus mutates to an extent that antibodies can no longer bind to the spike protein with the same high efficiency as now, it means the spike protein will also not easily bind to the ACE-2 site present on human cells. If it can't easily bind to the ACE-2 site then it can't put it's genetic material into the cell and create virus replication factories out of those cells.

One of the Delta subvariants seems to have a minor mutation to the spike protein that has decreased ACE-2 binding efficiency by a small amount and this seems to have actually made it less deadly, it's looking like the first example of the viral evolutionary path leading to a more transmissive but less deadly variation. Happily that subvariant still has very good binding efficiency to neutralising antibodies so there's nothing to worry about in regards to immunity.

Anyway, that's the extent of my understanding on the subject, my speciality in chemistry was very much on the other side of it in creating novel types of semi-conductor!

That's soothing and enlightening - thanks

Twitter is actually being quite reasonable on this variant - lots of people agreeing with you re low transmissibility. But there are the usual suspects crying FIRE, and they have blue ticks. Irresponsible

Again, those usual suspects are seizing what they think is an opportunity to get everyone in the world locked in their homes again. I don't understand their obsession with lockdowns. They were a necessary evil in 2020 and earlier part of this year, now they are, at least for the UK, completely unnecessary.

Some ominous reportage, however


"Scientists have discovered a new variant of coronavirus with "extremely long branches" and "high amount of spike mutations" that may not be stopped by existing vaccines."

https://twitter.com/SkyNewsAust/status/1463694460626235399?s=20


IF this new variant proves to be dangerous - a mighty IF - then I reckon the pressure for mandatory jabs worldwide will become irresistible, because as long as there are unvaxxed people there is a greater chance of new variants. Worldwide vax mandates will be extremely provocative. Brace

Of course we all hope this is a scare story

That isn't going to make a difference because the virus has animal reservoirs now. Even if we vaccinated every single human three times, there are billions of wild and domesticated animals which have it as well.

And once again, I'm generally very wary of any unscientific reporting of variants and mutations. Sky News exists to drive clicks to their websites or get people watching their news, they give no fucks about the truth.

Sky News Oz is a curious beast. It has elements of Fox News - which is bad - but it is willing to report news that others won't touch - which is good. One example is the Lab Leak Hypothesis - the Sky News Oz journo Sherri Markson doggedly pursued this story for a year, even when it was getting other people cancelled, labelled a racist, and so on. She may not be entirely right, but without people like her we would still be in total, enforced denial of a highly plausible Covid origins story


"'There was no evidence that this virus arose naturally.'

Journalist Sherri Markson is the author of What Really Happened in Wuhan, a book featuring documents exposing China’s early cover-up of the virus and fresh interviews with whistleblower doctors and eyewitness accounts."


https://twitter.com/GMB/status/1443099370052853760?s=20

rottenborough said:

Shut the border to SA now!

Now. Not next month. Not after that trade trip that must happen because Brexit or whatever this time's excuse is.

It's almost a certainty that this variant is already here.

MaxPB said:

Leon said:

MaxPB said:

Leon said:

MaxPB said:

Leon said:

MaxPB said:

On vaccine efficacy dilution, the more detailed version - one for @Leon:

The reason COVID is so deadly is that it is almost perfectly adapted to the ACE-2 receptor and it enters the cell by using the spike protein which binds with very, very high efficiency to those ACE-2 sites on human cells. That's not something we normally see with this kind of virus, hence the "novel"Coronavirus name at the beginning, it was essentially a completely new type of coronavirus with ACE-2 binding. The reason all of our vaccines, AZ, Pfizer, Moderna and others, are still so highly effective is that they essentially replicate the same ACE-2 receptor sites but in neutralising antibodies which allows them to bind very efficiently to the virus in the bloodstream before they enter (m)any cells.

If the virus mutates to an extent that antibodies can no longer bind to the spike protein with the same high efficiency as now, it means the spike protein will also not easily bind to the ACE-2 site present on human cells. If it can't easily bind to the ACE-2 site then it can't put it's genetic material into the cell and create virus replication factories out of those cells.

One of the Delta subvariants seems to have a minor mutation to the spike protein that has decreased ACE-2 binding efficiency by a small amount and this seems to have actually made it less deadly, it's looking like the first example of the viral evolutionary path leading to a more transmissive but less deadly variation. Happily that subvariant still has very good binding efficiency to neutralising antibodies so there's nothing to worry about in regards to immunity.

Anyway, that's the extent of my understanding on the subject, my speciality in chemistry was very much on the other side of it in creating novel types of semi-conductor!

That's soothing and enlightening - thanks

Twitter is actually being quite reasonable on this variant - lots of people agreeing with you re low transmissibility. But there are the usual suspects crying FIRE, and they have blue ticks. Irresponsible

Again, those usual suspects are seizing what they think is an opportunity to get everyone in the world locked in their homes again. I don't understand their obsession with lockdowns. They were a necessary evil in 2020 and earlier part of this year, now they are, at least for the UK, completely unnecessary.

Some ominous reportage, however


"Scientists have discovered a new variant of coronavirus with "extremely long branches" and "high amount of spike mutations" that may not be stopped by existing vaccines."

https://twitter.com/SkyNewsAust/status/1463694460626235399?s=20


IF this new variant proves to be dangerous - a mighty IF - then I reckon the pressure for mandatory jabs worldwide will become irresistible, because as long as there are unvaxxed people there is a greater chance of new variants. Worldwide vax mandates will be extremely provocative. Brace

Of course we all hope this is a scare story

That isn't going to make a difference because the virus has animal reservoirs now. Even if we vaccinated every single human three times, there are billions of wild and domesticated animals which have it as well.

And once again, I'm generally very wary of any unscientific reporting of variants and mutations. Sky News exists to drive clicks to their websites or get people watching their news, they give no fucks about the truth.

That's less cheering


So, in your opinion, a vax mandate like Austria's - coming in Feb 22 - is pointless?

We're talking across problems here. Austria and other countries may make vaccines mandatory to ensure they relieve pressure on medical facilities, not to eliminate the chance of any future mutations. The first is a valid issue and while I don't agree with mandatory vaccines, it is something countries can turn to in an attempt to reduce the number of hospitalisations. On mutations, the die is cast and the virus already seems to have a common evolutionary pathway so it's not exactly an unknown quantity either.

Yes, that makes sense. Thanks for elucidating

MaxPB said:

turbotubbs said:

MaxPB said:

Leon said:

rottenborough said:

Leon said:

MaxPB said:

Leon said:

Pretty bloody ropey after my Moderna booster jab. Seriously sore and frozen arm, general malaise and fatigue. Much worse than AZ, which caused a tiny bit of tenderness in the shoulder...

That's a sign that you've probably previously had COVID.

I am now near-certain that I did have Covid way back in January 2020, caught in Thailand. That's what Public Health England thought, that's why they sent me to be tested in UCLH, tho a SNAFU prevented any actual test

It would also explain why I haven't caught Covid since, despite taking many risks in recent months: pubs, bars, restaurants, planes, the works

"That's a sign that you've probably previously had COVID."

Is it? First I've heard of that idea.

Yes it has been punted before, by proper scientists, tho there are also other explanations, ofc

Hey, my Chemistry degree still just about qualifies me as a "proper scientist" just not a practicing one.

You never lose the scientific training.

You know a junior asked me earlier this year whether or not I thought my degree was useful, I was going to say "not really" as always but actually after having a short think about it, I think it is pretty useful. Not the chemistry because fuck that noise, but the methodology of being a scientist and being open to any and all criticism of a theory, idea or model. I think a lot of our more public scientists, especially those in iSAGE, seem to have forgotten that a big part of science is having regular retrospectives on current theories vs real life data. It's something I've noticed myself doing over the course of this pandemic, go back on old ideas and make sure they are still relevant.

Too many of the public scientific advisors aren't doing that exercise right now. Just today I read that some SAGE scientists are calling for the immediate implementation of plan b, despite there being not very much evidence to support that. They're stuck in a timeloop of a political agenda that lockdown measures are the only way to combat this. I'm sure when Germany, France and other major European countries go into a full lockdown in two weeks those same voices will condemn the government as irresponsible and callous for not doing the same here and in the process completely ignore the available real world data on infection rates, testing and hospitalisation.

Agree - and it can have very real world consequences - take the AIDS pandemic - no one had to explain to Thatcher the horrors of exponential growth in an infection - something the current incumbent seemed to have difficulty getting his head around.

Favourite observations on science "Many a grand beautiful theory has been destroyed by a single ugly fact" (yes, iSAGE, I'm looking at you - and these aren't "single" facts but whole battalions of them.)

And of the French (which may be playing a part in the NI problems) - "it's all very well it working in practice - but does it work in theory?" I fear the EU are hung up on the theory of the integrity of the single market, ignoring the practical solutions and the ramifications of their absolutism.

MaxPB said:

rottenborough said:

Shut the border to SA now!

Now. Not next month. Not after that trade trip that must happen because Brexit or whatever this time's excuse is.

It's almost a certainty that this variant is already here.

Could it be behind the huge surge in European cases?

eg the Netherlands is in a really bad situation, despite high vaccine rates and early opening (like us). Lots of links between the Netherlands and South Africa, obvs.

How much sampling are they doing?

Cyclefree said:

Philip_Thompson said:

MaxPB said:

Nigelb said:

LostPassword said:

MaxPB said:

turbotubbs said:

MaxPB said:

Leon said:

rottenborough said:

Leon said:

MaxPB said:

Leon said:

Pretty bloody ropey after my Moderna booster jab. Seriously sore and frozen arm, general malaise and fatigue. Much worse than AZ, which caused a tiny bit of tenderness in the shoulder...

That's a sign that you've probably previously had COVID.

I am now near-certain that I did have Covid way back in January 2020, caught in Thailand. That's what Public Health England thought, that's why they sent me to be tested in UCLH, tho a SNAFU prevented any actual test

It would also explain why I haven't caught Covid since, despite taking many risks in recent months: pubs, bars, restaurants, planes, the works

"That's a sign that you've probably previously had COVID."

Is it? First I've heard of that idea.

Yes it has been punted before, by proper scientists, tho there are also other explanations, ofc

Hey, my Chemistry degree still just about qualifies me as a "proper scientist" just not a practicing one.

You never lose the scientific training.

You know a junior asked me earlier this year whether or not I thought my degree was useful, I was going to say "not really" as always but actually after having a short think about it, I think it is pretty useful. Not the chemistry because fuck that noise, but the methodology of being a scientist and being open to any and all criticism of a theory, idea or model. I think a lot of our more public scientists, especially those in iSAGE, seem to have forgotten that a big part of science is having regular retrospectives on current theories vs real life data. It's something I've noticed myself doing over the course of this pandemic, go back on old ideas and make sure they are still relevant.

Too many of the public scientific advisors aren't doing that exercise right now. Just today I read that some SAGE scientists are calling for the immediate implementation of plan b, despite there being not very much evidence to support that. They're stuck in a timeloop of a political agenda that lockdown measures are the only way to combat this. I'm sure when Germany, France and other major European countries go into a full lockdown in two weeks those same voices will condemn the government as irresponsible and callous for not doing the same here and in the process completely ignore the available real world data on infection rates, testing and hospitalisation.

I'm a recovering former scientist, and what is notable is that science works more on a collective level than on an individual level.

Individual scientists are human, and most of them become wedded to particular ideas and find it hard to abandon those ideas. The hardest thing in science I had to do was to abandon months of work that just wasn't working as I'd hoped it would. If it had initially worked well enough to publish a paper on it I would have found it a lot harder to give up on it later.

But collectively science works because other scientists don't share the emotional attachment and cognitive biases that have individual scientists stick to a dead end, because they don't have the history with that idea. They'll get attached to some other ideas in time.

So I have a lot of faith in Science, but am more wary of individual scientists...

The medical establishment seems particularly susceptible to unjustified attachments to dogma, for some reason.

One of my wife's friends is in obstetrics/gynaecology and she was over recently lamenting the militant attachment that midwives in this country have got to natural birth, often to the detriment of the mother. She's had to step in multiple times and recommend a c-section and fight the midwife on the reasoning, even though she's got 7 years of medical training and another 5 years experience being in the field she's being countermanded by someone who simply can't see beyond "yeah but natural birth is better". She was saying the whole profession has been completely and totally captured by this thinking.

Its the same with breastfeeding.

My wife really, really struggled to feed both our children. It happens to a certain proportion of women but there is so much dogma attached now to "breast is best" that when faced with the need to go for an alternative, it is very hard to get objective information on what alternatives to go for etc

We found there is very little in the way of support for people who can't breastfeed - and immense pressure of "oh you just need to keep at it" as if we hadn't tried that already.

I found that too. I was unable to feed my eldest. The midwife insisted. Eventually, the GP - furious at her behaviour - put my son on bottle feeding and the poor child was starving. I had mastitis by this point and was really quite ill so spent the first few weeks after the birth ill and then on antibiotics. The GP - an old-fashioned but very experienced sort - told me he was fed up with the way young midwives, with no experience of giving birth, bullied mothers into feeling guilty if they could not breast feed. My mother was very supportive but the midwives were no good at all.

4 siblings in my family. 1st 3, including me, breast fed. The youngest had to settle for a bottle. He got one of the best 1st's in Maths that Imperial had seen in years, without busting a gut either, and is now a Prof at a Russell Group Uni. Also the most stable, confident and balanced, one spouse, 2 kids, nuclear family, bla bla. So ...

rottenborough said:

Fuck... This guy is usually on the we should be calm, things are going ok, no need for more lockdowns end of spectrum:

Prof Francois Balloux
@BallouxFrancois
·
25m
OK, it looks like we may have a Nu Variant of Concern on our hands ... 😕

Two questions:
- Does having had Delta already stop you catching it or significantly reduce the symptoms?
- Does the vaccine stop you catching it or significantly reduce the symptoms?

If the answer to the first question is yes, and to the second question, no - then the solution is obvious.


Get your third vax, and go clubbing.

Another variant, another winter of lockdown, another spike in deaths, another vaccine, and on and on it goes, forever and ever until the death knell of a doomed and blacknened universe sounds across the empty void

China might have killed the world


*eyes gin*

Leon said:

MaxPB said:

rottenborough said:

Shut the border to SA now!

Now. Not next month. Not after that trade trip that must happen because Brexit or whatever this time's excuse is.

It's almost a certainty that this variant is already here.

Could it be behind the huge surge in European cases?

eg the Netherlands is in a really bad situation, despite high vaccine rates and early opening (like us). Lots of links between the Netherlands and South Africa, obvs.

How much sampling are they doing?

It's a possibility, sadly not a lot of sequencing outside of the UK and Denmark in Europe. Loads of countries saw what happened when we announced alpha and delta to the world and got shat on for it so have decided not to bother.

The Netherlands pussied out in August iirc and put measures back in place when they had rising cases. They definitely haven't had the scale of cases we've had since the end of May, at least.

MaxPB said:

Leon said:

MaxPB said:

rottenborough said:

Shut the border to SA now!

Now. Not next month. Not after that trade trip that must happen because Brexit or whatever this time's excuse is.

It's almost a certainty that this variant is already here.

Could it be behind the huge surge in European cases?

eg the Netherlands is in a really bad situation, despite high vaccine rates and early opening (like us). Lots of links between the Netherlands and South Africa, obvs.

How much sampling are they doing?

It's a possibility, sadly not a lot of sequencing outside of the UK and Denmark in Europe. Loads of countries saw what happened when we announced alpha and delta to the world and got shat on for it so have decided not to bother.

The Netherlands pussied out in August iirc and put measures back in place when they had rising cases. They definitely haven't had the scale of cases we've had since the end of May, at least.

I've got a horrible feeling about this variant and the Netherlands. They have just announced an even tighter curfew, all hospitality and non-essential shops to close at 5pm

https://twitter.com/NUnl/status/1463881927207882766?s=20

Max, I WARNED YOU ABOUT COVID HUBRIS

If 3m Britons die in the next ten weeks, you do realise you are personally responsible? Hope that's OK. No biggie

Leon said:

Another variant, another winter of lockdown, another spike in deaths, another vaccine, and on and on it goes, forever and ever until the death knell of a doomed and blacknened universe sounds across the empty void

China might have killed the world


*eyes gin*

Friendly reminder that new variants are just that: new. We can’t know if they will be bad or just meh based on sequence alone, nor guess at their provenance. Lots of mutations ≠ very bad.

This Thanksgiving, I remain grateful for genomic surveillance & safe, effective vaccines.

https://twitter.com/angie_rasmussen/status/1463874468065861639?s=20