This week’s charts from R&W – politicalbetting.com

Leon said:

Anyway, before I condemn myself as an utter cad and a churl, I can genuinely say it is nice to be back after my PB holibobs

I definitely missed everyone. I even missed the chats abour tram networks. Sorta

*buys virtual round for the entire pub, from Messrs Smithson*

Chahz

Good to have you back, warts and all.

The fundamental mistake that pollsters make is to presume that the public are voting FOR an individual, a party or an idea.

In fact, in my opinion, a very large proportion of people are voting AGAINST the status quo, often through a feeling of marginalisation or disempowerment.

This, I am sure was the appeal of Corbyn, Farage, BoJo, the Red Wall, Trump etc. Now we are seeing not just a vote against the Tories, but against anyone in power. The SNP are in rapid retreat, and in London Khan may well lose the mayoral election. Even in Mike Smithson's beloved Bedford, the incumbent Lib Dem mayor got booted out, not that he had done anything terribly wrong but just because he had become part of the status quo.

So it's not just the Tories who are in trouble, but essentially anyone who is seem to be part of the system, and it is one of the challenges that Kier Starmer will have to face.

Richard_Tyndall said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Gardenwalker said:

I got no help from the “bank of mum and dad”.
Does that make me unique on here?

My best friend was gifted a house in London, now worth around £3M, about ten years ago.

I got no help either.

Like most of my generation I got the joy of spending many years paying a landlord's mortgage, but am now in the fortunate position of owning my own home we bought last year.

I couldn't care less if I end up in negative equity, having bought at the peak of the market. If it means that more of my compatriots end up being able to save a deposit and buy their own home too, then I say bring it on.

People should be able to save a deposit from their own efforts in their 20s, not their 40s.

You see I used to be the same as you. With exactly that attitude to negative equity. Indeed personally I still am.

The trouble is that it wasn't about peple like you and me. We are the minority of mortgage holders. Last time this ht hard 1/3rd of all mortgage holders ended up in negative equity. 350,000 people lost their homes because they couldn't pay the mortgage and hundreds of thousands of others found themselves unable to move, even though they had to because of divorce or jobs or one of the myriad other reasons that people move house even when they don't want to.

Negative equity is meaningless if you don't have to move and can pay the mortgage. It is not meaningless for all those people - the overwhelming majority of whom will be first time buyers who have only just started paying down their mortgages - who have no choice but to move.

Which is worse?

350,000 losing their homes because they can't afford a mortgage?

Or millions never getting their homes in the first place because they can't afford a deposit?

I'm very sorry for anyone who loses their homes because they can't afford a mortgage. I'm equally sorry for anyone who loses their opportunity to get a home because they can't afford a deposit. They are both awful situations, but the problem is recent decades have meant there's millions not thousands of the latter.

People trapped not for years but for decades renting is every bit as awful as people being in negative equity.

But most of those people who lose their homes are the first time buyers. Those who have managed to scrape enough together over the years to get that deposit. Which they will lose along with everything else. You don't get it back again when they take your house away from you.

People like us who have been on the ladder for decades, unless we are really stupid, will never be in a position of negative equity. And as I said the other day, when negative equity comes along the market seizes up. People stop selling unless they absolutely have to. So there are even fewer houses on the market than ususal. Yes the price come sdown in theory but in reality for most people it might as well still be as high as it was because no one is selling those cheaper houes. (well apart from the banks selling off those 350,000 houses they reclaimed).

Meanwhile the builders stop building because they don't want to sell houses on the cheap. This is already happening right now even with the small drop we have seen in the last few months.

You consider the market seizing up for months or a year a problem as you're in the fortuitous problem that is all you had to face.

The average young adult today faces not months or years of waiting to be able to get a home, but decades. Most 39 year olds are still renting. I now own, but was renting on my 40th birthday, that is not atypical.

The market seizing for a few months or a year is not a problem. Needing to save more than a whole year's take home pay to pay for a deposit, is a much bigger problem.

Last time it was 4 years.

Not decades. Good.

So worst case scenario a 20-something can save for a couple of years to get 10% of a much lower multiple, then buy when its not ceased up anymore. Rather than face two decades of renting as is the norm currently.

What's the objection to that?

The 350,000 buyers who just did that and then lost it all.

Are not trumped by the millions more tenants who currently spend decades paying someone else's mortgage because they can't afford their own.

The average young adult today faces two decades paying someone else's mortgage because they can't afford a deposit without aid from the bank of mum and dad. When a 10% deposit today means more than a year's take home pay, rather than about 2 months pay in the past, then how are you supposed to afford that?

Spend two decades paying someone else's mortgage rather than your own, you've essentially paid off a house, just not in your own name. You've bought a home for someone else essentially.

Its tragic if people lose a home they've bought. Its every bit as tragic if people can't buy one in the first place because deposits are out of their reach without support from someone else as prices are too high.

BartholomewRoberts said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Gardenwalker said:

I got no help from the “bank of mum and dad”.
Does that make me unique on here?

My best friend was gifted a house in London, now worth around £3M, about ten years ago.

I got no help either.

Like most of my generation I got the joy of spending many years paying a landlord's mortgage, but am now in the fortunate position of owning my own home we bought last year.

I couldn't care less if I end up in negative equity, having bought at the peak of the market. If it means that more of my compatriots end up being able to save a deposit and buy their own home too, then I say bring it on.

People should be able to save a deposit from their own efforts in their 20s, not their 40s.

You see I used to be the same as you. With exactly that attitude to negative equity. Indeed personally I still am.

The trouble is that it wasn't about peple like you and me. We are the minority of mortgage holders. Last time this ht hard 1/3rd of all mortgage holders ended up in negative equity. 350,000 people lost their homes because they couldn't pay the mortgage and hundreds of thousands of others found themselves unable to move, even though they had to because of divorce or jobs or one of the myriad other reasons that people move house even when they don't want to.

Negative equity is meaningless if you don't have to move and can pay the mortgage. It is not meaningless for all those people - the overwhelming majority of whom will be first time buyers who have only just started paying down their mortgages - who have no choice but to move.

Which is worse?

350,000 losing their homes because they can't afford a mortgage?

Or millions never getting their homes in the first place because they can't afford a deposit?

I'm very sorry for anyone who loses their homes because they can't afford a mortgage. I'm equally sorry for anyone who loses their opportunity to get a home because they can't afford a deposit. They are both awful situations, but the problem is recent decades have meant there's millions not thousands of the latter.

People trapped not for years but for decades renting is every bit as awful as people being in negative equity.

But most of those people who lose their homes are the first time buyers. Those who have managed to scrape enough together over the years to get that deposit. Which they will lose along with everything else. You don't get it back again when they take your house away from you.

People like us who have been on the ladder for decades, unless we are really stupid, will never be in a position of negative equity. And as I said the other day, when negative equity comes along the market seizes up. People stop selling unless they absolutely have to. So there are even fewer houses on the market than ususal. Yes the price come sdown in theory but in reality for most people it might as well still be as high as it was because no one is selling those cheaper houes. (well apart from the banks selling off those 350,000 houses they reclaimed).

Meanwhile the builders stop building because they don't want to sell houses on the cheap. This is already happening right now even with the small drop we have seen in the last few months.

You consider the market seizing up for months or a year a problem as you're in the fortuitous problem that is all you had to face.

The average young adult today faces not months or years of waiting to be able to get a home, but decades. Most 39 year olds are still renting. I now own, but was renting on my 40th birthday, that is not atypical.

The market seizing for a few months or a year is not a problem. Needing to save more than a whole year's take home pay to pay for a deposit, is a much bigger problem.

Last time it was 4 years.

Not decades. Good.

So worst case scenario a 20-something can save for a couple of years to get 10% of a much lower multiple, then buy when its not ceased up anymore. Rather than face two decades of renting as is the norm currently.

What's the objection to that?

The 350,000 buyers who just did that and then lost it all.

Are not trumped by the millions more tenants who currently spend decades paying someone else's mortgage because they can't afford their own.

The average young adult today faces two decades paying someone else's mortgage because they can't afford a deposit without aid from the bank of mum and dad. When a 10% deposit today means more than a year's take home pay, rather than about 2 months pay in the past, then how are you supposed to afford that?

Spend two decades paying someone else's mortgage rather than your own, you've essentially paid off a house, just not in your own name. You've bought a home for someone else essentially.

Its tragic if people lose a home they've bought. Its every bit as tragic if people can't buy one in the first place because deposits are out of their reach without support from someone else as prices are too high.

It certainly wasn't 2 months pay when I bought my first house in 1989.

Leon said:

Anyway, before I condemn myself as an utter cad and a churl, I can genuinely say it is nice to be back after my PB holibobs

I definitely missed everyone. I even missed the chats abour tram networks. Sorta

*buys virtual round for the entire pub, from Messrs Smithson*

Chahz

Welcome home Leon 👍

On topic, is the key thing that SKS managed to turn things around? Disappointing and drifting until Summer 2021, but improving since then.

The odd thing is that I'm not sure it's obvious what caused the reapprasial. It's a bit early for the sequence of government scandals. Paterson, parties and I'm sure there was another one...

Stuartinromford said:

On topic, is the key thing that SKS managed to turn things around? Disappointing and drifting until Summer 2021, but improving since then.

The odd thing is that I'm not sure it's obvious what caused the reapprasial. It's a bit early for the sequence of government scandals. Paterson, parties and I'm sure there was another one...

No Tory poll lead since December 6th 2021, and that was R+W.

Stuartinromford said:

On topic, is the key thing that SKS managed to turn things around? Disappointing and drifting until Summer 2021, but improving since then.

The odd thing is that I'm not sure it's obvious what caused the reapprasial. It's a bit early for the sequence of government scandals. Paterson, parties and I'm sure there was another one...

Sunak increasing National Insurance.

Predated both Paterson and parties, and the polls already began to turn then.

Stuartinromford said:

On topic, is the key thing that SKS managed to turn things around? Disappointing and drifting until Summer 2021, but improving since then.

The odd thing is that I'm not sure it's obvious what caused the reapprasial. It's a bit early for the sequence of government scandals. Paterson, parties and I'm sure there was another one...

Labour retaining Batley and Spen felt like a Battle of Britain / Marne/ gates of Kyiv moment at the time. The Tory invasion of the old heartland faltering.

At the same time the shine started to come off the short term Covid vaccine boost, as the early running of the UK was caught up elsewhere. I think the spring 2021 vaccine effect probably masked and delayed a more typical decline in incumbent fortunes.

londonpubman said:

Leon said:

Anyway, before I condemn myself as an utter cad and a churl, I can genuinely say it is nice to be back after my PB holibobs

I definitely missed everyone. I even missed the chats abour tram networks. Sorta

*buys virtual round for the entire pub, from Messrs Smithson*

Chahz

Welcome home Leon 👍

He barely left, and quite likely made a guest appearance in the meantime anyway.

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Leon said:

I've no wish to mark my return with a massive stramash, nor do I desire to humilate another PB local. but I can't - in all honesty - let this go by from @Richard_Tyndall

It is just so wrong, it is beyond ignorance

"There has been not a single domesticated bone fragment nor husk of domesticated cereal found at Gobleki Tepe. Out of all of the hundreds of thousands of bones found covering the whole site - not one"

The actual science:

"The high frequency of artifacts is unusual for contemporary sites in the region. Using an integrated approach of formal, experimental, and macro- / microscopical use-wear analyses we show that Neolithic people at Göbekli Tepe have produced standardized and efficient grinding tools, most of which have been used for the processing of cereals. Additional phytolith analysis confirms the massive presence of cereals at the site, filling the gap left by the weakly preserved charred macro-rests. "

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6493732/


The whole pivotal point of the Tas Tepeler, Gobekli included, is that they are situated in the very same place where wild grasses were turned into cereals round 9000-8000BC, and where wild animals became domesticated


"The Göbekli Tepe people of Anatolia were probably the first plant breeders on earth. There, they settled 12,000 years ago and selected einkorn wheat for their nutrition. About 6000 years later, this culture arrived in Europe."

https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/mono/10.1201/b22334-1/introduction-rolf-schlegel

Oldest site that is currently ABOVE water!

that sounds like one of those cryptic crossword clues I can never do

Leon said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Leon said:

I've no wish to mark my return with a massive stramash, nor do I desire to humilate another PB local. but I can't - in all honesty - let this go by from @Richard_Tyndall

It is just so wrong, it is beyond ignorance

"There has been not a single domesticated bone fragment nor husk of domesticated cereal found at Gobleki Tepe. Out of all of the hundreds of thousands of bones found covering the whole site - not one"

The actual science:

"The high frequency of artifacts is unusual for contemporary sites in the region. Using an integrated approach of formal, experimental, and macro- / microscopical use-wear analyses we show that Neolithic people at Göbekli Tepe have produced standardized and efficient grinding tools, most of which have been used for the processing of cereals. Additional phytolith analysis confirms the massive presence of cereals at the site, filling the gap left by the weakly preserved charred macro-rests. "

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6493732/


The whole pivotal point of the Tas Tepeler, Gobekli included, is that they are situated in the very same place where wild grasses were turned into cereals round 9000-8000BC, and where wild animals became domesticated


"The Göbekli Tepe people of Anatolia were probably the first plant breeders on earth. There, they settled 12,000 years ago and selected einkorn wheat for their nutrition. About 6000 years later, this culture arrived in Europe."

https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/mono/10.1201/b22334-1/introduction-rolf-schlegel

Oldest site that is currently ABOVE water!

Yes, now we have seen what has emerged from Kurdish Turkey, who can say they aren't other similar, confounding sites across the world, waiting to be discovered? Particularly underwater

One of the most exciting things about Tas Tepeler is that the older sites are MORE advanced than the younger sites. Gobekli Tepe might be the ENDpoint of an extraordinary civilisation, not its zenith. We just don't know. We need them to dig things up fast

Trouble is, the ethos of modern archaeology is to leave lots of stuff underground for a later, more sophisticated archaeology to sort out. While I can see the merits of that, morally, it leaves us - here, now - rather in the dark. And who is to say our descendants will be better at this?

Dig the stones up NOW!

Something I’ve not paid much attention to. I must do some reading on this, whoever’s right.

Leon said:

I've no wish to mark my return with a massive stramash, nor do I desire to humilate another PB local. but I can't - in all honesty - let this go by from @Richard_Tyndall

It is just so wrong, it is beyond ignorance

"There has been not a single domesticated bone fragment nor husk of domesticated cereal found at Gobleki Tepe. Out of all of the hundreds of thousands of bones found covering the whole site - not one"

The actual science:

"The high frequency of artifacts is unusual for contemporary sites in the region. Using an integrated approach of formal, experimental, and macro- / microscopical use-wear analyses we show that Neolithic people at Göbekli Tepe have produced standardized and efficient grinding tools, most of which have been used for the processing of cereals. Additional phytolith analysis confirms the massive presence of cereals at the site, filling the gap left by the weakly preserved charred macro-rests. "

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6493732/


The whole pivotal point of the Tas Tepeler, Gobekli included, is that they are situated in the very same place where wild grasses were turned into cereals round 9000-8000BC, and where wild animals became domesticated


"The Göbekli Tepe people of Anatolia were probably the first plant breeders on earth. There, they settled 12,000 years ago and selected einkorn wheat for their nutrition. About 6000 years later, this culture arrived in Europe."

https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/mono/10.1201/b22334-1/introduction-rolf-schlegel

But did they have a coherent tram network?

nico679 said:

Andy_JS said:

According to today's Times, Red Wall voters regard SKS as being "off-the-scale posh". He's actually from a working-class background. I seem to recall they thought the same sort of thing about William Hague. Actually finding out the facts doesn't seem to interest them.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/keir-starmers-knighthood-puts-off-red-wall-voters-kqmfvp66z

And yet they thought Bozo was a man of the people ! Disturbing. I find my tolerance of thick voters at an all time low .

Well, Starmer and Hague both went to the University-of-lah-de-dah. That makes them posh.

Fortunately for Labour, the one thing everyone knows about Rishi Sunak is how unimaginably wealthy he is.

nico679 said:

Andy_JS said:

According to today's Times, Red Wall voters regard SKS as being "off-the-scale posh". He's actually from a working-class background. I seem to recall they thought the same sort of thing about William Hague. Actually finding out the facts doesn't seem to interest them.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/keir-starmers-knighthood-puts-off-red-wall-voters-kqmfvp66z

And yet they thought Bozo was a man of the people ! Disturbing. I find my tolerance of thick voters at an all time low .

Establishment vs non-establishment

DPP lawyer is a man of The System.

Eabhal said:

Leon said:

I've no wish to mark my return with a massive stramash, nor do I desire to humilate another PB local. but I can't - in all honesty - let this go by from @Richard_Tyndall

It is just so wrong, it is beyond ignorance

"There has been not a single domesticated bone fragment nor husk of domesticated cereal found at Gobleki Tepe. Out of all of the hundreds of thousands of bones found covering the whole site - not one"

The actual science:

"The high frequency of artifacts is unusual for contemporary sites in the region. Using an integrated approach of formal, experimental, and macro- / microscopical use-wear analyses we show that Neolithic people at Göbekli Tepe have produced standardized and efficient grinding tools, most of which have been used for the processing of cereals. Additional phytolith analysis confirms the massive presence of cereals at the site, filling the gap left by the weakly preserved charred macro-rests. "

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6493732/


The whole pivotal point of the Tas Tepeler, Gobekli included, is that they are situated in the very same place where wild grasses were turned into cereals round 9000-8000BC, and where wild animals became domesticated


"The Göbekli Tepe people of Anatolia were probably the first plant breeders on earth. There, they settled 12,000 years ago and selected einkorn wheat for their nutrition. About 6000 years later, this culture arrived in Europe."

https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/mono/10.1201/b22334-1/introduction-rolf-schlegel

But did they have a coherent tram network?

Did they eat vegan venison?

Sunil_Prasannan said:

state_go_away said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Leon said:

I've no wish to mark my return with a massive stramash, nor do I desire to humilate another PB local. but I can't - in all honesty - let this go by from @Richard_Tyndall

It is just so wrong, it is beyond ignorance

"There has been not a single domesticated bone fragment nor husk of domesticated cereal found at Gobleki Tepe. Out of all of the hundreds of thousands of bones found covering the whole site - not one"

The actual science:

"The high frequency of artifacts is unusual for contemporary sites in the region. Using an integrated approach of formal, experimental, and macro- / microscopical use-wear analyses we show that Neolithic people at Göbekli Tepe have produced standardized and efficient grinding tools, most of which have been used for the processing of cereals. Additional phytolith analysis confirms the massive presence of cereals at the site, filling the gap left by the weakly preserved charred macro-rests. "

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6493732/


The whole pivotal point of the Tas Tepeler, Gobekli included, is that they are situated in the very same place where wild grasses were turned into cereals round 9000-8000BC, and where wild animals became domesticated


"The Göbekli Tepe people of Anatolia were probably the first plant breeders on earth. There, they settled 12,000 years ago and selected einkorn wheat for their nutrition. About 6000 years later, this culture arrived in Europe."

https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/mono/10.1201/b22334-1/introduction-rolf-schlegel

Oldest site that is currently ABOVE water!

that sounds like one of those cryptic crossword clues I can never do

During the Ice Age, the Ice Sheets were so thick and extensive that sea level was about 100 m (328 ft) lower, give or take, at the so-called Last Glacial Maximum about 20,000 years ago, and vast lands were exposed. Including, but certainly not limited to: Doggerland in the North Sea, the entire floor of the Persian Gulf, the land bridge linking India and Sri Lanka, and a bigger land bridge between Oz and New Guinea. But a HUGE area was exposed in the area bounded by Indonesia, Malaysia and Thailand, the Sunda Shelf (or Sundaland). Slap bang on the equator, and fed by at least four major rivers, this surely would have been the most ideal place for an Ice Age Refugium.

https://grahamhancock.com/drsunilatlantis/

crossword answers are getting longer these days -no wonder i am william pitt at them

Leon said:

I've no wish to mark my return with a massive stramash, nor do I desire to humilate another PB local. but I can't - in all honesty - let this go by from @Richard_Tyndall

It is just so wrong, it is beyond ignorance

"There has been not a single domesticated bone fragment nor husk of domesticated cereal found at Gobleki Tepe. Out of all of the hundreds of thousands of bones found covering the whole site - not one"

The actual science:

"The high frequency of artifacts is unusual for contemporary sites in the region. Using an integrated approach of formal, experimental, and macro- / microscopical use-wear analyses we show that Neolithic people at Göbekli Tepe have produced standardized and efficient grinding tools, most of which have been used for the processing of cereals. Additional phytolith analysis confirms the massive presence of cereals at the site, filling the gap left by the weakly preserved charred macro-rests. "

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6493732/


The whole pivotal point of the Tas Tepeler, Gobekli included, is that they are situated in the very same place where wild grasses were turned into cereals round 9000-8000BC, and where wild animals became domesticated


"The Göbekli Tepe people of Anatolia were probably the first plant breeders on earth. There, they settled 12,000 years ago and selected einkorn wheat for their nutrition. About 6000 years later, this culture arrived in Europe."

https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/mono/10.1201/b22334-1/introduction-rolf-schlegel

Your problem is you don't actually understand what you are reading. None of the paper you are quoting actually disputes what I wrote. Yes they were grinding cereals at Gobekli Tepe. But they were not domesticating either the cereals nor the animals.

The site is remarkable because of this. But it is a million miles away from your ancient civilisations. No one working on the site seriously considers this is the remains of some advanced civilisation. It is only lunatics like you and Graham Hancock who believe that rubbish.

state_go_away said:

nico679 said:

Andy_JS said:

According to today's Times, Red Wall voters regard SKS as being "off-the-scale posh". He's actually from a working-class background. I seem to recall they thought the same sort of thing about William Hague. Actually finding out the facts doesn't seem to interest them.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/keir-starmers-knighthood-puts-off-red-wall-voters-kqmfvp66z

And yet they thought Bozo was a man of the people ! Disturbing. I find my tolerance of thick voters at an all time low .

its not posh as such ,its being establishment. Johnson was never seen as establishment ,KS is defo establishment (as was Hague) . WWC are suspicious of establishment (see the republican base in the US for instance) whether in government or general 'bosses'

If that is the case, (and you may well be right), then what the heck is the definition of "establishment"?

dixiedean said:

state_go_away said:

nico679 said:

Andy_JS said:

According to today's Times, Red Wall voters regard SKS as being "off-the-scale posh". He's actually from a working-class background. I seem to recall they thought the same sort of thing about William Hague. Actually finding out the facts doesn't seem to interest them.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/keir-starmers-knighthood-puts-off-red-wall-voters-kqmfvp66z

And yet they thought Bozo was a man of the people ! Disturbing. I find my tolerance of thick voters at an all time low .

its not posh as such ,its being establishment. Johnson was never seen as establishment ,KS is defo establishment (as was Hague) . WWC are suspicious of establishment (see the republican base in the US for instance) whether in government or general 'bosses'

If that is the case, (and you may well be right), then what the heck is the definition of "establishment"?

If you have to ask, you're not in it.

(I'm not, either.)

londonpubman said:

Leon said:

Anyway, before I condemn myself as an utter cad and a churl, I can genuinely say it is nice to be back after my PB holibobs

I definitely missed everyone. I even missed the chats abour tram networks. Sorta

*buys virtual round for the entire pub, from Messrs Smithson*

Chahz

Welcome home Leon 👍

..I know this super highway
This bright familiar sun
I guess that I'm the lucky one
Who wrote that tired sea song
Set on this peaceful shore
You think you've heard this one before

Well the danger on the rocks is surely past
Still I remain tied to the mast
Could it be that I have found my home at last
Home at last..

BartholomewRoberts said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Gardenwalker said:

I got no help from the “bank of mum and dad”.
Does that make me unique on here?

My best friend was gifted a house in London, now worth around £3M, about ten years ago.

I got no help either.

Like most of my generation I got the joy of spending many years paying a landlord's mortgage, but am now in the fortunate position of owning my own home we bought last year.

I couldn't care less if I end up in negative equity, having bought at the peak of the market. If it means that more of my compatriots end up being able to save a deposit and buy their own home too, then I say bring it on.

People should be able to save a deposit from their own efforts in their 20s, not their 40s.

You see I used to be the same as you. With exactly that attitude to negative equity. Indeed personally I still am.

The trouble is that it wasn't about peple like you and me. We are the minority of mortgage holders. Last time this ht hard 1/3rd of all mortgage holders ended up in negative equity. 350,000 people lost their homes because they couldn't pay the mortgage and hundreds of thousands of others found themselves unable to move, even though they had to because of divorce or jobs or one of the myriad other reasons that people move house even when they don't want to.

Negative equity is meaningless if you don't have to move and can pay the mortgage. It is not meaningless for all those people - the overwhelming majority of whom will be first time buyers who have only just started paying down their mortgages - who have no choice but to move.

Which is worse?

350,000 losing their homes because they can't afford a mortgage?

Or millions never getting their homes in the first place because they can't afford a deposit?

I'm very sorry for anyone who loses their homes because they can't afford a mortgage. I'm equally sorry for anyone who loses their opportunity to get a home because they can't afford a deposit. They are both awful situations, but the problem is recent decades have meant there's millions not thousands of the latter.

People trapped not for years but for decades renting is every bit as awful as people being in negative equity.

But most of those people who lose their homes are the first time buyers. Those who have managed to scrape enough together over the years to get that deposit. Which they will lose along with everything else. You don't get it back again when they take your house away from you.

People like us who have been on the ladder for decades, unless we are really stupid, will never be in a position of negative equity. And as I said the other day, when negative equity comes along the market seizes up. People stop selling unless they absolutely have to. So there are even fewer houses on the market than ususal. Yes the price come sdown in theory but in reality for most people it might as well still be as high as it was because no one is selling those cheaper houes. (well apart from the banks selling off those 350,000 houses they reclaimed).

Meanwhile the builders stop building because they don't want to sell houses on the cheap. This is already happening right now even with the small drop we have seen in the last few months.

You consider the market seizing up for months or a year a problem as you're in the fortuitous problem that is all you had to face.

The average young adult today faces not months or years of waiting to be able to get a home, but decades. Most 39 year olds are still renting. I now own, but was renting on my 40th birthday, that is not atypical.

The market seizing for a few months or a year is not a problem. Needing to save more than a whole year's take home pay to pay for a deposit, is a much bigger problem.

Last time it was 4 years.

Not decades. Good.

So worst case scenario a 20-something can save for a couple of years to get 10% of a much lower multiple, then buy when its not ceased up anymore. Rather than face two decades of renting as is the norm currently.

What's the objection to that?

The 350,000 buyers who just did that and then lost it all.

Are not trumped by the millions more tenants who currently spend decades paying someone else's mortgage because they can't afford their own.

The average young adult today faces two decades paying someone else's mortgage because they can't afford a deposit without aid from the bank of mum and dad. When a 10% deposit today means more than a year's take home pay, rather than about 2 months pay in the past, then how are you supposed to afford that?

Spend two decades paying someone else's mortgage rather than your own, you've essentially paid off a house, just not in your own name. You've bought a home for someone else essentially.

Its tragic if people lose a home they've bought. Its every bit as tragic if people can't buy one in the first place because deposits are out of their reach without support from someone else as prices are too high.

It certainly wasn't 2 months pay when I bought my first house in 1989.

Which is why first time buyers went up in the 1990s versus 1989, because it was about that then.

Which is easier? Saving 10% of 2-3x your income, or saving 10% of 6-8x your income?

If you only need to save 10% of 2x your income to get on the ladder then you can do that much more viably.

My income was £7,000 a year. My house cost £35,000.

state_go_away said:

dixiedean said:

state_go_away said:

nico679 said:

Andy_JS said:

According to today's Times, Red Wall voters regard SKS as being "off-the-scale posh". He's actually from a working-class background. I seem to recall they thought the same sort of thing about William Hague. Actually finding out the facts doesn't seem to interest them.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/keir-starmers-knighthood-puts-off-red-wall-voters-kqmfvp66z

And yet they thought Bozo was a man of the people ! Disturbing. I find my tolerance of thick voters at an all time low .

its not posh as such ,its being establishment. Johnson was never seen as establishment ,KS is defo establishment (as was Hague) . WWC are suspicious of establishment (see the republican base in the US for instance) whether in government or general 'bosses'

If that is the case, (and you may well be right), then what the heck is the definition of "establishment"?

well its saying the right things , not upsetting the right people, being safe and guarded , pretending to care , being (too) smooth and slick ,being corporate . All the things bosses do basically.
Boris/Farage - Posh ,private school but not establishment (hence effective and popular with WWC)

It’s also about sharing the Common Purpose (ha!) of the group.

Off topic but i love a bit of arrogance in sport people where they can back it up - For instance just loved Ronnie O Sullivan a few years back asking the ref what the prize was for a 147 when he had just potted one red (he then went on to do a reluctant 147 when told there was not a big prize) .

Saw another example last night in the athletics where in the 5000m the norwegian Ingebritsten was a couple of metres behind the leading guy coming into the home straight but took time to look behind him obviously thinking he could overtake the leader no bother but just checking nothing gonna surprise him from behind. He then caught the leader with a metre to go to the line . Class !

Leon said:

Anyway, before I condemn myself as an utter cad and a churl, I can genuinely say it is nice to be back after my PB holibobs

I definitely missed everyone. I even missed the chats abour tram networks. Sorta

*buys virtual round for the entire pub, from Messrs Smithson*

Chahz

I have found a video of you showing us all your photos from your lost weekend... https://fb.watch/mIOL1PDFPg/

Cyclefree said:

I like Maryport and all that West Cumbrian coast really. This is my local beach, for instance.




I love Whitehaven and Cockermouth too. I was at the latter's agricultural show a couple of weekends back - I love these! - where I met the local MP, Mark Jenkinson, and bent his ear about the Post Office.

This weekend we had our local agricultural show: it was the most glorious day so we spent it lolling about on the grass, picknicking and drinking until late in the evening and having a very jolly dejeuner sur l'herbe sort of day. Then walking back through the woods and fields to Broughton to continue the merriment.

I very nearly brought one of these home.



And this was the view on our walk home -

Also endorse @Algakirk's recommendation of Bragg's book: "Back in the Day". Outstanding. One of the last events I went to just before Covid was a talk by him in Ambleside (where, incidentally, I met Hazel Blears - who is lovely in real life) and he told us then about how he was writing this and how he was trying to approach it, to dig deep and recreate a vanished world.

Was that Lowick show?

I see normal service has resumed on good old PB.

Leon said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Leon said:

I've no wish to mark my return with a massive stramash, nor do I desire to humilate another PB local. but I can't - in all honesty - let this go by from @Richard_Tyndall

It is just so wrong, it is beyond ignorance

"There has been not a single domesticated bone fragment nor husk of domesticated cereal found at Gobleki Tepe. Out of all of the hundreds of thousands of bones found covering the whole site - not one"

The actual science:

"The high frequency of artifacts is unusual for contemporary sites in the region. Using an integrated approach of formal, experimental, and macro- / microscopical use-wear analyses we show that Neolithic people at Göbekli Tepe have produced standardized and efficient grinding tools, most of which have been used for the processing of cereals. Additional phytolith analysis confirms the massive presence of cereals at the site, filling the gap left by the weakly preserved charred macro-rests. "

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6493732/


The whole pivotal point of the Tas Tepeler, Gobekli included, is that they are situated in the very same place where wild grasses were turned into cereals round 9000-8000BC, and where wild animals became domesticated


"The Göbekli Tepe people of Anatolia were probably the first plant breeders on earth. There, they settled 12,000 years ago and selected einkorn wheat for their nutrition. About 6000 years later, this culture arrived in Europe."

https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/mono/10.1201/b22334-1/introduction-rolf-schlegel

Your problem is you don't actually understand what you are reading. None of the paper you are quoting actually disputes what I wrote. Yes they were grinding cereals at Gobekli Tepe. But they were not domesticating either the cereals nor the animals.

The site is remarkable because of this. But it is a million miles away from your ancient civilisations. No one working on the site seriously considers this is the remains of some advanced civilisation. It is only lunatics like you and Graham Hancock who believe that rubbish.

Maaaaate, stop

I actually personally know one of the authors of that paper, Jens Notroff, the second in command of the dig under the late Klaus Schmidt

I could get him on here to embarrass you. But I shall spare your blushes

You don't understand the site, you certainly don't understand its significance, nor the profound and startling implications of what has been unearthed in the last four or five digging seasons. You are an oil-man in Lincolnshire, I have been visiting Gobekli Tepe for two decades, so: meh, whatevs

Go on then. Get Jens on here and get him to tell us what he thinks of Graham Hancock's theories about his site and the whole advanced ancient civilisation idea.

In fact I can tell you because he himself has referred to it as "pseudoarchaeology in scientific disguise".

Meanwhile I can dig up a couple of people from the Northern Syrian pre-ceramic Neolithic project I have been helping out for the last decade or so and they can give you their opinion of him as well.

state_go_away said:

Leon said:

DRAMATIC CHANGE OF SUBJECT TO ALIENS

I would be interested in PB-ers views of this footage of an alien, filmed - purportedly - by the KGB some time in the 1940s-70s


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RsQCXN4o4Ps


It has recently re-emerged. It is known as "Skinny Bob"

There are many weird things about it. eg it is one of four or five vids posted by a guy named "Ivan0135" in 2011. Ivan posted this then never posted again. If it is a fake -surely it is a fake - it is quite brilliant (esp for 2011). The old time clicking overlay is tiresome and bogus (and proved to be so), but the underlying footage is still deeply impressive. The blinking!

It is now the subject of much wild discussion. If it is a hoax (my guess) how did they do it? Consensus is it would have taken a serious professional in Hollywood, using puppets and CGI perhaps in combo, and with a lot of money

Forensic analysis here

https://skinnybob.info/

Why make such an elaborate hoax but then, apparently, never profit from it?

For the sport of it? I mean back in the days when the BBC had a sense of humour still they did some hoaxes themselves -including a staged fight on Grandstand

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R4fBrZj1uXM

Yes, I can see that, what larks! Genuinely

However most hoaxers eventually come forward and claim the glory. There is actually a large cash prize - $30k I believe - waiting for the first person to uncover the truth behind these "alien" vids. No one has yet claimed it


Here is a debate, apparently between Hollywood pros, discussing how difficult it might be to make this fake in 2011

https://www.reddit.com/r/AliensAndUFOs/comments/bibcmh/skinny_bob_analysis/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=ioscss&utm_content=1&utm_term=1

Conclusion: it is (was) certainly do-able, but you would need time, money, resources, a team

Richard_Tyndall said:

Leon said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Leon said:

I've no wish to mark my return with a massive stramash, nor do I desire to humilate another PB local. but I can't - in all honesty - let this go by from @Richard_Tyndall

It is just so wrong, it is beyond ignorance

"There has been not a single domesticated bone fragment nor husk of domesticated cereal found at Gobleki Tepe. Out of all of the hundreds of thousands of bones found covering the whole site - not one"

The actual science:

"The high frequency of artifacts is unusual for contemporary sites in the region. Using an integrated approach of formal, experimental, and macro- / microscopical use-wear analyses we show that Neolithic people at Göbekli Tepe have produced standardized and efficient grinding tools, most of which have been used for the processing of cereals. Additional phytolith analysis confirms the massive presence of cereals at the site, filling the gap left by the weakly preserved charred macro-rests. "

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6493732/


The whole pivotal point of the Tas Tepeler, Gobekli included, is that they are situated in the very same place where wild grasses were turned into cereals round 9000-8000BC, and where wild animals became domesticated


"The Göbekli Tepe people of Anatolia were probably the first plant breeders on earth. There, they settled 12,000 years ago and selected einkorn wheat for their nutrition. About 6000 years later, this culture arrived in Europe."

https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/mono/10.1201/b22334-1/introduction-rolf-schlegel

Your problem is you don't actually understand what you are reading. None of the paper you are quoting actually disputes what I wrote. Yes they were grinding cereals at Gobekli Tepe. But they were not domesticating either the cereals nor the animals.

The site is remarkable because of this. But it is a million miles away from your ancient civilisations. No one working on the site seriously considers this is the remains of some advanced civilisation. It is only lunatics like you and Graham Hancock who believe that rubbish.

Maaaaate, stop

I actually personally know one of the authors of that paper, Jens Notroff, the second in command of the dig under the late Klaus Schmidt

I could get him on here to embarrass you. But I shall spare your blushes

You don't understand the site, you certainly don't understand its significance, nor the profound and startling implications of what has been unearthed in the last four or five digging seasons. You are an oil-man in Lincolnshire, I have been visiting Gobekli Tepe for two decades, so: meh, whatevs

Go on then. Get Jens on here and get him to tell us what he thinks of Graham Hancock's theories about his site and the whole advanced ancient civilisation idea.

In fact I can tell you because he himself has referred to it as "pseudoarchaeology in scientific disguise".

Meanwhile I can dig up a couple of people from the Northern Syrian pre-ceramic Neolithic project I have been helping out for the last decade or so and they can give you their opinion of him as well.

This is like me lecturing you on hydrocarbon extraction in hostile oceanic environments. Honestly

I've got drunk with these archeologists, many of them, over decades. IN GOBEKLI TEPE/SANLIURFA. You haven't done that, have you? You're a "member of a Facebook group"

Give over, My Tyndall

BTW I am not saying Hancock's overall thesis is right. It's surely bonkers, and he makes insane non sequitur leaps. But is an unknown civilisation, buried since the Ice Age, apparently emerging near Dyarbakir, Anatolia? Absolutely, yes it is. Hancock was right on that specific point, and his doubters were wrong

CorrectHorseBat said:

Virtually zero chance Khan loses.

Only possible if Corbyn splits the Lab vote, and the Tory limps home.

I think though that there is something true in the backlash against the incumbent. It was true of Lab in Leicester and Slough in the Locals, but is a worldwide phenomenon. Ours isn't the only country that seems to be in decline, and where nothing works.

Foxy said:

CorrectHorseBat said:

Virtually zero chance Khan loses.

Only possible if Corbyn splits the Lab vote, and the Tory limps home.

I think though that there is something true in the backlash against the incumbent. It was true of Lab in Leicester and Slough in the Locals, but is a worldwide phenomenon. Ours isn't the only country that seems to be in decline, and where nothing works.

I wonder if Labour Gov puts it back to AV.

I wonder how they perceived Tony Blair. I am not sure this "posh" thing is as important as they say.

state_go_away said:

dixiedean said:

state_go_away said:

nico679 said:

Andy_JS said:

According to today's Times, Red Wall voters regard SKS as being "off-the-scale posh". He's actually from a working-class background. I seem to recall they thought the same sort of thing about William Hague. Actually finding out the facts doesn't seem to interest them.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/keir-starmers-knighthood-puts-off-red-wall-voters-kqmfvp66z

And yet they thought Bozo was a man of the people ! Disturbing. I find my tolerance of thick voters at an all time low .

its not posh as such ,its being establishment. Johnson was never seen as establishment ,KS is defo establishment (as was Hague) . WWC are suspicious of establishment (see the republican base in the US for instance) whether in government or general 'bosses'

If that is the case, (and you may well be right), then what the heck is the definition of "establishment"?

well its saying the right things , not upsetting the right people, being safe and guarded , pretending to care , being (too) smooth and slick ,being corporate . All the things bosses do basically.
Boris/Farage - Posh ,private school but not establishment (hence effective and popular with WWC)

I mostly agree with the definition, but I think despite being unconventional in style Boris cannot really escape being pretty darn establishment.

Boris was not really an outsider in the way a Farage type was. He had a conventional entry into politics, he had a conventional kind of career as an MP, he wasn't some toiling backbencher or rebel no one ever thought would go for a major role, and it was often noted that despite how his opponents criticised him for being so he really wasn't all that extreme in most of his policy positions either, nor that unconventional.

It can't be denied he was perceived differently in many ways, hence the broader appeal he had, and that's not nothing especially when noting Sunak just cannot persuade peopel of the same thing for all sorts of reasons, but I just cannot see how he can avoid an establishment label just because he had that broader appeal (Brexit does not count, despite being outnumbered it was a position held by hundreds of MPs at various times, it had not been a fringe view for quite some time, it was an internal war as much as anything).

Heck, Starmer seems to be in part getting supprot (or at least acceptance) from the same group in part because he is so much more establishment seeming that the last chap - workmanlike if not slick, definitely safe and guarded, a knight of the realm, not wanting to upset people.

Richard_Tyndall said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Gardenwalker said:

I got no help from the “bank of mum and dad”.
Does that make me unique on here?

My best friend was gifted a house in London, now worth around £3M, about ten years ago.

I got no help either.

Like most of my generation I got the joy of spending many years paying a landlord's mortgage, but am now in the fortunate position of owning my own home we bought last year.

I couldn't care less if I end up in negative equity, having bought at the peak of the market. If it means that more of my compatriots end up being able to save a deposit and buy their own home too, then I say bring it on.

People should be able to save a deposit from their own efforts in their 20s, not their 40s.

You see I used to be the same as you. With exactly that attitude to negative equity. Indeed personally I still am.

The trouble is that it wasn't about peple like you and me. We are the minority of mortgage holders. Last time this ht hard 1/3rd of all mortgage holders ended up in negative equity. 350,000 people lost their homes because they couldn't pay the mortgage and hundreds of thousands of others found themselves unable to move, even though they had to because of divorce or jobs or one of the myriad other reasons that people move house even when they don't want to.

Negative equity is meaningless if you don't have to move and can pay the mortgage. It is not meaningless for all those people - the overwhelming majority of whom will be first time buyers who have only just started paying down their mortgages - who have no choice but to move.

Which is worse?

350,000 losing their homes because they can't afford a mortgage?

Or millions never getting their homes in the first place because they can't afford a deposit?

I'm very sorry for anyone who loses their homes because they can't afford a mortgage. I'm equally sorry for anyone who loses their opportunity to get a home because they can't afford a deposit. They are both awful situations, but the problem is recent decades have meant there's millions not thousands of the latter.

People trapped not for years but for decades renting is every bit as awful as people being in negative equity.

But most of those people who lose their homes are the first time buyers. Those who have managed to scrape enough together over the years to get that deposit. Which they will lose along with everything else. You don't get it back again when they take your house away from you.

People like us who have been on the ladder for decades, unless we are really stupid, will never be in a position of negative equity. And as I said the other day, when negative equity comes along the market seizes up. People stop selling unless they absolutely have to. So there are even fewer houses on the market than ususal. Yes the price come sdown in theory but in reality for most people it might as well still be as high as it was because no one is selling those cheaper houes. (well apart from the banks selling off those 350,000 houses they reclaimed).

Meanwhile the builders stop building because they don't want to sell houses on the cheap. This is already happening right now even with the small drop we have seen in the last few months.

You consider the market seizing up for months or a year a problem as you're in the fortuitous problem that is all you had to face.

The average young adult today faces not months or years of waiting to be able to get a home, but decades. Most 39 year olds are still renting. I now own, but was renting on my 40th birthday, that is not atypical.

The market seizing for a few months or a year is not a problem. Needing to save more than a whole year's take home pay to pay for a deposit, is a much bigger problem.

Last time it was 4 years.

Not decades. Good.

So worst case scenario a 20-something can save for a couple of years to get 10% of a much lower multiple, then buy when its not ceased up anymore. Rather than face two decades of renting as is the norm currently.

What's the objection to that?

The 350,000 buyers who just did that and then lost it all.

Are not trumped by the millions more tenants who currently spend decades paying someone else's mortgage because they can't afford their own.

The average young adult today faces two decades paying someone else's mortgage because they can't afford a deposit without aid from the bank of mum and dad. When a 10% deposit today means more than a year's take home pay, rather than about 2 months pay in the past, then how are you supposed to afford that?

Spend two decades paying someone else's mortgage rather than your own, you've essentially paid off a house, just not in your own name. You've bought a home for someone else essentially.

Its tragic if people lose a home they've bought. Its every bit as tragic if people can't buy one in the first place because deposits are out of their reach without support from someone else as prices are too high.

It certainly wasn't 2 months pay when I bought my first house in 1989.

Which is why first time buyers went up in the 1990s versus 1989, because it was about that then.

Which is easier? Saving 10% of 2-3x your income, or saving 10% of 6-8x your income?

If you only need to save 10% of 2x your income to get on the ladder then you can do that much more viably.

My income was £7,000 a year. My house cost £35,000.

Pretty typical, homes in 1989 reached a 4-5x multiple.

Thankfully for the rest of the country that home would presumably have been worth less a few years later. Meaning an alternate you a few years later would have needed a much smaller deposit. Which as we've discussed a few times is how even after the sale of council houses in the 80s, by the end of the 90s the home ownership rates were even higher than the end of the 80s, because affordability improved, something that has been reversed this century with predictable and catastrophic results for generations of people doomed to decades not years of renting as a result.

Unfortunately for the country, today that home would be many hundreds of thousands of pounds - and wages have quite simply not kept track.

Yes losing a home, or losing your equity is bad.

Dooming millions to a life of penury paying someone else's mortgage in a broken system because there's no way to reach a deposit without 'mum and dad' or decades saving is simply worse than that.

Richard_Tyndall said:

rottenborough said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Leon said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Leon said:

I've no wish to mark my return with a massive stramash, nor do I desire to humilate another PB local. but I can't - in all honesty - let this go by from @Richard_Tyndall

It is just so wrong, it is beyond ignorance

"There has been not a single domesticated bone fragment nor husk of domesticated cereal found at Gobleki Tepe. Out of all of the hundreds of thousands of bones found covering the whole site - not one"

The actual science:

"The high frequency of artifacts is unusual for contemporary sites in the region. Using an integrated approach of formal, experimental, and macro- / microscopical use-wear analyses we show that Neolithic people at Göbekli Tepe have produced standardized and efficient grinding tools, most of which have been used for the processing of cereals. Additional phytolith analysis confirms the massive presence of cereals at the site, filling the gap left by the weakly preserved charred macro-rests. "

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6493732/


The whole pivotal point of the Tas Tepeler, Gobekli included, is that they are situated in the very same place where wild grasses were turned into cereals round 9000-8000BC, and where wild animals became domesticated


"The Göbekli Tepe people of Anatolia were probably the first plant breeders on earth. There, they settled 12,000 years ago and selected einkorn wheat for their nutrition. About 6000 years later, this culture arrived in Europe."

https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/mono/10.1201/b22334-1/introduction-rolf-schlegel

Your problem is you don't actually understand what you are reading. None of the paper you are quoting actually disputes what I wrote. Yes they were grinding cereals at Gobekli Tepe. But they were not domesticating either the cereals nor the animals.

The site is remarkable because of this. But it is a million miles away from your ancient civilisations. No one working on the site seriously considers this is the remains of some advanced civilisation. It is only lunatics like you and Graham Hancock who believe that rubbish.

Maaaaate, stop

I actually personally know one of the authors of that paper, Jens Notroff, the second in command of the dig under the late Klaus Schmidt

I could get him on here to embarrass you. But I shall spare your blushes

You don't understand the site, you certainly don't understand its significance, nor the profound and startling implications of what has been unearthed in the last four or five digging seasons. You are an oil-man in Lincolnshire, I have been visiting Gobekli Tepe for two decades, so: meh, whatevs

Go on then. Get Jens on here and get him to tell us what he thinks of Graham Hancock's theories about his site and the whole advanced ancient civilisation idea.

In fact I can tell you because he himself has referred to it as "pseudoarchaeology in scientific disguise".

Meanwhile I can dig up a couple of people from the Northern Syrian pre-ceramic Neolithic project I have been helping out for the last decade or so and they can give you their opinion of him as well.

"You are an oil-man in Lincolnshire"

Isn't Richard also an archaeologist?

Yes I am but don't tell Leon that, it would spoil his fun

And I do work with the Northern Syria Early Neolithic project. I was fortunate enough about a decade ago to acquire the library of Sir Max Mallowan including many of his field notebooks of his work in Northern Syria. This resulted in me making contacts with the archaeologists working there and I have done the occasional bits of research work over the years. Although there was a long hiatus during the ISIS takeover.

Some of my collection is also on display at the Vessuna Roman Museum in Perigueux and I have been providing research materials on early cylinder seals to the Lebanese author Hooda Shawa.

But apparently I am just a dumb oilman who knows nothing compared to a tourist who likes a drink.

People should respect oilmen anyway, I've seen Armageddon, those dudes are amazingly versatile.

Leon said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Leon said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Leon said:

I've no wish to mark my return with a massive stramash, nor do I desire to humilate another PB local. but I can't - in all honesty - let this go by from @Richard_Tyndall

It is just so wrong, it is beyond ignorance

"There has been not a single domesticated bone fragment nor husk of domesticated cereal found at Gobleki Tepe. Out of all of the hundreds of thousands of bones found covering the whole site - not one"

The actual science:

"The high frequency of artifacts is unusual for contemporary sites in the region. Using an integrated approach of formal, experimental, and macro- / microscopical use-wear analyses we show that Neolithic people at Göbekli Tepe have produced standardized and efficient grinding tools, most of which have been used for the processing of cereals. Additional phytolith analysis confirms the massive presence of cereals at the site, filling the gap left by the weakly preserved charred macro-rests. "

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6493732/


The whole pivotal point of the Tas Tepeler, Gobekli included, is that they are situated in the very same place where wild grasses were turned into cereals round 9000-8000BC, and where wild animals became domesticated


"The Göbekli Tepe people of Anatolia were probably the first plant breeders on earth. There, they settled 12,000 years ago and selected einkorn wheat for their nutrition. About 6000 years later, this culture arrived in Europe."

https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/mono/10.1201/b22334-1/introduction-rolf-schlegel

Your problem is you don't actually understand what you are reading. None of the paper you are quoting actually disputes what I wrote. Yes they were grinding cereals at Gobekli Tepe. But they were not domesticating either the cereals nor the animals.

The site is remarkable because of this. But it is a million miles away from your ancient civilisations. No one working on the site seriously considers this is the remains of some advanced civilisation. It is only lunatics like you and Graham Hancock who believe that rubbish.

Maaaaate, stop

I actually personally know one of the authors of that paper, Jens Notroff, the second in command of the dig under the late Klaus Schmidt

I could get him on here to embarrass you. But I shall spare your blushes

You don't understand the site, you certainly don't understand its significance, nor the profound and startling implications of what has been unearthed in the last four or five digging seasons. You are an oil-man in Lincolnshire, I have been visiting Gobekli Tepe for two decades, so: meh, whatevs

Go on then. Get Jens on here and get him to tell us what he thinks of Graham Hancock's theories about his site and the whole advanced ancient civilisation idea.

In fact I can tell you because he himself has referred to it as "pseudoarchaeology in scientific disguise".

Meanwhile I can dig up a couple of people from the Northern Syrian pre-ceramic Neolithic project I have been helping out for the last decade or so and they can give you their opinion of him as well.

This is like me lecturing you on hydrocarbon extraction in hostile oceanic environments. Honestly

I've got drunk with these archeologists, many of them, over decades. IN GOBEKLI TEPE/SANLIURFA. You haven't done that, have you? You're a "member of a Facebook group"

Give over, My Tyndall

BTW I am not saying Hancock's overall thesis is right. It's surely bonkers, and he makes insane non sequitur leaps. But is an unknown civilisation, buried since the Ice Age, apparently emerging near Dyarbakir, Anatolia? Absolutely, yes it is. Hancock was right on that specific point, and his doubters were wrong

FYI Urfa, nearby and with a population of 600,000, does not have a decent tram system.

Indeed, Trolleybus Magazine explains that despite work starting in 2017 on a 78km network, only one vehicle is in operation.

"America's Failure in Afghanistan: 20 Years of Occupation" an animated history by the Armchair Historian, see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-M-QpYakBO0 , duration 15 mins.

Stuartinromford said:

CorrectHorseBat said:

Telegraph says that SKS should stop the ULEZ rollout.

How on Earth would he do that? Are they saying SKS is now the PM in which case sign me right up.

More importantly, he's got about half an hour to do it.

Have the Conservatives gamed out the next bit? It's one thing to promise to Stop Something. It's another to make that promise when you can't actually keep it (see also: boats), and yet another to make it an issue when it's likely to die a death pretty quickly.

After all, having gone to the trouble of becoming ULEZ compliant, people aren't going to want yo switch back, are they?

For the ones who can afford to become compliant its not such a big deal. So long as they are selfish and don't give a damn about anyone else who can't afford to do so. And so long as what's currently compliant isn't suddenly going to be non-compliant when the system ratchets again.

But that's kind of the problem - its already the law that these old vehicles can't be manufactured or sold anymore. People buying new vehicles aren't buying these polluting vehicles in the first place as they've already been outlawed from new.

The people who suffer from this isn't anyone who can afford a new car, who already is automatically compliant when they do. Its people who can't afford it.

darkage said:

Good to see @Leon re-emerge. I do agree with the sentiment though that this website is turning in to an echo chamber with an increasingly limited acceptable range of opinion. It is reading like a forum for widespread agreement on progressive talking points. Ironically when I started reading the comments on this website, perhaps 8 years ago, it was to try and challenge my own 'left/liberal' beliefs as many (but by no means all) of the commentators were taking an informed 'right wing', pro Brexit perspective. It is mostly now just evidence of the problem of progressive groupthink. The problem with those who have succumbed to this viewpoint is that there will be things that happen in the future in politics that go against your worldview and you have no way of explaining, because you have lost the ability to understand the other side of the argument.

Erm, the problem as I see it with Leon's posts are nothing to do with his anti-woke agenda. It's because he is constantly attention seeking, highly aggressive and nasty to people with whom he disagrees (especially after he's been at the bottle), and worst of all filling it up with utterly irrelevant posts or photos about his latest travel.

On your broader point ...

p.s. those complaining about woke views coming into the ascendancy are really raging against their own 'dying of the light.'

It is ever thus.

R&W - good for Starmer but still an August poll.

It'll be interesting to see how things look after the Conferences a month or so from now. Mid-October is when we should pay close attention to the lie of the land. The Media will be on election footing e.g. 'the last Conference before the election' memes which will begin to feed their narrative over the winter.

Sunak really has two realistic 2024 election options: May/June or October

tlg86 said:

Lib Dem councillor in Sutton on BBC Breakfast strongly against ULEZ. I hadn’t really thought about their policy on this, but it does look like they are generally opposed.

I guess they are in a bind. They know how unpopular it is and don’t want to give the Tories an edge in Surrey and South West London.

I would assume they are strongly opposed in the newly affected area and the surrounding counties and fully in favour elsewhere.

Eabhal said:

Leon said:

I've no wish to mark my return with a massive stramash, nor do I desire to humilate another PB local. but I can't - in all honesty - let this go by from @Richard_Tyndall

It is just so wrong, it is beyond ignorance

"There has been not a single domesticated bone fragment nor husk of domesticated cereal found at Gobleki Tepe. Out of all of the hundreds of thousands of bones found covering the whole site - not one"

The actual science:

"The high frequency of artifacts is unusual for contemporary sites in the region. Using an integrated approach of formal, experimental, and macro- / microscopical use-wear analyses we show that Neolithic people at Göbekli Tepe have produced standardized and efficient grinding tools, most of which have been used for the processing of cereals. Additional phytolith analysis confirms the massive presence of cereals at the site, filling the gap left by the weakly preserved charred macro-rests. "

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6493732/


The whole pivotal point of the Tas Tepeler, Gobekli included, is that they are situated in the very same place where wild grasses were turned into cereals round 9000-8000BC, and where wild animals became domesticated


"The Göbekli Tepe people of Anatolia were probably the first plant breeders on earth. There, they settled 12,000 years ago and selected einkorn wheat for their nutrition. About 6000 years later, this culture arrived in Europe."

https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/mono/10.1201/b22334-1/introduction-rolf-schlegel

But did they have a coherent tram network?

Lord Hardie's report on it is due any day now....

franklyn said:

The fundamental mistake that pollsters make is to presume that the public are voting FOR an individual, a party or an idea.

In fact, in my opinion, a very large proportion of people are voting AGAINST the status quo, often through a feeling of marginalisation or disempowerment.

This, I am sure was the appeal of Corbyn, Farage, BoJo, the Red Wall, Trump etc. Now we are seeing not just a vote against the Tories, but against anyone in power. The SNP are in rapid retreat, and in London Khan may well lose the mayoral election. Even in Mike Smithson's beloved Bedford, the incumbent Lib Dem mayor got booted out, not that he had done anything terribly wrong but just because he had become part of the status quo.

So it's not just the Tories who are in trouble, but essentially anyone who is seem to be part of the system, and it is one of the challenges that Kier Starmer will have to face.

I see zero polling suggesting Sadiq Khan is in danger of losing. Dave Hodgson did lose the Bedford mayoralty, but his percentage share was within the range of his previous winning performances. The big change there was the switch from SV to FPTP, not a turn against the status quo.

ydoethur said:

DavidL said:

Eabhal said:

Leon said:

I've no wish to mark my return with a massive stramash, nor do I desire to humilate another PB local. but I can't - in all honesty - let this go by from @Richard_Tyndall

It is just so wrong, it is beyond ignorance

"There has been not a single domesticated bone fragment nor husk of domesticated cereal found at Gobleki Tepe. Out of all of the hundreds of thousands of bones found covering the whole site - not one"

The actual science:

"The high frequency of artifacts is unusual for contemporary sites in the region. Using an integrated approach of formal, experimental, and macro- / microscopical use-wear analyses we show that Neolithic people at Göbekli Tepe have produced standardized and efficient grinding tools, most of which have been used for the processing of cereals. Additional phytolith analysis confirms the massive presence of cereals at the site, filling the gap left by the weakly preserved charred macro-rests. "

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6493732/


The whole pivotal point of the Tas Tepeler, Gobekli included, is that they are situated in the very same place where wild grasses were turned into cereals round 9000-8000BC, and where wild animals became domesticated


"The Göbekli Tepe people of Anatolia were probably the first plant breeders on earth. There, they settled 12,000 years ago and selected einkorn wheat for their nutrition. About 6000 years later, this culture arrived in Europe."

https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/mono/10.1201/b22334-1/introduction-rolf-schlegel

But did they have a coherent tram network?

Lord Hardie's report on it is due any day now....

Really? Did he get paid extra to do that one quickly?

I am presuming that we are going to get a tour de force comparing Edinburgh's trams with every system and even potential system in the history of the world. It may not even be limited to this planet.

DavidL said:

ydoethur said:

DavidL said:

Eabhal said:

Leon said:

I've no wish to mark my return with a massive stramash, nor do I desire to humilate another PB local. but I can't - in all honesty - let this go by from @Richard_Tyndall

It is just so wrong, it is beyond ignorance

"There has been not a single domesticated bone fragment nor husk of domesticated cereal found at Gobleki Tepe. Out of all of the hundreds of thousands of bones found covering the whole site - not one"

The actual science:

"The high frequency of artifacts is unusual for contemporary sites in the region. Using an integrated approach of formal, experimental, and macro- / microscopical use-wear analyses we show that Neolithic people at Göbekli Tepe have produced standardized and efficient grinding tools, most of which have been used for the processing of cereals. Additional phytolith analysis confirms the massive presence of cereals at the site, filling the gap left by the weakly preserved charred macro-rests. "

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6493732/


The whole pivotal point of the Tas Tepeler, Gobekli included, is that they are situated in the very same place where wild grasses were turned into cereals round 9000-8000BC, and where wild animals became domesticated


"The Göbekli Tepe people of Anatolia were probably the first plant breeders on earth. There, they settled 12,000 years ago and selected einkorn wheat for their nutrition. About 6000 years later, this culture arrived in Europe."

https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/mono/10.1201/b22334-1/introduction-rolf-schlegel

But did they have a coherent tram network?

Lord Hardie's report on it is due any day now....

Really? Did he get paid extra to do that one quickly?

I am presuming that we are going to get a tour de force comparing Edinburgh's trams with every system and even potential system in the history of the world. It may not even be limited to this planet.

If I say that certain Nationalists have been consulted about extra-terrestrial systems, will I be a target for ballistic turnips for the rest of the day?

Re: public perceptions of politicians discussed upthread. Twice I've seen quiz shows where contestants were asked to name a Post War British Prime Minister who didn't go to University and contestants have said Harold Wilson, when in reality Wilson was one of the most academic PMs we have had.