On 29.03.2021 at 21:07, Joe scribbled:
On Mon, 29 Mar 2021 20:46:04 +0100
Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
On Mon, 29 Mar 2021 20:17:23 +0100
Joe <joe@jretrading.com> wrote:
Occam's Razor says that there is a simpler explanation than
'hygiene'.
I'd guess cough etiquette[1] to be a major factor, along
with the huge upswing in effective hand cleansing.
[1] Just how long ago was the "coughs and sneezes spread diseases"
campaign ?
So why has flu been practically eliminated, but not Covid, which is a
comparable respiratory disease caused by a virus of similar size?
Covid-19 is most definitely NOT a respiratory disease. If anything, it
is actually comparable to AIDS in that it attacks your immune system,
hijacks it, and then turns it against you. Certain gene sequences of
the SARS-CoV-2 virus' RNA are actually also found in the HIV virus.
Aragorn wrote on 30/3/21 7:54 am:
Covid-19 is most definitely NOT a respiratory disease. If anything,
it is actually comparable to AIDS in that it attacks your immune
system, hijacks it, and then turns it against you. Certain gene
sequences of the SARS-CoV-2 virus' RNA are actually also found in the
HIV virus.
Approx twelve months ago (late-2020), University of Queensland in
combination with Australia's Commonwealth Serum Laboratories had to
give up on their CoViD-19 Anti-Vax development because it was giving
False HIV indications, so that sort of supports your last statement,
Aragon.
Aragorn wrote on 30/3/21 7:54 am:
On 29.03.2021 at 21:07, Joe scribbled:
So why has flu been practically eliminated, but not Covid, which is a
comparable respiratory disease caused by a virus of similar size?
Covid-19 is most definitely NOT a respiratory disease. If anything, it
is actually comparable to AIDS in that it attacks your immune system,
hijacks it, and then turns it against you. Certain gene sequences of
the SARS-CoV-2 virus' RNA are actually also found in the HIV virus.
Approx twelve months ago (late-2020), University of Queensland in
combination with Australia's Commonwealth Serum Laboratories had to give
up on their CoViD-19 Anti-Vax development because it was giving False
HIV indications, so that sort of supports your last statement, Aragon.
On 24/10/2021 12:36, Daniel65 wrote:
Aragorn wrote on 30/3/21 7:54 am:
On 29.03.2021 at 21:07, Joe scribbled:
So why has flu been practically eliminated, but not Covid, which is a
comparable respiratory disease caused by a virus of similar size?
Because covid-19 is even more easily transmissible, because people canExcept people with flu do not self isolate They struggle in to work for
become infectious to others before or without ever knowing that they themselves are infected and therefore should self-isolate,i
and because
it's a new virus and therefore most people have only very limited if any pre-existing anti-body and T-cell defences against it, though I believe
there is some suggestion of some immunity in some people from similarity
to a common cold virus.
Covid-19 is most definitely NOT a respiratory disease. If anything, it
is actually comparable to AIDS in that it attacks your immune system,
hijacks it, and then turns it against you. Certain gene sequences of
the SARS-CoV-2 virus' RNA are actually also found in the HIV virus.
Provenance? Certainly covid-19 can affect more than just the
respiratory system, but I've not heard the above claim before, and I
think you may be confusing it with ...
Approx twelve months ago (late-2020), University of Queensland in
combination with Australia's Commonwealth Serum Laboratories had to give
up on their CoViD-19 Anti-Vax development because it was giving False
HIV indications, so that sort of supports your last statement, Aragon.
No, as it happened I watched a programme that explained this only last
night, and I believe the above to be garbled misrecollection. AIUI,
what actually happened is that The University Of Queensland used as part
of their vaccine not just a deactivated section of the covid-19
SARS-Cov-2 genome, but also for some reason a deactivated section of the
HIV virus genome, and an unfortunate side-effect of the latter was that
their vaccine triggered false positives in many commonly used HIV tests, which made the vaccine, although efficacious in generating an immune
response to SARS-Cov-2, unworkable in practice, and this was why it had
to be abandoned. I am not aware of any reliable suggestion that
inherently SARS-Cov-2 has much if anything in common with HIV, apart
from them both being a virus.
Sadly, I don't think you'll be able to watch this outside the UK: https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m000x2tf/horizon-2021-1-horizon-special-the-vaccine
On 2021-10-24, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
On 24/10/2021 12:36, Daniel65 wrote:
Aragorn wrote on 30/3/21 7:54 am:
On 29.03.2021 at 21:07, Joe scribbled:
So why has flu been practically eliminated, but not Covid, which
is a comparable respiratory disease caused by a virus of similar
size?
It han't. Every year millions get the flu and many die.
Aragorn wrote on 30/3/21 7:54 am:
On 29.03.2021 at 21:07, Joe scribbled:
On Mon, 29 Mar 2021 20:46:04 +0100
Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
On Mon, 29 Mar 2021 20:17:23 +0100
Joe <joe@jretrading.com> wrote:
Occam's Razor says that there is a simpler explanation than
'hygiene'.
I'd guess cough etiquette[1] to be a major factor, along
with the huge upswing in effective hand cleansing.
[1] Just how long ago was the "coughs and sneezes spread diseases"
campaign ?
So why has flu been practically eliminated, but not Covid, which
is a comparable respiratory disease caused by a virus of similar
size?
Covid-19 is most definitely NOT a respiratory disease. If
anything, it is actually comparable to AIDS in that it attacks your
immune system, hijacks it, and then turns it against you. Certain
gene sequences of the SARS-CoV-2 virus' RNA are actually also found
in the HIV virus.
Approx twelve months ago (late-2020), University of Queensland in
combination with Australia's Commonwealth Serum Laboratories had to
give up on their CoViD-19 Anti-Vax development because it was giving
False HIV indications, so that sort of supports your last statement,
Aragon.
On Sun, 24 Oct 2021 12:56:59 -0000 (UTC)
William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> wrote:
On 2021-10-24, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
On 24/10/2021 12:36, Daniel65 wrote:
Aragorn wrote on 30/3/21 7:54 am:
On 29.03.2021 at 21:07, Joe scribbled:
So why has flu been practically eliminated, but not Covid, which
is a comparable respiratory disease caused by a virus of similar
size?
It han't. Every year millions get the flu and many die.
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02558-8
https://media.nature.com/lw800/magazine-assets/d41586-021-02558-8/d41586-021-02558-8_19770944.png
"The United States recorded just 646 flu deaths in the 2020–21 season — the annual average is in the tens of thousands — and there was only one paediatric flu death. Australia has had no seasonal influenza deaths so
far in 2021, compared with between 100 and 1,200 in previous years."
On Sun, 24 Oct 2021 22:36:38 +1100
Daniel65 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
Aragorn wrote on 30/3/21 7:54 am:
On 29.03.2021 at 21:07, Joe scribbled:
On Mon, 29 Mar 2021 20:46:04 +0100
Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
On Mon, 29 Mar 2021 20:17:23 +0100
Joe <joe@jretrading.com> wrote:
Occam's Razor says that there is a simpler explanation than
'hygiene'.
I'd guess cough etiquette[1] to be a major factor, along
with the huge upswing in effective hand cleansing.
[1] Just how long ago was the "coughs and sneezes spread diseases"
campaign ?
So why has flu been practically eliminated, but not Covid, which
is a comparable respiratory disease caused by a virus of similar
size?
Covid-19 is most definitely NOT a respiratory disease. If
anything, it is actually comparable to AIDS in that it attacks your
immune system, hijacks it, and then turns it against you. Certain
gene sequences of the SARS-CoV-2 virus' RNA are actually also found
in the HIV virus.
Approx twelve months ago (late-2020), University of Queensland in
combination with Australia's Commonwealth Serum Laboratories had to
give up on their CoViD-19 Anti-Vax development because it was giving
False HIV indications, so that sort of supports your last statement,
Aragon.
But that's what happens *after* infection. Covid is spread by
respiration and initially latches onto receptors in the lungs, the
so-called ACE2 for which Covid seems to have been specifically
engineered. In other words, you catch Covid and flu (and other
coronaviruses, rhinoviruses etc.) by the same physical mechanism, and
the same physical defences ought to be roughly equally effective (or ineffective) for all of them.
On Sun, 24 Oct 2021 12:56:59 -0000 (UTC)
William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> wrote:
On 2021-10-24, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
On 24/10/2021 12:36, Daniel65 wrote:
Aragorn wrote on 30/3/21 7:54 am:
On 29.03.2021 at 21:07, Joe scribbled:
So why has flu been practically eliminated, but not Covid, which
is a comparable respiratory disease caused by a virus of similar
size?
It han't. Every year millions get the flu and many die.
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02558-8
https://media.nature.com/lw800/magazine-assets/d41586-021-02558-8/d41586-021-02558-8_19770944.png
"The United States recorded just 646 flu deaths in the 2020–21 season — the annual average is in the tens of thousands — and there was only one paediatric flu death. Australia has had no seasonal influenza deaths so
far in 2021, compared with between 100 and 1,200 in previous years."
On Sun, 24 Oct 2021 22:36:38 +1100
Daniel65 <daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
Aragorn wrote on 30/3/21 7:54 am:
Covid-19 is most definitely NOT a respiratory disease. If
anything, it is actually comparable to AIDS in that it attacks your
immune system, hijacks it, and then turns it against you. Certain
gene sequences of the SARS-CoV-2 virus' RNA are actually also found
in the HIV virus.
Approx twelve months ago (late-2020), University of Queensland in
combination with Australia's Commonwealth Serum Laboratories had to
give up on their CoViD-19 Anti-Vax development because it was giving
False HIV indications, so that sort of supports your last statement,
Aragon.
But that's what happens *after* infection. Covid is spread by
respiration and initially latches onto receptors in the lungs, the
so-called ACE2
for which Covid seems to have been specifically engineered.
In other words, you catch Covid and flu (and other
coronaviruses, rhinoviruses etc.) by the same physical mechanism, and
the same physical defences ought to be roughly equally effective (or ineffective) for all of them.
On Mon, 25 Oct 2021 15:52:36 +0100, Joe wrote:
On Sun, 24 Oct 2021 12:56:59 -0000 (UTC)
William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> wrote:
On 2021-10-24, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
On 24/10/2021 12:36, Daniel65 wrote:
Aragorn wrote on 30/3/21 7:54 am:
On 29.03.2021 at 21:07, Joe scribbled:
So why has flu been practically eliminated, but not Covid,
which is a comparable respiratory disease caused by a virus
of similar size?
It han't. Every year millions get the flu and many die.
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02558-8
https://media.nature.com/lw800/magazine-assets/d41586-021-02558-8/d41586-021-02558-8_19770944.png
"The United States recorded just 646 flu deaths in the 2020–21
season — the annual average is in the tens of thousands — and there
was only one paediatric flu death. Australia has had no seasonal
influenza deaths so far in 2021, compared with between 100 and
1,200 in previous years."
Well, you can thank COVID-19 for that.
The protocols put in place for COVID-19
were Very Effective against the flu.
Yes, but many other cells around the body have ACE2 receptors as well,
and therefore the virus has multiple routes into the human body, and
although the easiest, and therefore the commonest, route in is by
air-borne virus, it's not the only method:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15141377/
"The most remarkable finding was the surface expression of ACE2 protein
on lung alveolar epithelial cells and enterocytes of the small
intestine. Furthermore, ACE2 was present in arterial and venous
endothelial cells and arterial smooth muscle cells in all organs
studied. In conclusion, ACE2 is abundantly present in humans in the
epithelia of the lung and small intestine, which might provide possible routes of entry for the SARS-CoV."
What has *any* of this got to do with the subject?
On 25 Oct 2021 15:37:57 GMT
Allodoxaphobia <trepidation@example.net> wrote:
On Mon, 25 Oct 2021 15:52:36 +0100, Joe wrote:
On Sun, 24 Oct 2021 12:56:59 -0000 (UTC)
William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> wrote:
On 2021-10-24, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
On 24/10/2021 12:36, Daniel65 wrote:
Aragorn wrote on 30/3/21 7:54 am:
On 29.03.2021 at 21:07, Joe scribbled:
So why has flu been practically eliminated, but not Covid,
which is a comparable respiratory disease caused by a virus
of similar size?
It han't. Every year millions get the flu and many die.
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02558-8
https://media.nature.com/lw800/magazine-assets/d41586-021-02558-8/d41586-021-02558-8_19770944.png
"The United States recorded just 646 flu deaths in the 2020–21
season — the annual average is in the tens of thousands — and there
was only one paediatric flu death. Australia has had no seasonal
influenza deaths so far in 2021, compared with between 100 and
1,200 in previous years."
Well, you can thank COVID-19 for that.
The protocols put in place for COVID-19
were Very Effective against the flu.
But not anything like as effective against Covid, which by coincidence registered about the same order of magnitude of winter deaths as flu
normally does.
On 2021-10-25, Joe <joe@jretrading.com> wrote:
On 25 Oct 2021 15:37:57 GMT
Allodoxaphobia <trepidation@example.net> wrote:
On Mon, 25 Oct 2021 15:52:36 +0100, Joe wrote:
On Sun, 24 Oct 2021 12:56:59 -0000 (UTC)
William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> wrote:
On 2021-10-24, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
On 24/10/2021 12:36, Daniel65 wrote:
Aragorn wrote on 30/3/21 7:54 am:
On 29.03.2021 at 21:07, Joe scribbled:
So why has flu been practically eliminated, but not Covid,
which is a comparable respiratory disease caused by a virus
of similar size?
It han't. Every year millions get the flu and many die.
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02558-8
https://media.nature.com/lw800/magazine-assets/d41586-021-02558-8/d
41586-021-02558-8_19770944.png
"The United States recorded just 646 flu deaths in the 2020–21
season — the annual average is in the tens of thousands — and
there
and for covid over half a million.
was only one paediatric flu death. Australia has had no seasonal
influenza deaths so far in 2021, compared with between 100 and
1,200 in previous years."
Well, you can thank COVID-19 for that.
The protocols put in place for COVID-19
were Very Effective against the flu.
But not anything like as effective against Covid, which by
coincidence registered about the same order of magnitude of winter
deaths as flu normally does.
Not even close. The excess deaths in the world almost certainly from
covid are of the order of 15,000,000. Nowhere has the flu totally
swamped the hospitals. except perhaps the Spanish flu.
William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> wrote in
news:sl7v9u$6sp$1@dont-email.me:
On 2021-10-25, Joe <joe@jretrading.com> wrote:
On 25 Oct 2021 15:37:57 GMT
Allodoxaphobia <trepidation@example.net> wrote:
On Mon, 25 Oct 2021 15:52:36 +0100, Joe wrote:
On Sun, 24 Oct 2021 12:56:59 -0000 (UTC)
William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> wrote:
It han't. Every year millions get the flu and many die.
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02558-8
https://media.nature.com/lw800/magazine-assets/d41586-021-02558-8/d
41586-021-02558-8_19770944.png
"The United States recorded just 646 flu deaths in the 2020–21 >>>>> season — the annual average is in the tens of thousands — and
there
and for covid over half a million.
was only one paediatric flu death. Australia has had no seasonal
influenza deaths so far in 2021, compared with between 100 and
1,200 in previous years."
Well, you can thank COVID-19 for that.
The protocols put in place for COVID-19
were Very Effective against the flu.
But not anything like as effective against Covid, which by
coincidence registered about the same order of magnitude of winter
deaths as flu normally does.
Not even close. The excess deaths in the world almost certainly from
covid are of the order of 15,000,000. Nowhere has the flu totally
swamped the hospitals. except perhaps the Spanish flu.
Yah, and there has been no death from natural causes in the USA since
COVID was identified. Everyone who dies now has died of COVID. Nobody
dies of old age, cancer, drug OD, or heart attack. Everyone died of
COVID. The USA has approximately 7,821 people die every day and they all
die from COVID.
This is what all those people died from before Democrats schemed to use
COVID as an excuse to steal an election.
Number of deaths for leading causes of death:
Heart disease: 659,041
Cancer: 599,601
Accidents (unintentional injuries): 173,040
Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 156,979
Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 150,005
Alzheimer’s disease: 121,499
Diabetes: 87,647
Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 51,565
Influenza and Pneumonia: 49,783
Intentional self-harm (suicide): 47,511
Intentional self–harm (suicide) by discharge of firearms: 23,941
Assault (homicide) by discharge of firearms: 14,414
Dementia-related causes: 271,872
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr70/nvsr70-08-508.pdf
Heart disease: 659,041
On 10/25/21 2:23 PM, Folderol wrote:
What has *any* of this got to do with the subject?
Absolutely NONE so far as I can tell ... even
going back lots of generations of the thread.
I'm not sure there CAN be a war on general-purpose
computing ... it's where all the special-purpose
stuff is planned and written.
A war on power users maybe ... The Big Corporations
badly want a total return to thin clients and
servers so they can charge for every second. All
online, all metered, all data harvested, all
THEIRS.
The excess deaths in the world almost certainly from covid are of the
order of 15,000,000. Nowhere has the flu totally swamped the hospitals. except perhaps the Spanish flu.
On 10/25/21 2:23 PM, Folderol wrote:
What has *any* of this got to do with the subject?
Absolutely NONE so far as I can tell ... even
going back lots of generations of the thread.
I'm not sure there CAN be a war on general-purpose
computing ... it's where all the special-purpose
stuff is planned and written.
A war on power users maybe ... The Big Corporations
badly want a total return to thin clients and
servers so they can charge for every second. All
online, all metered, all data harvested, all
THEIRS.
William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> wrote in
news:sl7v9u$6sp$1@dont-email.me:
On 2021-10-25, Joe <joe@jretrading.com> wrote:
On 25 Oct 2021 15:37:57 GMT
Allodoxaphobia <trepidation@example.net> wrote:
On Mon, 25 Oct 2021 15:52:36 +0100, Joe wrote:
On Sun, 24 Oct 2021 12:56:59 -0000 (UTC)
William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> wrote:
On 2021-10-24, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
On 24/10/2021 12:36, Daniel65 wrote:
Aragorn wrote on 30/3/21 7:54 am:
On 29.03.2021 at 21:07, Joe scribbled:
So why has flu been practically eliminated, but not Covid,
which is a comparable respiratory disease caused by a virus
of similar size?
It han't. Every year millions get the flu and many die.
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02558-8
https://media.nature.com/lw800/magazine-assets/d41586-021-02558-8/d
41586-021-02558-8_19770944.png
"The United States recorded just 646 flu deaths in the 2020–21
season — the annual average is in the tens of thousands — and
there
and for covid over half a million.
was only one paediatric flu death. Australia has had no seasonal
influenza deaths so far in 2021, compared with between 100 and
1,200 in previous years."
Well, you can thank COVID-19 for that.
The protocols put in place for COVID-19
were Very Effective against the flu.
But not anything like as effective against Covid, which by
coincidence registered about the same order of magnitude of winter
deaths as flu normally does.
Not even close. The excess deaths in the world almost certainly from
covid are of the order of 15,000,000. Nowhere has the flu totally
swamped the hospitals. except perhaps the Spanish flu.
Yah, and there has been no death from natural causes in the USA since
COVID was identified. Everyone who dies now has died of COVID. Nobody
dies of old age, cancer, drug OD, or heart attack. Everyone died of
COVID. The USA has approximately 7,821 people die every day and they all
die from COVID.
This is what all those people died from before Democrats schemed to use
COVID as an excuse to steal an election.
Number of deaths for leading causes of death:
Heart disease: 659,041
Cancer: 599,601
Accidents (unintentional injuries): 173,040
Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 156,979
Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 150,005
Alzheimer?s disease: 121,499
Diabetes: 87,647
Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 51,565
Influenza and Pneumonia: 49,783
Intentional self-harm (suicide): 47,511
Intentional self?harm (suicide) by discharge of firearms: 23,941
Assault (homicide) by discharge of firearms: 14,414
Dementia-related causes: 271,872
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr70/nvsr70-08-508.pdf
Renting time share on a cloud app is exactly what they love.
Yah, and there has been no death from natural causes in the USA since
COVID was identified. Everyone who dies now has died of COVID. Nobody
dies of old age, cancer, drug OD, or heart attack. Everyone died of
COVID. The USA has approximately 7,821 people die every day and they all
die from COVID.
On Tue, 26 Oct 2021 14:29:18 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Renting time share on a cloud app is exactly what they love.And, to give M$ their due, using Office365 applications is almost exactly that (even if some of the just plain folks using them still manage to
screw up).
On Tue, 26 Oct 2021 15:00:55 +0100
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
I am not going to criticise Microsoft for that, or IBM for realising
that what their customers wanted was not computers, but a software
supplied service to enable their businesses to perform better.
I have no quibble with that... if that's what they stuck too, but it's the endless deckchair moving (with no actual functional improvement) that winds the office girls up where I used to work. It wastes their time trying to find out where everything has moved to. Since the became a 'Microsoft' office, they've had to hire a specialist to keep sorting out all their problems.
I was still working there at the time, and chugging along quite happy with the
same machine that I'd started with 15 years previously.
The guy was trying to persuade the boss to change mine as well, until I pointed
out that *none* of the development software I used had a Microsoft equivalent.
I am not going to criticise Microsoft for that, or IBM for realising
that what their customers wanted was not computers, but a software
supplied service to enable their businesses to perform better.
On Tue, 26 Oct 2021 15:00:55 +0100 The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
I am not going to criticise Microsoft for that, or IBM for realising
that what their customers wanted was not computers, but a software
supplied service to enable their businesses to perform better.
I have no quibble with that... if that's what they stuck too, but it's
the endless deckchair moving (with no actual functional improvement)
that winds the office girls up where I used to work. It wastes their
time trying to find out where everything has moved to. Since the became
a 'Microsoft' office, they've had to hire a specialist to keep sorting
out all their problems.
I was still working there at the time, and chugging along quite happy
with the same machine that I'd started with 15 years previously.
The guy was trying to persuade the boss to change mine as well, until I pointed out that *none* of the development software I used had a
Microsoft equivalent.
Like C++, coders have to find ever more reasons to justify their
existence - look at Poettering foir example.
"Creeping featurism" is a prime example.
Probably likes te EU too
"All desktops must be harmonised!"
"Why?"
"Er....because?"
On Tue, 26 Oct 2021 15:10:18 -0000 (UTC)
Martin Gregorie <martin@mydomain.invalid> wrote:
On Tue, 26 Oct 2021 15:36:11 +0100, Folderol wrote:
The guy was trying to persuade the boss to change mine as well, until
I pointed out that *none* of the development software I used had a
Microsoft equivalent.
Interesting. Out of curiosity, what machine and OS was that?
Bog standard single core Intel @ 1.6GHz (I think - good for its time), initially running debian Sarge. Running Stretch when I retired (think it still is).
- look at Poettering foir example
On Tue, 26 Oct 2021 15:36:11 +0100, Folderol wrote:
The guy was trying to persuade the boss to change mine as well, until I
pointed out that *none* of the development software I used had a
Microsoft equivalent.
Interesting. Out of curiosity, what machine and OS was that?
On Tue, 26 Oct 2021 18:49:44 +0100, Folderol wrote:
On Tue, 26 Oct 2021 15:10:18 -0000 (UTC)Cool. In the early '80s I was doing a lot of work on SWTPC multi-user
Martin Gregorie <martin@mydomain.invalid> wrote:
On Tue, 26 Oct 2021 15:36:11 +0100, Folderol wrote:
The guy was trying to persuade the boss to change mine as well, until
I pointed out that *none* of the development software I used had a
Microsoft equivalent.
Interesting. Out of curiosity, what machine and OS was that?
Bog standard single core Intel @ 1.6GHz (I think - good for its time),
initially running debian Sarge. Running Stretch when I retired (think it
still is).
kit, based on MC6809 chips and running under the Uniflex OS. That was the >heyday of 4GL languages, so most of what we did was small-business
accounting systems written using the Sculptor 4GL. One of those boxes
with a 5" hard drive, couple of terminals and a printer could easily
support anything a family business needed.
On Tue, 26 Oct 2021 19:32:58 +0100
Folderol <general@musically.me.uk> wrote:
Dipped my toes in the water with a BBC Master in the late 80s,That was continued with an ARM assembler in Archimedes BBC Basic.
*loved* the in-line assembler in BBC BASIC :)
Dipped my toes in the water with a BBC Master in the late 80s,
*loved* the in-line assembler in BBC BASIC :)
On Tue, 26 Oct 2021 18:10:05 -0000 (UTC)
Martin Gregorie <martin@mydomain.invalid> wrote:
On Tue, 26 Oct 2021 18:49:44 +0100, Folderol wrote:Interesting. That predates me quite a bit. Work wise, I was up to my
On Tue, 26 Oct 2021 15:10:18 -0000 (UTC)Cool. In the early '80s I was doing a lot of work on SWTPC multi-user
Martin Gregorie <martin@mydomain.invalid> wrote:
On Tue, 26 Oct 2021 15:36:11 +0100, Folderol wrote:
The guy was trying to persuade the boss to change mine as well,
until I pointed out that *none* of the development software I used
had a Microsoft equivalent.
Interesting. Out of curiosity, what machine and OS was that?
Bog standard single core Intel @ 1.6GHz (I think - good for its time),
initially running debian Sarge. Running Stretch when I retired (think
it still is).
kit, based on MC6809 chips and running under the Uniflex OS. That was
the heyday of 4GL languages, so most of what we did was small-business >>accounting systems written using the Sculptor 4GL. One of those boxes
with a 5" hard drive, couple of terminals and a printer could easily >>support anything a family business needed.
armpits in PCBs with acres of CMOS chips and a smattering of TTL for the 'fast' bits - narry a processor in sight.
Dipped my toes in the water with a BBC Master in the late 80s, *loved*
the in-line assembler in BBC BASIC :)
On Tue, 26 Oct 2021 19:32:58 +0100, Folderol wrote:
On Tue, 26 Oct 2021 18:10:05 -0000 (UTC)
Martin Gregorie <martin@mydomain.invalid> wrote:
On Tue, 26 Oct 2021 18:49:44 +0100, Folderol wrote:Interesting. That predates me quite a bit. Work wise, I was up to my
On Tue, 26 Oct 2021 15:10:18 -0000 (UTC)Cool. In the early '80s I was doing a lot of work on SWTPC multi-user >>>kit, based on MC6809 chips and running under the Uniflex OS. That was
Martin Gregorie <martin@mydomain.invalid> wrote:
On Tue, 26 Oct 2021 15:36:11 +0100, Folderol wrote:
The guy was trying to persuade the boss to change mine as well,
until I pointed out that *none* of the development software I used >>>>>> had a Microsoft equivalent.
Interesting. Out of curiosity, what machine and OS was that?
Bog standard single core Intel @ 1.6GHz (I think - good for its
time),
initially running debian Sarge. Running Stretch when I retired (think
it still is).
the heyday of 4GL languages, so most of what we did was small-business >>>accounting systems written using the Sculptor 4GL. One of those boxes >>>with a 5" hard drive, couple of terminals and a printer could easily >>>support anything a family business needed.
armpits in PCBs with acres of CMOS chips and a smattering of TTL for
the 'fast' bits - narry a processor in sight.
Dipped my toes in the water with a BBC Master in the late 80s, *loved*
the in-line assembler in BBC BASIC :)
That was after my final stint on a relatively big system: The BBC's dual
ICL 2966 setup.
This lived in a large room in Sheppards Bush containing two independent, roughly equal sized systems interconnected with a cabinet looking very
much like the switch box in a railway shunting yard. One machine was the production system, the other being for development and hot standby. The switch system meant that if 'prod' died, we all got kicked off 'dev',
'prod's disks were swapped over to 'dev', which then rebooted as the production system. IIRC that meant about 30-40 minutes downtime - fast
enough because the 2966s supported admin, accounting and
(broadcast)program planning and production rather than anything that was
live on air. This sort of crash didn't happen often. I was there for
just under 3 years only remember being booted off 'dev' a couple of
times.
Everything we did there was written in COBOL and used IDMSX databases.
VME/B was a nice OS - by and large it 'just worked'. Every program had
two names (long and short), so 'deletefile(filename)' did what you might expect and 'xf(filename)' was the short name for the same program. The
name construction systax was totally consistent (unlike the Unix/Linux
naming mess) and the OS had a built-in manpage capability, so once you understood it you could think:
"I need a command to do this unusual thing I've not tried before. If it exists its name should be, say 'addfileindex'".
So you'd type that into a terminal, hit the 'screen prompt' button, and
if there was such a command the screen would fill with a summary
description and a set of named argument fields and any default values
already set. If the command didn't exist you'd get shown a list of
similar command names.
If the command was found all you needed to do was fill in the arguments
you wanted and hit ENTER. Job done!
On Tue, 26 Oct 2021 19:32:58 +0100, Folderol wrote:
On Tue, 26 Oct 2021 18:10:05 -0000 (UTC)
Martin Gregorie <martin@mydomain.invalid> wrote:
On Tue, 26 Oct 2021 18:49:44 +0100, Folderol wrote:Interesting. That predates me quite a bit. Work wise, I was up to my
On Tue, 26 Oct 2021 15:10:18 -0000 (UTC)Cool. In the early '80s I was doing a lot of work on SWTPC multi-user
Martin Gregorie <martin@mydomain.invalid> wrote:
On Tue, 26 Oct 2021 15:36:11 +0100, Folderol wrote:
The guy was trying to persuade the boss to change mine as well,
until I pointed out that *none* of the development software I used >>>>>> had a Microsoft equivalent.
Interesting. Out of curiosity, what machine and OS was that?
Bog standard single core Intel @ 1.6GHz (I think - good for its time), >>>> initially running debian Sarge. Running Stretch when I retired (think
it still is).
kit, based on MC6809 chips and running under the Uniflex OS. That was
the heyday of 4GL languages, so most of what we did was small-business
accounting systems written using the Sculptor 4GL. One of those boxes
with a 5" hard drive, couple of terminals and a printer could easily
support anything a family business needed.
armpits in PCBs with acres of CMOS chips and a smattering of TTL for the
'fast' bits - narry a processor in sight.
Dipped my toes in the water with a BBC Master in the late 80s, *loved*
the in-line assembler in BBC BASIC :)
That was after my final stint on a relatively big system: The BBC's dual
ICL 2966 setup.
This lived in a large room in Sheppards Bush containing two independent, roughly equal sized systems interconnected with a cabinet looking very
much like the switch box in a railway shunting yard. One machine was the production system, the other being for development and hot standby. The switch system meant that if 'prod' died, we all got kicked off 'dev',
'prod's disks were swapped over to 'dev', which then rebooted as the production system. IIRC that meant about 30-40 minutes downtime - fast
enough because the 2966s supported admin, accounting and
(broadcast)program planning and production rather than anything that was
live on air. This sort of crash didn't happen often. I was there for just under 3 years only remember being booted off 'dev' a couple of times.
Everything we did there was written in COBOL and used IDMSX databases.
VME/B was a nice OS - by and large it 'just worked'. Every program had
two names (long and short), so 'deletefile(filename)' did what you might expect and 'xf(filename)' was the short name for the same program. The
name construction systax was totally consistent (unlike the Unix/Linux
naming mess) and the OS had a built-in manpage capability, so once you understood it you could think:
"I need a command to do this unusual thing I've not tried before. If it exists its name should be, say 'addfileindex'".
So you'd type that into a terminal, hit the 'screen prompt' button, and
if there was such a command the screen would fill with a summary
description and a set of named argument fields and any default values
already set. If the command didn't exist you'd get shown a list of
similar command names.
If the command was found all you needed to do was fill in the arguments
you wanted and hit ENTER. Job done!
Unix has apropos. So I just tried "apropos remove file". This gave me three and a half screens-full of commands (so, some hundreds), but not including 'rm'.
Unix has apropos. So I just tried "apropos remove file". This gave me
three and a half screens-full of commands (so, some hundreds), but not including 'rm'.
On Tue, 26 Oct 2021 19:32:58 +0100
Folderol <general@musically.me.uk> wrote:
Dipped my toes in the water with a BBC Master in the late 80s,That was continued with an ARM assembler in Archimedes BBC Basic.
*loved* the in-line assembler in BBC BASIC :)
On 26/10/2021 04:59, 1p166 wrote:
On 10/25/21 2:23 PM, Folderol wrote:
What has *any* of this got to do with the subject?
Absolutely NONE so far as I can tell ... even
going back lots of generations of the thread.
I'm not sure there CAN be a war on general-purpose
computing ... it's where all the special-purpose
stuff is planned and written.
A war on power users maybe ... The Big Corporations
badly want a total return to thin clients and
servers so they can charge for every second. All
online, all metered, all data harvested, all
THEIRS.
Well its all rather emotive language about something that is shifting as
the relative speed and power of networks and CPUs change over time.
What is clear is that if you are maintaining a big app with thousands
upon thousands of customers, its a damned sight cheaper to charge them
rental and run the code on a server and let them access it via a browser
or relatively thin client.
Think support:
"Your program doesnt work"
"Have you tried ALT-F7->gribbulate?"
"ALT- F7 doesnt work on your code!
"Oh ah, which versions do you have?"
"How would I know"?
"go alt-H->about"
"Ok version 2.23"
"We dont support that version you need to upgrade to 8.3 at least"
"How do I do that?"
"On Windows 10..."
"I have windows XP"
"Well sir, then you are fucked, We don't support that platform any more"
How much easier to say 'as long as your browser is IE8 or more or
Firefox 10 or more or... then you will be running the latest version of
our code...
..on MacosX winders and Linux/BSD unix too.
Most users of apps dont *want* to know how it works, they just want it
to work, and if they are paying for it, to have a way to fix it when it doesn't.
Renting time share on a cloud app is exactly what they love.
Like contract hire on a car. Brand new car, all the features, service included for the first two years, no need to take responsibility for any
of it....just pay the monthly fee.
There are of course situations where you need local computing power and bandwidth, but they are fewer and fewer.
Content generators
Application designers
OS maintainers
Players of real time games.
Highly specialised computationally intensive technical programs
Everything else can by done via a web interface
On Tue, 26 Oct 2021 14:29:18 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Renting time share on a cloud app is exactly what they love.And, to give M$ their due, using Office365 applications is almost exactly that (even if some of the just plain folks using them still manage to
screw up).
Unix has apropos. So I just tried "apropos remove file". This gave me three and a half screens-full of commands (so, some hundreds), but not including 'rm'.
On 26-10-2021 23:06, TimS wrote:
Unix has apropos. So I just tried "apropos remove file". This gave me three >> and a half screens-full of commands (so, some hundreds), but not including >> 'rm'.
On MacOS (~BSD) it gives more than 20 pages because it seems to treat
the keywords as OR-ed and "file" is ubiquitous. Two pages for just
"apropos remove" and in both versions it includes on page two (because alphabetically) :
On 27 Oct 2021 at 07:51:38 BST, "A. Dumas" <alexandre@dumas.fr.invalid> wrote:
On 26-10-2021 23:06, TimS wrote:
Unix has apropos. So I just tried "apropos remove file". This gave me three >>> and a half screens-full of commands (so, some hundreds), but not including >>> 'rm'.
On MacOS (~BSD) it gives more than 20 pages because it seems to treat
the keywords as OR-ed and "file" is ubiquitous. Two pages for just
"apropos remove" and in both versions it includes on page two (because
alphabetically) :
My Terminal windows are nearly 100 lines long.
On Tue, 26 Oct 2021 15:10:18 -0000 (UTC)
Martin Gregorie <martin@mydomain.invalid> wrote:
On Tue, 26 Oct 2021 15:36:11 +0100, Folderol wrote:
The guy was trying to persuade the boss to change mine as well, until I
pointed out that *none* of the development software I used had a
Microsoft equivalent.
Interesting. Out of curiosity, what machine and OS was that?
Bog standard single core Intel @ 1.6GHz (I think - good for its time), initially
running debian Sarge. Running Stretch when I retired (think it still is).
It's almost all bespoke software we built up ourselves. The arrival of the Arduino made life a lot easier for us - program a chip and test the code, pop it out and stick a resonator on it and instant *cheap* dedicated controller.
On 26/10/2021 15:53, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Probably likes te EU too
"All desktops must be harmonised!"
"Why?"
"Er....because?"
Still lying about the EU, I see ...
On 26/10/2021 15:53, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Probably likes te EU too
"All desktops must be harmonised!"
"Why?"
"Er....because?"
Still lying about the EU, I see ...
Unix has apropos. So I just tried "apropos remove file". This gave me three and a half screens-full of commands (so, some hundreds), but not including 'rm'.
On 10/26/21 9:44 AM, Martin Gregorie wrote:
On Tue, 26 Oct 2021 14:29:18 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Renting time share on a cloud app is exactly what they love.And, to give M$ their due, using Office365 applications is almost exactly
that (even if some of the just plain folks using them still manage to
screw up).
You KNOW they (and Russia) are plundering all that
online data, don't you ? Selling to the highest bidder ...
On Tue, 26 Oct 2021 15:53:14 +0100
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
- look at Poettering foir example
Do we have to!
:)
On 26/10/2021 05:13, William Unruh wrote:
The excess deaths in the world almost certainly from covid are of the
order of 15,000,000. Nowhere has the flu totally swamped the hospitals.
except perhaps the Spanish flu.
I think that is all that need be said. COVID is like a very very nasty variety of flu, and about 10 times nastier than ordinary flu.
Whether that justifies the public health measures that were taken is something we will learn after it is over unfortunately. I simply don't
think the data existed to do more than take a calculated risk at the
outset.
Certainly in the UK the metric seemed to be at the political level to
limit contact and up hygiene standards until the hospitals could just
cope, whilst allowing pretty much unrestricted travel. That changed
later on.
I don't find that unreasonable. The public would not have stood for
people dying in droves, and they wouldn't stand for protracted
lockdowns. At some level politicians had to balance those two
conflicting requirements and come up with policy in pretty much an information vacuum
As it is there are now many vaccines to pick from that offer some degree
of protection against the more serious forms of the disease, and seem to
have reduced the transmission rates in the population sectors that have
been vaccinated. And treatment regimes have been improved as 'stuff that works' has replaced 'stuff that might work' in treating serious cases.
In short, in a year or so, we will be in the admirable position of
knowing exactly what we ought to have been doing all along....
On 26/10/2021 16:20, Java Jive wrote:
On 26/10/2021 15:53, The Natural Philosopher wrote:Are you?
Probably likes te EU too
"All desktops must be harmonised!"
"Why?"
"Er....because?"
Still lying about the EU, I see ...
Il 26/10/2021 15:40, The Natural Philosopher ha scritto:
On 26/10/2021 05:13, William Unruh wrote:
The excess deaths in the world almost certainly from covid are of the
order of 15,000,000. Nowhere has the flu totally swamped the hospitals.
except perhaps the Spanish flu.
I think that is all that need be said. COVID is like a very very nasty
variety of flu, and about 10 times nastier than ordinary flu.
Whether that justifies the public health measures that were taken is
something we will learn after it is over unfortunately. I simply don't
think the data existed to do more than take a calculated risk at the
outset.
Certainly in the UK the metric seemed to be at the political level to
limit contact and up hygiene standards until the hospitals could just
cope, whilst allowing pretty much unrestricted travel. That changed
later on.
I don't find that unreasonable. The public would not have stood for
people dying in droves, and they wouldn't stand for protracted
lockdowns. At some level politicians had to balance those two
conflicting requirements and come up with policy in pretty much an
information vacuum
As it is there are now many vaccines to pick from that offer some degree
of protection against the more serious forms of the disease, and seem to
have reduced the transmission rates in the population sectors that have
been vaccinated. And treatment regimes have been improved as 'stuff that
works' has replaced 'stuff that might work' in treating serious cases.
In short, in a year or so, we will be in the admirable position of
knowing exactly what we ought to have been doing all along....
In the opinion of many scientists, one of the things to do immediately
should have been to selectively vaccinate the people most at risk only because the viruses defend themselves by mutating and when they mutate
they become more treacherous and aggressive.
On 26/10/2021 16:20, Java Jive wrote:
On 26/10/2021 15:53, The Natural Philosopher wrote:"Harmonisation, also known as standardisation or approximation, refers
Probably likes te EU too
"All desktops must be harmonised!"
"Why?"
"Er....because?"
Still lying about the EU, I see ...
to the determination of EU-wide legally binding standards to be met in
all Member States."
https://www.lexisnexis.co.uk/legal/guidance/harmonisation
Look who is lying now...
On 27 Oct 2021 at 15:47:00 BST, jak <nospam@please.ty> wrote:
Il 26/10/2021 15:40, The Natural Philosopher ha scritto:
In short, in a year or so, we will be in the admirable position of
knowing exactly what we ought to have been doing all along....
In the opinion of many scientists, one of the things to do immediately
should have been to selectively vaccinate the people most at risk only
because the viruses defend themselves by mutating and when they mutate
they become more treacherous and aggressive.
Selectively vaccinate them with what?
On 27/10/2021 04:23, 1p166 wrote:
On 10/26/21 9:44 AM, Martin Gregorie wrote:One assumes that anything in the cloud is at some level public domain.
On Tue, 26 Oct 2021 14:29:18 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Renting time share on a cloud app is exactly what they love.And, to give M$ their due, using Office365 applications is almost exactly >>> that (even if some of the just plain folks using them still manage to
screw up).
You KNOW they (and Russia) are plundering all that
online data, don't you ? Selling to the highest bidder ...
For Clapton's sake, most of what we do isn't a state secret, it's just unbearably boring routine paperwork - or paperless work, these days.
If Russia wants to sell my private data to the highest bidder, that
would be me, and i'll give them one rouble for it.
I am far more concerned that UK and US intelligence is hosted on amazon
web services....
Il 26/10/2021 15:40, The Natural Philosopher ha scritto:
On 26/10/2021 05:13, William Unruh wrote:
The excess deaths in the world almost certainly from covid are of the
order of 15,000,000. Nowhere has the flu totally swamped the hospitals.
except perhaps the Spanish flu.
I think that is all that need be said. COVID is like a very very nasty
variety of flu, and about 10 times nastier than ordinary flu.
Whether that justifies the public health measures that were taken is
something we will learn after it is over unfortunately. I simply don't
think the data existed to do more than take a calculated risk at the
outset.
Certainly in the UK the metric seemed to be at the political level to
limit contact and up hygiene standards until the hospitals could just
cope, whilst allowing pretty much unrestricted travel. That changed
later on.
I don't find that unreasonable. The public would not have stood for
people dying in droves, and they wouldn't stand for protracted
lockdowns. At some level politicians had to balance those two
conflicting requirements and come up with policy in pretty much an
information vacuum
As it is there are now many vaccines to pick from that offer some degree
of protection against the more serious forms of the disease, and seem to
have reduced the transmission rates in the population sectors that have
been vaccinated. And treatment regimes have been improved as 'stuff that
works' has replaced 'stuff that might work' in treating serious cases.
In short, in a year or so, we will be in the admirable position of
knowing exactly what we ought to have been doing all along....
In the opinion of many scientists, one of the things to do immediately
should have been to selectively vaccinate the people most at risk only
because the viruses defend themselves by mutating and when they mutate
they become more treacherous and aggressive.
On 27/10/2021 15:55, TimS wrote:
On 27 Oct 2021 at 15:47:00 BST, jak <nospam@please.ty> wrote:
Il 26/10/2021 15:40, The Natural Philosopher ha scritto:
In short, in a year or so, we will be in the admirable position of
knowing exactly what we ought to have been doing all along....
In the opinion of many scientists, one of the things to do immediately
should have been to selectively vaccinate the people most at risk only
because the viruses defend themselves by mutating and when they mutate
they become more treacherous and aggressive.
Selectively vaccinate them with what?
Exactly, at the time we didn't have the vaccines. Now that we have,
some scientists are saying that the best way to protect the most
vulnerable is vaccinate the mixers, as they are the most likely to bring
the disease into a vulnerable persons home.
On 27/10/2021 14:11, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 26/10/2021 16:20, Java Jive wrote:
On 26/10/2021 15:53, The Natural Philosopher wrote:"Harmonisation, also known as standardisation or approximation, refers
Probably likes te EU too
"All desktops must be harmonised!"
"Why?"
"Er....because?"
Still lying about the EU, I see ...
to the determination of EU-wide legally binding standards to be met in
all Member States."
https://www.lexisnexis.co.uk/legal/guidance/harmonisation
Look who is lying now...
You are, neither computers or desktops are mentioned on that page.
Il 26/10/2021 15:40, The Natural Philosopher ha scritto:
On 26/10/2021 05:13, William Unruh wrote:
The excess deaths in the world almost certainly from covid are of the
order of 15,000,000. Nowhere has the flu totally swamped the hospitals.
except perhaps the Spanish flu.
I think that is all that need be said. COVID is like a very very
nasty variety of flu, and about 10 times nastier than ordinary flu.
Whether that justifies the public health measures that were taken is
something we will learn after it is over unfortunately. I simply don't
think the data existed to do more than take a calculated risk at the
outset.
Certainly in the UK the metric seemed to be at the political level to
limit contact and up hygiene standards until the hospitals could just
cope, whilst allowing pretty much unrestricted travel. That changed
later on.
I don't find that unreasonable. The public would not have stood for
people dying in droves, and they wouldn't stand for protracted
lockdowns. At some level politicians had to balance those two
conflicting requirements and come up with policy in pretty much an
information vacuum
As it is there are now many vaccines to pick from that offer some
degree of protection against the more serious forms of the disease,
and seem to have reduced the transmission rates in the population
sectors that have been vaccinated. And treatment regimes have been
improved as 'stuff that works' has replaced 'stuff that might work' in
treating serious cases.
In short, in a year or so, we will be in the admirable position of
knowing exactly what we ought to have been doing all along....
In the opinion of many scientists, one of the things to do immediately
should have been to selectively vaccinate the people most at risk only because the viruses defend themselves by mutating and when they mutate
they become more treacherous and aggressive.
On 2021-10-27, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 27/10/2021 04:23, 1p166 wrote:
On 10/26/21 9:44 AM, Martin Gregorie wrote:One assumes that anything in the cloud is at some level public domain.
On Tue, 26 Oct 2021 14:29:18 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Renting time share on a cloud app is exactly what they love.And, to give M$ their due, using Office365 applications is almost exactly >>>> that (even if some of the just plain folks using them still manage to
screw up).
You KNOW they (and Russia) are plundering all that
online data, don't you ? Selling to the highest bidder ...
Does that include your SIN, your tax records, your medical records, your
bank account and passwords?
I do not think anyone holds that opinion.
For Clapton's sake, most of what we do isn't a state secret, it's just
unbearably boring routine paperwork - or paperless work, these days.
No, but it may be your secret.
.......
If Russia wants to sell my private data to the highest bidder, that
would be me, and i'll give them one rouble for it.
I think they would get more than that for your bank records and
passwords say. or your credit card details and passwords.
I am far more concerned that UK and US intelligence is hosted on amazon
web services....
On 27/10/2021 19:52, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 27/10/2021 16:02, Java Jive wrote:
On 27/10/2021 14:11, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 26/10/2021 16:20, Java Jive wrote:
On 26/10/2021 15:53, The Natural Philosopher wrote:"Harmonisation, also known as standardisation or approximation,
Probably likes te EU too
"All desktops must be harmonised!"
"Why?"
"Er....because?"
Still lying about the EU, I see ...
refers to the determination of EU-wide legally binding standards to
be met in all Member States."
https://www.lexisnexis.co.uk/legal/guidance/harmonisation
Look who is lying now...
You are, neither computers or desktops are mentioned on that page.
Weak - very weak. And misses the point.
It's entirely to the point, yet again you're lying about the EU on zilch evidence.
Which to spell it out, is that harmonisation for its own sake, is a
characteristic of blind bureaucracies. I.e. the EU.
But they aren't trying to harmonise computers or desktops, so your crowbarring the EU into this discussion is just bigotry.
On 27/10/2021 16:02, Java Jive wrote:
On 27/10/2021 14:11, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 26/10/2021 16:20, Java Jive wrote:
On 26/10/2021 15:53, The Natural Philosopher wrote:"Harmonisation, also known as standardisation or approximation,
Probably likes te EU too
"All desktops must be harmonised!"
"Why?"
"Er....because?"
Still lying about the EU, I see ...
refers to the determination of EU-wide legally binding standards to
be met in all Member States."
https://www.lexisnexis.co.uk/legal/guidance/harmonisation
Look who is lying now...
You are, neither computers or desktops are mentioned on that page.
Weak - very weak. And misses the point.
Which to spell it out, is that harmonisation for its own sake, is a characteristic of blind bureaucracies. I.e. the EU.
On 27/10/2021 15:47, jak wrote:
Il 26/10/2021 15:40, The Natural Philosopher ha scritto:Well lets look at that statement
On 26/10/2021 05:13, William Unruh wrote:
The excess deaths in the world almost certainly from covid are of the
order of 15,000,000. Nowhere has the flu totally swamped the hospitals. >>>> except perhaps the Spanish flu.
I think that is all that need be said. COVID is like a very very
nasty variety of flu, and about 10 times nastier than ordinary flu.
Whether that justifies the public health measures that were taken is
something we will learn after it is over unfortunately. I simply
don't think the data existed to do more than take a calculated risk
at the outset.
Certainly in the UK the metric seemed to be at the political level to
limit contact and up hygiene standards until the hospitals could just
cope, whilst allowing pretty much unrestricted travel. That changed
later on.
I don't find that unreasonable. The public would not have stood for
people dying in droves, and they wouldn't stand for protracted
lockdowns. At some level politicians had to balance those two
conflicting requirements and come up with policy in pretty much an
information vacuum
As it is there are now many vaccines to pick from that offer some
degree of protection against the more serious forms of the disease,
and seem to have reduced the transmission rates in the population
sectors that have been vaccinated. And treatment regimes have been
improved as 'stuff that works' has replaced 'stuff that might work'
in treating serious cases.
In short, in a year or so, we will be in the admirable position of
knowing exactly what we ought to have been doing all along....
In the opinion of many scientists, one of the things to do immediately
should have been to selectively vaccinate the people most at risk only
because the viruses defend themselves by mutating and when they mutate
they become more treacherous and aggressive.
How could anything have been done immediately by way of vaccination
since no vaccines existed?
Even if they had, is your statement any more reasonable? A person who
is most at risk will likely die. The ones we want to vaccinate are the
ones who don't die, but wander around giving the virus to other people
and allowing it to live and mutate. Surely?
On 2021-10-27, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
One assumes that anything in the cloud is at some level public
domain.
Does that include your SIN, your tax records, your medical records,
your bank account and passwords?
I do not think anyone holds that opinion.
You may also have noticed that vaccinated people are less careful about
other people around them.
They act as if they can no longer infect
anyone and this is false.
Il 27/10/2021 20:49, The Natural Philosopher ha scritto:
On 27/10/2021 15:47, jak wrote:
Il 26/10/2021 15:40, The Natural Philosopher ha scritto:Well lets look at that statement
On 26/10/2021 05:13, William Unruh wrote:
The excess deaths in the world almost certainly from covid are of the >>>>> order of 15,000,000. Nowhere has the flu totally swamped the hospitals. >>>>> except perhaps the Spanish flu.
I think that is all that need be said. COVID is like a very very
nasty variety of flu, and about 10 times nastier than ordinary flu.
Whether that justifies the public health measures that were taken is
something we will learn after it is over unfortunately. I simply
don't think the data existed to do more than take a calculated risk
at the outset.
Certainly in the UK the metric seemed to be at the political level to
limit contact and up hygiene standards until the hospitals could just
cope, whilst allowing pretty much unrestricted travel. That changed
later on.
I don't find that unreasonable. The public would not have stood for
people dying in droves, and they wouldn't stand for protracted
lockdowns. At some level politicians had to balance those two
conflicting requirements and come up with policy in pretty much an
information vacuum
As it is there are now many vaccines to pick from that offer some
degree of protection against the more serious forms of the disease,
and seem to have reduced the transmission rates in the population
sectors that have been vaccinated. And treatment regimes have been
improved as 'stuff that works' has replaced 'stuff that might work'
in treating serious cases.
In short, in a year or so, we will be in the admirable position of
knowing exactly what we ought to have been doing all along....
In the opinion of many scientists, one of the things to do immediately
should have been to selectively vaccinate the people most at risk only
because the viruses defend themselves by mutating and when they mutate
they become more treacherous and aggressive.
How could anything have been done immediately by way of vaccination
since no vaccines existed?
Even if they had, is your statement any more reasonable? A person who
is most at risk will likely die. The ones we want to vaccinate are the
ones who don't die, but wander around giving the virus to other people
and allowing it to live and mutate. Surely?
If the gazelles didn't run then the cheetahs would have shorter legs:
mutations are proportional to the need to survive.
You may also have noticed that vaccinated people are less careful about
other people around them. They act as if they can no longer infect
anyone and this is false.
On 2021-10-27, jak <nospam@please.ty> wrote:
Il 27/10/2021 20:49, The Natural Philosopher ha scritto:
On 27/10/2021 15:47, jak wrote:
Il 26/10/2021 15:40, The Natural Philosopher ha scritto:Well lets look at that statement
On 26/10/2021 05:13, William Unruh wrote:
The excess deaths in the world almost certainly from covid are of the >>>>>> order of 15,000,000. Nowhere has the flu totally swamped the hospitals. >>>>>> except perhaps the Spanish flu.
I think that is all that need be said. COVID is like a very very
nasty variety of flu, and about 10 times nastier than ordinary flu.
Whether that justifies the public health measures that were taken is >>>>> something we will learn after it is over unfortunately. I simply
don't think the data existed to do more than take a calculated risk
at the outset.
Certainly in the UK the metric seemed to be at the political level to >>>>> limit contact and up hygiene standards until the hospitals could just >>>>> cope, whilst allowing pretty much unrestricted travel. That changed
later on.
I don't find that unreasonable. The public would not have stood for
people dying in droves, and they wouldn't stand for protracted
lockdowns. At some level politicians had to balance those two
conflicting requirements and come up with policy in pretty much an
information vacuum
As it is there are now many vaccines to pick from that offer some
degree of protection against the more serious forms of the disease,
and seem to have reduced the transmission rates in the population
sectors that have been vaccinated. And treatment regimes have been
improved as 'stuff that works' has replaced 'stuff that might work'
in treating serious cases.
In short, in a year or so, we will be in the admirable position of >>>>> knowing exactly what we ought to have been doing all along....
In the opinion of many scientists, one of the things to do immediately >>>> should have been to selectively vaccinate the people most at risk only >>>> because the viruses defend themselves by mutating and when they mutate >>>> they become more treacherous and aggressive.
How could anything have been done immediately by way of vaccination
since no vaccines existed?
Even if they had, is your statement any more reasonable? A person who
is most at risk will likely die. The ones we want to vaccinate are the
ones who don't die, but wander around giving the virus to other people
and allowing it to live and mutate. Surely?
If the gazelles didn't run then the cheetahs would have shorter legs:
the rhinos don't run very well, and yet the cheetahs have long lengs.
mutations are proportional to the need to survive.
No. Mutations go their merry way, and do not care ( since they have no ability to care) obout their effects. Darwin discussed this 150 years
ago. Those that produce more progeny ( and they cannot if they are dead) eventually dominate, whether viruses or cheetahs.
You may also have noticed that vaccinated people are less careful about
other people around them. They act as if they can no longer infect
anyone and this is false.
What does that have to do with the discussion. People who are
unvaccinated infect a lot more, and they are far more liable to not care
what the effect of their behaviour is on others. The evidence is that
people who are vaccinated do infect others less. But again, this is
supposed to evidence of what?
On Wed, 27 Oct 2021 15:59:50 -0000 (UTC)
William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> wrote:
On 2021-10-27, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
One assumes that anything in the cloud is at some level public
domain.
Does that include your SIN, your tax records, your medical records,
your bank account and passwords?
I do not think anyone holds that opinion.
My opinion is that any data legitimately held by my country's public
sector is already public domain. They can't even use their damn
computers, let alone secure them.
And I suspect that MS now makes more money selling data than selling or renting software.
Il 27/10/2021 20:49, The Natural Philosopher ha scritto:
On 27/10/2021 15:47, jak wrote:
Il 26/10/2021 15:40, The Natural Philosopher ha scritto:Well lets look at that statement
On 26/10/2021 05:13, William Unruh wrote:
The excess deaths in the world almost certainly from covid are of the >>>>> order of 15,000,000. Nowhere has the flu totally swamped the
hospitals.
except perhaps the Spanish flu.
I think that is all that need be said. COVID is like a very very
nasty variety of flu, and about 10 times nastier than ordinary flu.
Whether that justifies the public health measures that were taken is
something we will learn after it is over unfortunately. I simply
don't think the data existed to do more than take a calculated risk
at the outset.
Certainly in the UK the metric seemed to be at the political level
to limit contact and up hygiene standards until the hospitals could
just cope, whilst allowing pretty much unrestricted travel. That
changed later on.
I don't find that unreasonable. The public would not have stood for
people dying in droves, and they wouldn't stand for protracted
lockdowns. At some level politicians had to balance those two
conflicting requirements and come up with policy in pretty much an
information vacuum
As it is there are now many vaccines to pick from that offer some
degree of protection against the more serious forms of the disease,
and seem to have reduced the transmission rates in the population
sectors that have been vaccinated. And treatment regimes have been
improved as 'stuff that works' has replaced 'stuff that might work'
in treating serious cases.
In short, in a year or so, we will be in the admirable position of
knowing exactly what we ought to have been doing all along....
In the opinion of many scientists, one of the things to do immediately
should have been to selectively vaccinate the people most at risk only
because the viruses defend themselves by mutating and when they mutate
they become more treacherous and aggressive.
How could anything have been done immediately by way of vaccination
since no vaccines existed?
Even if they had, is your statement any more reasonable? A person who
is most at risk will likely die. The ones we want to vaccinate are the
ones who don't die, but wander around giving the virus to other people
and allowing it to live and mutate. Surely?
If the gazelles didn't run then the cheetahs would have shorter legs: mutations are proportional to the need to survive.
You may also have noticed that vaccinated people are less careful about
other people around them.
anyone and this is false.
Thanks for the replies. Now I understand better why this pandemic lasts
so long. The Maya people were more fortunate in meeting the Hispanics.
On 28/10/2021 08:19, jak wrote:
Thanks for the replies. Now I understand better why this pandemic lasts
so long. The Maya people were more fortunate in meeting the Hispanics.
in 700 years time what we ought to have done will become as clear to our descendants as what the 14th century people wearing plague masks ought
to have done. Namely spent less on the church and more on terriers.
Even if they had, is your statement any more reasonable? A person who
is most at risk will likely die. The ones we want to vaccinate are the
ones who don't die, but wander around giving the virus to other people
and allowing it to live and mutate. Surely?
On Wed, 27 Oct 2021 19:49:05 +0100
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
Even if they had, is your statement any more reasonable? A person who
is most at risk will likely die. The ones we want to vaccinate are the
ones who don't die, but wander around giving the virus to other people
and allowing it to live and mutate. Surely?
Yet when the vaccines did become available they went to those most
at risk first, at least that's what happened here.
On Wed, 27 Oct 2021 22:57:06 +0200, jak wrote:
You may also have noticed that vaccinated people are less careful about
other people around them. They act as if they can no longer infect
anyone and this is false.
This is probably your only sensible observation
Yes there are a large number of vaccinated Idiots who don't care about others.
Tripple jabbed but I still wear a mask when out because if I dont how
can I expect it of others.
You may also have noticed that vaccinated people are less careful about
other people around them. They act as if they can no longer infect
anyone and this is false.
On 30/10/2021 16:25, alister wrote:
On Wed, 27 Oct 2021 22:57:06 +0200, jak wrote:
You may also have noticed that vaccinated people are less careful
about other people around them. They act as if they can no longer
infect anyone and this is false.
This is probably your only sensible observation
Yes there are a large number of vaccinated Idiots who don't care about
others.
Tripple jabbed but I still wear a mask when out because if I dont how
can I expect it of others.
IME there are more unvaccinated idiots who don't care about others, this probably being one of the reasons they're still unvaccinated.
On Sat, 30 Oct 2021 16:57:59 +0100, Java Jive wrote:
On 30/10/2021 16:25, alister wrote:
On Wed, 27 Oct 2021 22:57:06 +0200, jak wrote:
You may also have noticed that vaccinated people are less careful
about other people around them. They act as if they can no longer
infect anyone and this is false.
This is probably your only sensible observation
Yes there are a large number of vaccinated Idiots who don't care about
others.
Tripple jabbed but I still wear a mask when out because if I dont
how
can I expect it of others.
IME there are more unvaccinated idiots who don't care about others,
this probably being one of the reasons they're still unvaccinated.
if I get a tetanus shot do I worry about the unvaccinated giving me
tetanus?? If I get a flu shot do I worry about the unvaccinated giving
me the flu??? I am vaccinated against polio..do I worry about the unvaccinated giving me polio??? The answer is FUCK NO....What a bunch of blathering idiots...you can tell who the vaccinated ones are...their
brains are now mush....Hurry up vaccinated idiots...get on the booster train...you don't want to be left behind....
On Sat, 30 Oct 2021 18:17:28 +0000, killa-de-bug wrote:
On Sat, 30 Oct 2021 16:57:59 +0100, Java Jive wrote:
IME there are more unvaccinated idiots who don't care about others,
this probably being one of the reasons they're still unvaccinated.
if I get a tetanus shot do I worry about the unvaccinated giving me
tetanus??
If I get a flu shot do I worry about the unvaccinated giving
me the flu???
I am vaccinated against polio..do I worry about the
unvaccinated giving me polio???
The answer is FUCK NO....What a bunch of
blathering idiots...you can tell who the vaccinated ones are...their
brains are now mush....Hurry up vaccinated idiots...get on the booster
train...you don't want to be left behind....
So if you still need a booster after being fully vaccinated, and testing after being fully vaccinated, and hospitalization after being fully vaccinated, and masks, social distancing & lock-downs all after being
fully vaccinated????
Then it's time to admit you have been FULLY conned......
On Sat, 30 Oct 2021 16:57:59 +0100, Java Jive wrote:
On 30/10/2021 16:25, alister wrote:
On Wed, 27 Oct 2021 22:57:06 +0200, jak wrote:
You may also have noticed that vaccinated people are less careful
about other people around them. They act as if they can no longer
infect anyone and this is false.
This is probably your only sensible observation
Yes there are a large number of vaccinated Idiots who don't care about
others.
Tripple jabbed but I still wear a mask when out because if I dont how
can I expect it of others.
IME there are more unvaccinated idiots who don't care about others, this
probably being one of the reasons they're still unvaccinated.
if I get a tetanus shot do I worry about the unvaccinated giving me
tetanus?? If I get a flu shot do I worry about the unvaccinated giving meYou should, since flu vaccines are only about50-70 % effective
the flu??? I am vaccinated against polio..do I worry about the
unvaccinated giving me polio??? The answer is FUCK NO....What a bunch of blathering idiots...you can tell who the vaccinated ones are...their
brains are now mush....Hurry up vaccinated idiots...get on the booster train...you don't want to boe left behind....
brains are now mush....Hurry up vaccinated idiots...get on the booster
train...you don't want to boe left behind....
And you care why?
On 2021-10-30, killa-de-bug <killdbug@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
On Sat, 30 Oct 2021 16:57:59 +0100, Java Jive wrote:
On 30/10/2021 16:25, alister wrote:
On Wed, 27 Oct 2021 22:57:06 +0200, jak wrote:
You may also have noticed that vaccinated people are less careful
about other people around them. They act as if they can no longer
infect anyone and this is false.
This is probably your only sensible observation
Yes there are a large number of vaccinated Idiots who don't care
about others.
Tripple jabbed but I still wear a mask when out because if I dont
how
can I expect it of others.
IME there are more unvaccinated idiots who don't care about others,
this probably being one of the reasons they're still unvaccinated.
if I get a tetanus shot do I worry about the unvaccinated giving me
Noone gets tetnus from other people.
tetanus?? If I get a flu shot do I worry about the unvaccinated givingYou should, since flu vaccines are only about50-70 % effective Fortunatelytheir fatality rate is relatively low (except sometimes, like Spanish flu). Covid's is high, esp for older people
me
the flu??? I am vaccinated against polio..do I worry about the
The transmissability of polio is low. Ie the current level of
vaccination is high enough to prevent a pandemic. Talk to people in the
50's about the polio worries.
unvaccinated giving me polio??? The answer is FUCK NO....What a bunch
of blathering idiots...you can tell who the vaccinated ones are...their
brains are now mush....Hurry up vaccinated idiots...get on the booster
train...you don't want to boe left behind....
And you care why?
On 30/10/2021 19:32, Bubba the Corn Dog wrote:
Both these irrational idiotic posts are by the same nym-shifter.
On Sat, 30 Oct 2021 18:17:28 +0000, killa-de-bug wrote:
On Sat, 30 Oct 2021 16:57:59 +0100, Java Jive wrote:
IME there are more unvaccinated idiots who don't care about others,
this probably being one of the reasons they're still unvaccinated.
if I get a tetanus shot do I worry about the unvaccinated giving me
tetanus??
No, because it's not usually infectious by respiration.
If I get a flu shot do I worry about the unvaccinated giving
me the flu???
Possibly, because the yearly flu vaccines are designed from predictions
as to what are likely to be the most prevalent &/or deadly strains in
the following year, and these predictions aren't always correct.
However, covid-19 is many times more deadly than most flu strains,
certainly the recent ones and probably also the historical ones, though
there is a shortage of reliable data for the latter.
I am vaccinated against polio..do I worry about the
unvaccinated giving me polio???
No, because it's not usually infectious by respiration.
The answer is FUCK NO....What a bunch of
blathering idiots...you can tell who the vaccinated ones are...their
brains are now mush....Hurry up vaccinated idiots...get on the booster
train...you don't want to be left behind....
You're the one with a turd for a brain in this thread.
So if you still need a booster after being fully vaccinated, and
testing after being fully vaccinated, and hospitalization after being
fully vaccinated, and masks, social distancing & lock-downs all after
being fully vaccinated????
The vaccines are largely effective at preventing people getting severe covid-19 and needing hospitalisation or dying. Figures vary but within
the UK, if you catch covid-19 you are about 3x more likely to die if
you're not vaccinated than if you are (see graph entitled 'Unvaccinated
more likely to die with Covid'):
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51768274
However, *NO* vaccine is ever 100% effective, and covid-19 is still an emergent disease spouting frequent new variants, any one of which at any
time might turn out to be one that can circumvent the protection given
by one, more, or all of the current vaccines, and the more the disease
is allowed to fester on within any given population, the greater the
chance of that happening. It is in *NOBODY'S* interest to allow that to happen, those who are still not vaccinated owe to themselves, their
nearest and dearest, and those they meet in everyday life to get
themselves fully vaccinated at the earliest opportunity.
Then it's time to admit you have been FULLY conned......
You have certainly been conned, but fortunately you are far too stupid
to be able to con others.
I don't care you vaccinated dipshit....hurry up and get on the booster train.....
On Sat, 30 Oct 2021 20:16:38 +0100, Java Jive wrote:
The vaccines are largely effective at preventing people getting severe
covid-19 and needing hospitalisation or dying. Figures vary but within
the UK, if you catch covid-19 you are about 3x more likely to die if
you're not vaccinated than if you are (see graph entitled 'Unvaccinated
more likely to die with Covid'):
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51768274
However, *NO* vaccine is ever 100% effective, and covid-19 is still an
emergent disease spouting frequent new variants, any one of which at any
time might turn out to be one that can circumvent the protection given
by one, more, or all of the current vaccines, and the more the disease
is allowed to fester on within any given population, the greater the
chance of that happening. It is in *NOBODY'S* interest to allow that to
happen, those who are still not vaccinated owe to themselves, their
nearest and dearest, and those they meet in everyday life to get
themselves fully vaccinated at the earliest opportunity.
Then it's time to admit you have been FULLY conned......
You have certainly been conned, but fortunately you are far too stupid
to be able to con others.
So says a vaccinated dipshit.....hurry up and get on the booster train dipshit.....
On 31/10/2021 01:22, killa-de-bug wrote:
On Sat, 30 Oct 2021 20:16:38 +0100, Java Jive wrote:
The vaccines are largely effective at preventing people getting severe
covid-19 and needing hospitalisation or dying. Figures vary but
within the UK, if you catch covid-19 you are about 3x more likely to
die if you're not vaccinated than if you are (see graph entitled
'Unvaccinated more likely to die with Covid'):
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51768274
However, *NO* vaccine is ever 100% effective, and covid-19 is still an
emergent disease spouting frequent new variants, any one of which at
any time might turn out to be one that can circumvent the protection
given by one, more, or all of the current vaccines, and the more the
disease is allowed to fester on within any given population, the
greater the chance of that happening. It is in *NOBODY'S* interest to
allow that to happen, those who are still not vaccinated owe to
themselves, their nearest and dearest, and those they meet in everyday
life to get themselves fully vaccinated at the earliest opportunity.
Then it's time to admit you have been FULLY conned......
You have certainly been conned, but fortunately you are far too stupid
to be able to con others.
So says a vaccinated dipshit.....hurry up and get on the booster train
dipshit.....
Abuse instead of rational argument is the first resort of the hard-of-thinking.
On 31/10/2021 01:19, killa-de-bug wrote:
I don't care you vaccinated dipshit....hurry up and get on the booster
train.....
Abuse instead of rational argument is the first resort of the >hard-of-thinking.
On Sun, 31 Oct 2021 10:06:51 +0000, Java Jive wrote:
On 31/10/2021 01:19, killa-de-bug wrote:
I don't care you vaccinated dipshit....hurry up and get on the booster
train.....
Abuse instead of rational argument is the first resort of the
hard-of-thinking.
Breakthrough Infections, Deaths Among COVID-19 Vaccinated Rose in Recent Months: CDC
On Sun, 31 Oct 2021 10:06:51 +0000
Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
On 31/10/2021 01:19, killa-de-bug wrote:Please don't feed the trolls
I don't care you vaccinated dipshit....hurry up and get on the booster
train.....
Abuse instead of rational argument is the first resort of the
hard-of-thinking.
On Sun, 31 Oct 2021 10:05:23 +0000, Java Jive wrote:
On 31/10/2021 01:22, killa-de-bug wrote:
On Sat, 30 Oct 2021 20:16:38 +0100, Java Jive wrote:
You have certainly been conned, but fortunately you are far too stupid >>>> to be able to con others.
So says a vaccinated dipshit.....hurry up and get on the booster train
dipshit.....
Abuse instead of rational argument is the first resort of the
hard-of-thinking.
Breakthrough Infections, Deaths Among COVID-19 Vaccinated Rose in Recent Months: CDC
On 31/10/2021 12:35, Bubba the Corn Dog wrote:
On Sun, 31 Oct 2021 10:05:23 +0000, Java Jive wrote:
On 31/10/2021 01:22, killa-de-bug wrote:
On Sat, 30 Oct 2021 20:16:38 +0100, Java Jive wrote:
You have certainly been conned, but fortunately you are far too
stupid to be able to con others.
So says a vaccinated dipshit.....hurry up and get on the booster
train dipshit.....
Abuse instead of rational argument is the first resort of the
hard-of-thinking.
Breakthrough Infections, Deaths Among COVID-19 Vaccinated Rose in
Recent Months: CDC
Yes, we know that, and we know also that, as previously linked,
breakthrough infections in those who have been vaccinated are less
serious and less likely to lead to death than infections in those that
have not been vaccinated, so your attempted argument against vaccination
is completely vacuous and irrational.
People get themselves vaccinated for the same reason as, on a busy road
with lots of traffic, they walk down it on the pavement/sidewalk rather
on the carriageway amongst all the traffic, becasue it represents a NET REDUCTION IN PERSONAL RISK. It won't stop a badly-driven car mounting
the pavement and killing them there, but IT'S LESS LIKELY, and for the
same reason being vaccinated makes it LESS LIKELY that you will have a
severe infection and maybe DIE!
But by all means carry on refusing to get vaccinated, because if you die
you will render humanity's gene-pool a service by removing one of the stupider elements of it.
On 31/10/2021 12:35, Bubba the Corn Dog wrote:
On Sun, 31 Oct 2021 10:06:51 +0000, Java Jive wrote:
On 31/10/2021 01:19, killa-de-bug wrote:
I don't care you vaccinated dipshit....hurry up and get on the
booster train.....
Abuse instead of rational argument is the first resort of the
hard-of-thinking.
Breakthrough Infections, Deaths Among COVID-19 Vaccinated Rose in
Recent Months: CDC
See other reply, candidate for the Darwin Awards for removing the worst elements from humanity's gene-pool.
On Sun, 31 Oct 2021 13:22:59 +0000, Java Jive wrote:
On 31/10/2021 12:35, Bubba the Corn Dog wrote:
Breakthrough Infections, Deaths Among COVID-19 Vaccinated Rose in
Recent Months: CDC
Yes, we know that, and we know also that, as previously linked,
breakthrough infections in those who have been vaccinated are less
serious and less likely to lead to death than infections in those that
have not been vaccinated, so your attempted argument against vaccination
is completely vacuous and irrational.
People get themselves vaccinated for the same reason as, on a busy road
with lots of traffic, they walk down it on the pavement/sidewalk rather
on the carriageway amongst all the traffic, becasue it represents a NET
REDUCTION IN PERSONAL RISK. It won't stop a badly-driven car mounting
the pavement and killing them there, but IT'S LESS LIKELY, and for the
same reason being vaccinated makes it LESS LIKELY that you will have a
severe infection and maybe DIE!
But by all means carry on refusing to get vaccinated, because if you die
you will render humanity's gene-pool a service by removing one of the
stupider elements of it.
Be sure and get on the booster train dipshit....by doing so you are contributing to my retirement account.
Covid gonna get you...Covid
gonna get you.....watch how many vaccinated dipshits die this
winter....it is gonna be alot...Covid gonna get you....Covid gonna get you
On Sun, 31 Oct 2021 13:25:12 +0000, Java Jive wrote:
On 31/10/2021 12:35, Bubba the Corn Dog wrote:
On Sun, 31 Oct 2021 10:06:51 +0000, Java Jive wrote:
On 31/10/2021 01:19, killa-de-bug wrote:
I don't care you vaccinated dipshit....hurry up and get on the
booster train.....
Abuse instead of rational argument is the first resort of the
hard-of-thinking.
Breakthrough Infections, Deaths Among COVID-19 Vaccinated Rose in
Recent Months: CDC
See other reply, candidate for the Darwin Awards for removing the worst
elements from humanity's gene-pool.
Will see if you are alive next spring.....get on the booster train...Covid gonna get you....Covid gonna get you......
On 28/10/2021 08:19, jak wrote:
Thanks for the replies. Now I understand better why this pandemic lasts
so long. The Maya people were more fortunate in meeting the Hispanics.
in 700 years time what we ought to have done will become as clear to our descendants as what the 14th century people wearing plague masks ought
to have done. Namely spent less on the church and more on terriers.
On 31/10/2021 19:33, killa-de-bug wrote:
On Sun, 31 Oct 2021 13:22:59 +0000, Java Jive wrote:
On 31/10/2021 12:35, Bubba the Corn Dog wrote:
Breakthrough Infections, Deaths Among COVID-19 Vaccinated Rose in
Recent Months: CDC
Yes, we know that, and we know also that, as previously linked,
breakthrough infections in those who have been vaccinated are less
serious and less likely to lead to death than infections in those that
have not been vaccinated, so your attempted argument against
vaccination is completely vacuous and irrational.
People get themselves vaccinated for the same reason as, on a busy
road with lots of traffic, they walk down it on the pavement/sidewalk
rather on the carriageway amongst all the traffic, becasue it
represents a NET REDUCTION IN PERSONAL RISK. It won't stop a
badly-driven car mounting the pavement and killing them there, but
IT'S LESS LIKELY, and for the same reason being vaccinated makes it
LESS LIKELY that you will have a severe infection and maybe DIE!
But by all means carry on refusing to get vaccinated, because if you
die you will render humanity's gene-pool a service by removing one of
the stupider elements of it.
Be sure and get on the booster train dipshit....by doing so you are
contributing to my retirement account.
I very much doubt it, so how exactly do suppose that is happening?
Covid gonna get you...Covid gonna get you.....watch how many vaccinated
dipshits die this winter....it is gonna be alot...Covid gonna get
you....Covid gonna get you
You're obviously as bad at song-writing as you are at making a rational argument, or indeed writing worth reading. As someone once said and you
need to learn, it is better to keep your mouth shut and let everyone
think you're a fool, than to open it and remove all shadow of doubt.
On Mon, 25 Oct 2021 23:59:47 -0400
1p166 <z24ba6.net> wrote:
On 10/25/21 2:23 PM, Folderol wrote:Indeed!
What has *any* of this got to do with the subject?
Absolutely NONE so far as I can tell ... even
going back lots of generations of the thread.
I'm not sure there CAN be a war on general-purpose
computing ... it's where all the special-purpose
stuff is planned and written.
A war on power users maybe ... The Big Corporations
badly want a total return to thin clients and
servers so they can charge for every second. All
online, all metered, all data harvested, all
THEIRS.
And with more and more going online (looking at you webassembly) it's getting harder to keep some semblance of control and security :(
On 2021-10-28, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 28/10/2021 08:19, jak wrote:
Thanks for the replies. Now I understand better why this pandemic lasts
so long. The Maya people were more fortunate in meeting the Hispanics.
in 700 years time what we ought to have done will become as clear to our
descendants as what the 14th century people wearing plague masks ought
to have done. Namely spent less on the church and more on terriers.
The problem is not how do we live, but what do we live *for.* The former is solved by logistics, the latter by art, morality and religion.
A war on power users maybe ... The Big Corporations
badly want a total return to thin clients and
servers so they can charge for every second. All
online, all metered, all data harvested, all
THEIRS.
It's too important a matter to allow them to get away with lying and fake-news. Kill the subthread if you don't like it.
Art morality and religion don't tell us what we are living for.
Mostly our hormones do that. To fuck and make babies. That's all. The
rest is mere intellectual pretension.
This (USENET) is too small a forum for this argument, don't waste
your time on it here make your points in a more relevant place where more people are listening.
On Mon, 1 Nov 2021 04:30:16 +0000
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
Art morality and religion don't tell us what we are living for.
Mostly our hormones do that. To fuck and make babies. That's all. The
rest is mere intellectual pretension.
That's what our bodies are here for, what about our minds ?
I've done all the making babies I'm going to (barring the unlikely cooperation of a far younger woman - I'm not Mick Jagger - and even then raising them would be problematic) and they've grown up to the point of
being able to make their own babies.
So what am I living for ? The only person who knows the answer to
that is me[1] - but unless I am much mistaken you are in a very similar position so ask yourself what are you living for ?
I am always surprised when I wake up in the morning
On Mon, 1 Nov 2021 09:32:40 +0000
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
I am always surprised when I wake up in the morning
Might as well enjoy it then.
I am always surprised when I wake up in the morning
Figures vary but within the UK, if you catch covid-19 you are about 3x more >likely to die if you're not vaccinated than if you are
If you take the measles shot you won't get measles -- or give it to anyone else.
Of course this forms the entire premise of so-called "mandatory" vaccinations, all of which has always been a crock of shit and worthy of a piano dropped on the head of anyone arguing for it. The only reason it didn't happen over the decades is that those other shots were in fact safe (which these are not) and, once taken, you didn't get the disease.
But now we have an actual Government so-called expert, in this case Germany's, stating out loud that the vaccines are in fact worthless as a public health measure. They neither prevent you from getting the virus or transmitting it, making them nothing more than a very dangerous flu shot.
The flu shot usually doesn't prevent you from getting or spreading the flu either. Indeed in Canada nurses have won court cases against their
employers who argued for mandatory flu shots on exactly this basis. The
flu shot, which is pushed heavily by a lot of doctors and so-called "experts", has the virtue of being quite safe, however, that only about 20
or 25 people die associated with it and it has no record of causing
effects like myocarditis. Neither can be said for these jabs that are somewhere between 100 and 1,000 times as dangerous -- bad enough that for someone under the age of 30 who doesn't have a pre-existing
life-threatening condition the jab is more-dangerous than the virus
itself.
But what's worse is the continuing stream of data out of England which strongly suggests that not only do these jabs not stop you from getting
the virus they also have a very nasty tendency to prevent you from
building "N" antibodies if and when you do get infected after being
jabbed. That's very bad, because it is those antibodies that, we have
reason to believe, are in fact critical to prevent serious or fatal
outcomes.
In article <slk5n5$ln7$1@dont-email.me>,
Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
Figures vary but within the UK, if you catch covid-19 you are about 3x more >> likely to die if you're not vaccinated than if you are
In other words, your likelihood of dropping dead of the China virus
goes
from 3 in 1000 (already highly unlikely) to 1 in 1000 (slightly more unlikely). Meanwhile, we're learning more and more about the side effects
of the !vax, which can have significantly worse probabilities (and those get even worse as it's administered to younger and younger people).
Even all that is predicated on the !vax doing what the public's been led to believe it's intended to do, which is not at all clear:
https://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=244072
But what's worse is the continuing stream of data out of England which
strongly suggests that not only do these jabs not stop you from getting
the virus they also have a very nasty tendency to prevent you from
building "N" antibodies if and when you do get infected after being
jabbed. That's very bad, because it is those antibodies that, we have
reason to believe, are in fact critical to prevent serious or fatal
outcomes.
Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
This (USENET) is too small a forum for this argument, don't waste
your time on it here make your points in a more relevant place where more
people are listening.
Several times I've nearly made that argument, but not wanted to annoy
JJ. If he really wants to make a difference to spreading of fake news, facetwit would be much richer pickings compared to the stagnant
backwaters of usenet.
Forgive my lack of knowledge of the English language but it is precisely
on this point that our opinions differ: if, for example, you are
vaccinated and you touch the handle of an infected door then you will
touch another handle that I will also touch, I will get infected because
of you even if you are vaccinated. The difference is that you who are >vaccinated will not get sick while I, who am not, will. When I was
young, they gave me the measles vaccine and told me that by doing so I
would most likely not get measles. Instead now they tell me that I have
to vaccinate otherwise other people get sick? I am really confused
because it is not necessary to be sick to pass the infection.
On 28/10/2021 15:35, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
On Wed, 27 Oct 2021 19:49:05 +0100Well yes.
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
Even if they had, is your statement any more reasonable? A person who
is most at risk will likely die. The ones we want to vaccinate are the
ones who don't die, but wander around giving the virus to other people
and allowing it to live and mutate. Surely?
Yet when the vaccines did become available they went to those most >> at risk first, at least that's what happened here.
The effect of the vaccine is to reduce the severity and the viral load
on people who catch the thing.
So less ill, less likely to die, less likely to pass it on.
The first priority here was to stop people dying and reduce the hospital load. The medical staff I have talked to said it was touch and go at one
or two points.,
Subsequently the next priority was to reduce the spread, to protect
mostly those who refused to be vaccinated.
On Mon, 1 Nov 2021 21:22:44 +0100
jak <nospam@please.ty> wrote:
Forgive my lack of knowledge of the English language but it is preciselyYou misunderstand how the virus is transferred. There is a very low chance of infection by contact. There is a very *high* chance of infection by airborne droplets.
on this point that our opinions differ: if, for example, you are
vaccinated and you touch the handle of an infected door then you will
touch another handle that I will also touch, I will get infected because
of you even if you are vaccinated. The difference is that you who are >>vaccinated will not get sick while I, who am not, will. When I was
young, they gave me the measles vaccine and told me that by doing so I >>would most likely not get measles. Instead now they tell me that I have
to vaccinate otherwise other people get sick? I am really confused
because it is not necessary to be sick to pass the infection.
If someone who is vaccinated does get infected, they will not only have milder symptoms but will also produce very much less viral content on their breath than an unvaccinated person.
In article <slk5n5$ln7$1@dont-email.me>,
Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
Figures vary but within the UK, if you catch covid-19 you are about 3x more >>likely to die if you're not vaccinated than if you are
In other words, your likelihood of dropping dead of the China virus goes
from 3 in 1000 (already highly unlikely) to 1 in 1000 (slightly more
unlikely). Meanwhile, we're learning more and more about the side effects
of the !vax, which can have significantly worse probabilities (and those get even worse as it's administered to younger and younger people).
Even all that is predicated on the !vax doing what the public's been led to believe it's intended to do, which is not at all clear:
https://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=244072
If you take the measles shot you won't get measles -- or give it to anyone >> else.
Of course this forms the entire premise of so-called "mandatory"
vaccinations, all of which has always been a crock of shit and worthy of a >> piano dropped on the head of anyone arguing for it. The only reason it
didn't happen over the decades is that those other shots were in fact safe >> (which these are not) and, once taken, you didn't get the disease.
But now we have an actual Government so-called expert, in this case
Germany's, stating out loud that the vaccines are in fact worthless as a
public health measure. They neither prevent you from getting the virus or >> transmitting it, making them nothing more than a very dangerous flu shot.
The flu shot usually doesn't prevent you from getting or spreading the flu >> either. Indeed in Canada nurses have won court cases against their
employers who argued for mandatory flu shots on exactly this basis. The
flu shot, which is pushed heavily by a lot of doctors and so-called
"experts", has the virtue of being quite safe, however, that only about 20 >> or 25 people die associated with it and it has no record of causing
effects like myocarditis. Neither can be said for these jabs that are
somewhere between 100 and 1,000 times as dangerous -- bad enough that for
someone under the age of 30 who doesn't have a pre-existing
life-threatening condition the jab is more-dangerous than the virus
itself.
But what's worse is the continuing stream of data out of England which
strongly suggests that not only do these jabs not stop you from getting
the virus they also have a very nasty tendency to prevent you from
building "N" antibodies if and when you do get infected after being
jabbed. That's very bad, because it is those antibodies that, we have
reason to believe, are in fact critical to prevent serious or fatal
outcomes.
_/_
/ v \ Scott Alfter (remove the obvious to send mail)
(IIGS( https://alfter.us/ Top-posting!
\_^_/ >What's the most annoying thing on Usenet?
Il 28/10/2021 21:10, The Natural Philosopher ha scritto:
On 28/10/2021 15:35, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
On Wed, 27 Oct 2021 19:49:05 +0100Well yes.
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
Even if they had, is your statement any more reasonable? A person who >>>> is most at risk will likely die. The ones we want to vaccinate are the >>>> ones who don't die, but wander around giving the virus to other people >>>> and allowing it to live and mutate. Surely?
Yet when the vaccines did become available they went to those most >>> at risk first, at least that's what happened here.
The effect of the vaccine is to reduce the severity and the viral load
on people who catch the thing.
So less ill, less likely to die, less likely to pass it on.
The first priority here was to stop people dying and reduce the hospital
load. The medical staff I have talked to said it was touch and go at one
or two points.,
Subsequently the next priority was to reduce the spread, to protect
mostly those who refused to be vaccinated.
Forgive my lack of knowledge of the English language but it is precisely
on this point that our opinions differ: if, for example, you are
vaccinated and you touch the handle of an infected door then you will
touch another handle that I will also touch, I will get infected because
of you even if you are vaccinated. The difference is that you who are
vaccinated will not get sick while I, who am not, will. When I was
young, they gave me the measles vaccine and told me that by doing so I
would most likely not get measles. Instead now they tell me that I have
to vaccinate otherwise other people get sick? I am really confused
because it is not necessary to be sick to pass the infection.
On 2021-11-01, Scott Alfter <scott@alfter.diespammersdie.us> wrote:
In article <slk5n5$ln7$1@dont-email.me>,
Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
Figures vary but within the UK, if you catch covid-19 you are about 3x more >>> likely to die if you're not vaccinated than if you are
In other words, your likelihood of dropping dead of the China virus goes
from 3 in 1000 (already highly unlikely) to 1 in 1000 (slightly more
Actually no, there is something very wrong with those figures. British Columbia recently released the number of cases broken down into
vaccinated and non-vaccinated. The chance of your getting the disease
was 40 times greater if you were unvaccinated than if you were
vaccinate, and your chance of dying was 80 times higher. You have to be really really careful with those figures. Since the number vaccinated in
the UK is 5 times higher than those unvaccinated, you have to take that
into account.
unlikely). Meanwhile, we're learning more and more about the side effects >> of the !vax, which can have significantly worse probabilities (and those get >> even worse as it's administered to younger and younger people).
Yes, what side effects are you refering to?
Even all that is predicated on the !vax doing what the public's been led to >> believe it's intended to do, which is not at all clear:
https://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=244072
Thanks for posting the link. It makes it absolutely clear that the
person writing it has not the first clue about anything. It is like
asking a flat earther about how to get a spacecraft from one planet to
the next.
At one time, I don't know if it's still true, it
was rumoured that the Flat Earth Society's website claimed that it had members 'all around the globe', or some such phrase.
Forgive my lack of knowledge of the English language but it is precisely
on this point that our opinions differ: if, for example, you are
vaccinated and you touch the handle of an infected door then you will
touch another handle that I will also touch, I will get infected because
of you even if you are vaccinated.
The difference is that you who are
vaccinated will not get sick while I, who am not, will. When I was
young, they gave me the measles vaccine and told me that by doing so I
would most likely not get measles. Instead now they tell me that I have
to vaccinate otherwise other people get sick? I am really confused
because it is not necessary to be sick to pass the infection.
On 01/11/2021 20:22, jak wrote:
Forgive my lack of knowledge of the English language but it is precisely
on this point that our opinions differ: if, for example, you are
vaccinated and you touch the handle of an infected door then you will
touch another handle that I will also touch, I will get infected because
of you even if you are vaccinated.
Exactly.
The difference is that you who are
vaccinated will not get sick while I, who am not, will. When I was
young, they gave me the measles vaccine and told me that by doing so I
would most likely not get measles. Instead now they tell me that I have
to vaccinate otherwise other people get sick? I am really confused
because it is not necessary to be sick to pass the infection.
Exactly. BUT it reduces the spread. the virus on your vaccinated hands
will not multiply in your lungs and get coughed out into someone
unvaccinated persons face to cause them to wither and die.
Vaccination reduces the overall world virus load.
As well as 'protecting vulnerable people'
The whole anti-vax thing is simply another manifestation of the
ArtStudent™ mind that can only think in Boolean terms = protect/does
not protect, prevents infection/does not prevent infection.
It's a numbers game. Vaccination lowers infection rate, transmission
rate hospitalisation rate and death rate.
which certainly indicates that the side effects are less worse than the disease.
It does however, *guarantee* nothing,
Il 02/11/2021 09:26, The Natural Philosopher ha scritto:
On 01/11/2021 20:22, jak wrote:
Forgive my lack of knowledge of the English language but it is precisely >>> on this point that our opinions differ: if, for example, you are
vaccinated and you touch the handle of an infected door then you will
touch another handle that I will also touch, I will get infected because >>> of you even if you are vaccinated.
Exactly.
The difference is that you who are
vaccinated will not get sick while I, who am not, will. When I was
young, they gave me the measles vaccine and told me that by doing so I
would most likely not get measles. Instead now they tell me that I have
to vaccinate otherwise other people get sick? I am really confused
because it is not necessary to be sick to pass the infection.
Exactly. BUT it reduces the spread. the virus on your vaccinated hands
will not multiply in your lungs and get coughed out into someone
unvaccinated persons face to cause them to wither and die.
Vaccination reduces the overall world virus load.
As well as 'protecting vulnerable people'
The whole anti-vax thing is simply another manifestation of the
ArtStudent™ mind that can only think in Boolean terms = protect/does
not protect, prevents infection/does not prevent infection.
It's a numbers game. Vaccination lowers infection rate, transmission
rate hospitalisation rate and death rate.
which certainly indicates that the side effects are less worse than
the disease.
It does however, *guarantee* nothing,
First of all I thank everyone (in this branch) for your answers and now
I understand the reason for your reasoning. Here where I live (Italy)
the media have said and reiterated that this was not an airborne virus,
for this reason I have a different way of looking at the related
problems. In any case, public administrations are very concerned with
the people who want to vaccinate and what they don't, but they forget to manage what they can't.
Il 02/11/2021 09:26, The Natural Philosopher ha scritto:
On 01/11/2021 20:22, jak wrote:
Forgive my lack of knowledge of the English language but it is precisely >>> on this point that our opinions differ: if, for example, you are
vaccinated and you touch the handle of an infected door then you will
touch another handle that I will also touch, I will get infected because >>> of you even if you are vaccinated.
Exactly.
The difference is that you who are
vaccinated will not get sick while I, who am not, will. When I was
young, they gave me the measles vaccine and told me that by doing so I
would most likely not get measles. Instead now they tell me that I have
to vaccinate otherwise other people get sick? I am really confused
because it is not necessary to be sick to pass the infection.
Exactly. BUT it reduces the spread. the virus on your vaccinated hands
will not multiply in your lungs and get coughed out into someone
unvaccinated persons face to cause them to wither and die.
Vaccination reduces the overall world virus load.
As well as 'protecting vulnerable people'
The whole anti-vax thing is simply another manifestation of the
ArtStudent™ mind that can only think in Boolean terms = protect/does
not protect, prevents infection/does not prevent infection.
It's a numbers game. Vaccination lowers infection rate, transmission
rate hospitalisation rate and death rate.
which certainly indicates that the side effects are less worse than
the disease.
It does however, *guarantee* nothing,
First of all I thank everyone (in this branch) for your answers and now
I understand the reason for your reasoning. Here where I live (Italy)
the media have said and reiterated that this was not an airborne virus,
for this reason I have a different way of looking at the related
problems. In any case, public administrations are very concerned with
the people who want to vaccinate and what they don't, but they forget to manage what they can't.
On 02/11/2021 14:31, jak wrote:
Il 02/11/2021 09:26, The Natural Philosopher ha scritto:
On 01/11/2021 20:22, jak wrote:
Forgive my lack of knowledge of the English language but it is
precisely
on this point that our opinions differ: if, for example, you are
vaccinated and you touch the handle of an infected door then you will
touch another handle that I will also touch, I will get infected
because
of you even if you are vaccinated.
Exactly.
The difference is that you who are
vaccinated will not get sick while I, who am not, will. When I was
young, they gave me the measles vaccine and told me that by doing so I >>>> would most likely not get measles. Instead now they tell me that I have >>>> to vaccinate otherwise other people get sick? I am really confused
because it is not necessary to be sick to pass the infection.
Exactly. BUT it reduces the spread. the virus on your vaccinated
hands will not multiply in your lungs and get coughed out into
someone unvaccinated persons face to cause them to wither and die.
Vaccination reduces the overall world virus load.
As well as 'protecting vulnerable people'
The whole anti-vax thing is simply another manifestation of the
ArtStudent™ mind that can only think in Boolean terms = protect/does >>> not protect, prevents infection/does not prevent infection.
It's a numbers game. Vaccination lowers infection rate, transmission
rate hospitalisation rate and death rate.
which certainly indicates that the side effects are less worse than
the disease.
It does however, *guarantee* nothing,
First of all I thank everyone (in this branch) for your answers and now
I understand the reason for your reasoning. Here where I live (Italy)
the media have said and reiterated that this was not an airborne virus,
Then they are probably guilty of fake news.
Wiki:
"COVID-19 transmits when people breathe in air contaminated by droplets
and small airborne particles containing the virus. The risk of breathing these in is highest when people are in close proximity, but they can be inhaled over longer distances, particularly indoors. Transmission can
also occur if splashed or sprayed with contaminated fluids in the eyes,
nose or mouth, and, rarely, via contaminated surfaces. People remain contagious for up to 20 days, and can spread the virus even if they do
not develop symptoms"
for this reason I have a different way of looking at the related
problems. In any case, public administrations are very concerned with
the people who want to vaccinate and what they don't, but they forget to
manage what they can't.
I think something got lost in translation there.???
Il 02/11/2021 15:39, The Natural Philosopher ha scritto:
On 02/11/2021 14:31, jak wrote:
Il 02/11/2021 09:26, The Natural Philosopher ha scritto:
On 01/11/2021 20:22, jak wrote:
Forgive my lack of knowledge of the English language but it is
precisely
on this point that our opinions differ: if, for example, you are
vaccinated and you touch the handle of an infected door then you will >>>>> touch another handle that I will also touch, I will get infected
because
of you even if you are vaccinated.
Exactly.
The difference is that you who are
vaccinated will not get sick while I, who am not, will. When I was
young, they gave me the measles vaccine and told me that by doing so I >>>>> would most likely not get measles. Instead now they tell me that I
have
to vaccinate otherwise other people get sick? I am really confused
because it is not necessary to be sick to pass the infection.
Exactly. BUT it reduces the spread. the virus on your vaccinated
hands will not multiply in your lungs and get coughed out into
someone unvaccinated persons face to cause them to wither and die.
Vaccination reduces the overall world virus load.
As well as 'protecting vulnerable people'
The whole anti-vax thing is simply another manifestation of the
ArtStudent™ mind that can only think in Boolean terms =
protect/does not protect, prevents infection/does not prevent
infection.
It's a numbers game. Vaccination lowers infection rate, transmission
rate hospitalisation rate and death rate.
which certainly indicates that the side effects are less worse than
the disease.
It does however, *guarantee* nothing,
First of all I thank everyone (in this branch) for your answers and now
I understand the reason for your reasoning. Here where I live (Italy)
the media have said and reiterated that this was not an airborne virus,
Then they are probably guilty of fake news.
Wiki:
"COVID-19 transmits when people breathe in air contaminated by
droplets and small airborne particles containing the virus. The risk
of breathing these in is highest when people are in close proximity,
but they can be inhaled over longer distances, particularly indoors.
Transmission can also occur if splashed or sprayed with contaminated
fluids in the eyes, nose or mouth, and, rarely, via contaminated
surfaces. People remain contagious for up to 20 days, and can spread
the virus even if they do not develop symptoms"
for this reason I have a different way of looking at the related
problems. In any case, public administrations are very concerned with
the people who want to vaccinate and what they don't, but they forget to >>> manage what they can't.
I think something got lost in translation there.???
...you are probably right :)
Following the media, they talk a lot about the vaccinated and also a lot about those who refuse the vaccine. Unfortunately, they speak very
little about how to behave those who cannot be vaccinated. This problem
is very serious here because the green-pass has also become essential to
go to work (in all europe, just here)
Il 02/11/2021 09:26, The Natural Philosopher ha scritto:
On 01/11/2021 20:22, jak wrote:
Forgive my lack of knowledge of the English language but it is precisely >>> on this point that our opinions differ: if, for example, you are
vaccinated and you touch the handle of an infected door then you will
touch another handle that I will also touch, I will get infected because >>> of you even if you are vaccinated.
Exactly.
The difference is that you who are
vaccinated will not get sick while I, who am not, will. When I was
young, they gave me the measles vaccine and told me that by doing so I
would most likely not get measles. Instead now they tell me that I have
to vaccinate otherwise other people get sick? I am really confused
because it is not necessary to be sick to pass the infection.
Exactly. BUT it reduces the spread. the virus on your vaccinated hands
will not multiply in your lungs and get coughed out into someone
unvaccinated persons face to cause them to wither and die.
Vaccination reduces the overall world virus load.
As well as 'protecting vulnerable people'
The whole anti-vax thing is simply another manifestation of the
ArtStudent™ mind that can only think in Boolean terms = protect/does
not protect, prevents infection/does not prevent infection.
It's a numbers game. Vaccination lowers infection rate, transmission
rate hospitalisation rate and death rate.
which certainly indicates that the side effects are less worse than the
disease.
It does however, *guarantee* nothing,
First of all I thank everyone (in this branch) for your answers and now
I understand the reason for your reasoning. Here where I live (Italy)
the media have said and reiterated that this was not an airborne virus,
for this reason I have a different way of looking at the related
problems. In any case, public administrations are very concerned with
the people who want to vaccinate and what they don't, but they forget to manage what they can't.
Il 02/11/2021 15:39, The Natural Philosopher ha scritto:
On 02/11/2021 14:31, jak wrote:
Il 02/11/2021 09:26, The Natural Philosopher ha scritto:
On 01/11/2021 20:22, jak wrote:
Forgive my lack of knowledge of the English language but it is
precisely
on this point that our opinions differ: if, for example, you are
vaccinated and you touch the handle of an infected door then you will >>>>> touch another handle that I will also touch, I will get infected
because
of you even if you are vaccinated.
Exactly.
The difference is that you who are
vaccinated will not get sick while I, who am not, will. When I was
young, they gave me the measles vaccine and told me that by doing so I >>>>> would most likely not get measles. Instead now they tell me that I have >>>>> to vaccinate otherwise other people get sick? I am really confused
because it is not necessary to be sick to pass the infection.
Exactly. BUT it reduces the spread. the virus on your vaccinated
hands will not multiply in your lungs and get coughed out into
someone unvaccinated persons face to cause them to wither and die.
Vaccination reduces the overall world virus load.
As well as 'protecting vulnerable people'
The whole anti-vax thing is simply another manifestation of the
ArtStudent™ mind that can only think in Boolean terms = protect/does >>>> not protect, prevents infection/does not prevent infection.
It's a numbers game. Vaccination lowers infection rate, transmission
rate hospitalisation rate and death rate.
which certainly indicates that the side effects are less worse than
the disease.
It does however, *guarantee* nothing,
First of all I thank everyone (in this branch) for your answers and now
I understand the reason for your reasoning. Here where I live (Italy)
the media have said and reiterated that this was not an airborne virus,
Then they are probably guilty of fake news.
Wiki:
"COVID-19 transmits when people breathe in air contaminated by droplets
and small airborne particles containing the virus. The risk of breathing
these in is highest when people are in close proximity, but they can be
inhaled over longer distances, particularly indoors. Transmission can
also occur if splashed or sprayed with contaminated fluids in the eyes,
nose or mouth, and, rarely, via contaminated surfaces. People remain
contagious for up to 20 days, and can spread the virus even if they do
not develop symptoms"
for this reason I have a different way of looking at the related
problems. In any case, public administrations are very concerned with
the people who want to vaccinate and what they don't, but they forget to >>> manage what they can't.
I think something got lost in translation there.???
...you are probably right :)
Following the media, they talk a lot about the vaccinated and also a lot about those who refuse the vaccine. Unfortunately, they speak very
little about how to behave those who cannot be vaccinated. This problem
is very serious here because the green-pass has also become essential to
go to work (in all europe, just here)
On 2021-11-02, jak <nospam@please.ty> wrote:
Il 02/11/2021 09:26, The Natural Philosopher ha scritto:
On 01/11/2021 20:22, jak wrote:
Forgive my lack of knowledge of the English language but it is precisely >>>> on this point that our opinions differ: if, for example, you are
vaccinated and you touch the handle of an infected door then you will
touch another handle that I will also touch, I will get infected because >>>> of you even if you are vaccinated.
Exactly.
The difference is that you who are
vaccinated will not get sick while I, who am not, will. When I was
young, they gave me the measles vaccine and told me that by doing so I >>>> would most likely not get measles. Instead now they tell me that I have >>>> to vaccinate otherwise other people get sick? I am really confused
because it is not necessary to be sick to pass the infection.
Exactly. BUT it reduces the spread. the virus on your vaccinated hands
will not multiply in your lungs and get coughed out into someone
unvaccinated persons face to cause them to wither and die.
Vaccination reduces the overall world virus load.
As well as 'protecting vulnerable people'
The whole anti-vax thing is simply another manifestation of the
ArtStudent™ mind that can only think in Boolean terms = protect/does >>> not protect, prevents infection/does not prevent infection.
It's a numbers game. Vaccination lowers infection rate, transmission
rate hospitalisation rate and death rate.
which certainly indicates that the side effects are less worse than the
disease.
It does however, *guarantee* nothing,
First of all I thank everyone (in this branch) for your answers and now
I understand the reason for your reasoning. Here where I live (Italy)
the media have said and reiterated that this was not an airborne virus,
And they are wrong. The original theory was that they were transmitted
either by contact (the doorknob theory) or by big dropplets in the air. HOwever by March 2020 it was clear that was wrong. One of the most
persuasive bits of evidence was the WAshington Choir mass infection.
There was an choir practice in Washington state, near SEattle. One
person walked in with covid. 60 people of a choir of 80 walked out with
with covid. There is simply no way that either the dropplet theory nor
the "doorknow" theory could account for this. The only reasonable
hypothesis is the aerosol theory-- the virus being spread by tiny
"droplets" ( although they rapidly dried out into dust specs) of size
less than 10 microns (1/100 of a millimeter, or 1/2500 of an inch) which remain in the air for days. (In Italy, the forest fires in Greece this
year brought smog into the air in Italy, which had to have travelled for
a few days, staying in the air. The size of those smoke particles is
less than 10 microns.) There were a large number of other incidents
which demonstrated that it was these aerosols which was the primary
vector for transmission.
You get rid of them by replacing the air the with clean air about every
10 min of so-- either by bringing in outside air, or by filtering the
air with efficient filters (say Merv 13 or 14 or Hepa). Thus inside
with bad filtration and with a covid carrier is THE most dangerous place to be unless
the room has good filtration.
All fo the above has been completely clear for over a year and a half to anyone who has looked at the data.
for this reason I have a different way of looking at the related
problems. In any case, public administrations are very concerned with
the people who want to vaccinate and what they don't, but they forget to
manage what they can't.
Certainly vaccination is a great idea and is essential to breaking the
back of the pandemic. But so is good indoor air filtration, which tends
not to be emphasised anywhere in the world. Masks could be if only the
masks people wore were worth a damn. Cloth masks are not, surgical masks which are not properlly fitted are not. Masks worn so the nose is
outside the mask are not worth anything. Even most surgical mask have attrocious nose seals ( the wire is not stiff enough to shape tightly
around the nose, and the elastics not tight enough to properlyseal
around the sides and bottom of the mask.) A mask with allows most of the
air to come in around the sides and around the nose is pretty useless
for filtering out the aerosols (100 microns or less).
On 2021-11-02, jak <nospam@please.ty> wrote:
Il 02/11/2021 15:39, The Natural Philosopher ha scritto:
On 02/11/2021 14:31, jak wrote:
Il 02/11/2021 09:26, The Natural Philosopher ha scritto:Then they are probably guilty of fake news.
On 01/11/2021 20:22, jak wrote:
Forgive my lack of knowledge of the English language but it is
precisely
on this point that our opinions differ: if, for example, you are
vaccinated and you touch the handle of an infected door then you will >>>>>> touch another handle that I will also touch, I will get infected
because
of you even if you are vaccinated.
Exactly.
The difference is that you who are
vaccinated will not get sick while I, who am not, will. When I was >>>>>> young, they gave me the measles vaccine and told me that by doing so I >>>>>> would most likely not get measles. Instead now they tell me that I have >>>>>> to vaccinate otherwise other people get sick? I am really confused >>>>>> because it is not necessary to be sick to pass the infection.
Exactly. BUT it reduces the spread. the virus on your vaccinated
hands will not multiply in your lungs and get coughed out into
someone unvaccinated persons face to cause them to wither and die.
Vaccination reduces the overall world virus load.
As well as 'protecting vulnerable people'
The whole anti-vax thing is simply another manifestation of the
ArtStudent™ mind that can only think in Boolean terms = protect/does >>>>> not protect, prevents infection/does not prevent infection.
It's a numbers game. Vaccination lowers infection rate, transmission >>>>> rate hospitalisation rate and death rate.
which certainly indicates that the side effects are less worse than
the disease.
It does however, *guarantee* nothing,
First of all I thank everyone (in this branch) for your answers and now >>>> I understand the reason for your reasoning. Here where I live (Italy)
the media have said and reiterated that this was not an airborne virus, >>>
Wiki:
"COVID-19 transmits when people breathe in air contaminated by droplets
and small airborne particles containing the virus. The risk of breathing >>> these in is highest when people are in close proximity, but they can be
inhaled over longer distances, particularly indoors. Transmission can
also occur if splashed or sprayed with contaminated fluids in the eyes,
nose or mouth, and, rarely, via contaminated surfaces. People remain
contagious for up to 20 days, and can spread the virus even if they do
not develop symptoms"
for this reason I have a different way of looking at the related
problems. In any case, public administrations are very concerned with
the people who want to vaccinate and what they don't, but they forget to >>>> manage what they can't.
I think something got lost in translation there.???
...you are probably right :)
Following the media, they talk a lot about the vaccinated and also a lot
about those who refuse the vaccine. Unfortunately, they speak very
little about how to behave those who cannot be vaccinated. This problem
The problem is that those who "cannot" be vaccinated are a miniscule
part of the population. What makes it so they cannot be vaccinated? A
severe alergic reaction to some of the ingredents might be, but that is
very rare. If everyone but them were vaccinated, one would have no
worries. The virus would die out.
The problem is that those who "cannot" be vaccinated are a miniscule
part of the population. What makes it so they cannot be vaccinated? A
severe alergic reaction to some of the ingredents might be, but that is
very rare. If everyone but them were vaccinated, one would have no
worries. The virus would die out.
is very serious here because the green-pass has also become essential to
go to work (in all europe, just here)
On 02/11/2021 15:47, William Unruh wrote:
The problem is that those who "cannot" be vaccinated are a miniscule
part of the population. What makes it so they cannot be vaccinated? A
severe alergic reaction to some of the ingredents might be, but that is
very rare. If everyone but them were vaccinated, one would have no
worries. The virus would die out.
Polio yes, Sars-Cov-2 not so much. AIUI, the vaccines are not effective enough at stopping transmission to eliminate the disease.
People should primarily take the vaccine to protect themselves. Only a
few people who mix with the vulnerable should take the vaccine to
protect others.
is very serious here because the green-pass has also become essential to >>> go to work (in all europe, just here)
The UK is no longer in Europe?
The UK is no longer in Europe?
On Wed, 3 Nov 2021 07:27:04 +0000
Pancho <Pancho.Dontmaileme@outlook.com> wrote:
The UK is no longer in Europe?
Correct. They took a referendum, voted to leave the EU, did so and
went through a protracted (more than two years!) leaving negotiation
process that ended up with essentially "no deal" and, since the start of
this year, are no longer in the EU, leaving a messy issue around the Eire/Northern Ireland border.
Did you really miss all that happening ? Did you not encounter the
term Brexit ?
On 03/11/2021 07:58, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
On Wed, 3 Nov 2021 07:27:04 +0000Do you really think that the EU - a small corrupt bureaucracy founded by
Pancho <Pancho.Dontmaileme@outlook.com> wrote:
The UK is no longer in Europe?
Correct. They took a referendum, voted to leave the EU, did so and
went through a protracted (more than two years!) leaving negotiation
process that ended up with essentially "no deal" and, since the start of
this year, are no longer in the EU, leaving a messy issue around the
Eire/Northern Ireland border.
Did you really miss all that happening ? Did you not encounter the
term Brexit ?
an Italian communist that gathers and redistributes taxes, and attempts
to be a self appointed undemocratic lawmaker for 27 countries whose politicians were bribed or blackmailed into entering it - represents Europe?
On 03/11/2021 07:58, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
On Wed, 3 Nov 2021 07:27:04 +0000
Pancho <Pancho.Dontmaileme@outlook.com> wrote:
The UK is no longer in Europe?
Correct. They took a referendum, voted to leave the EU, did so
and went through a protracted (more than two years!) leaving negotiation process that ended up with essentially "no deal" and, since the start of this year, are no longer in the EU, leaving a messy issue around the Eire/Northern Ireland border.
Did you really miss all that happening ? Did you not encounter
the term Brexit ?
Do you really think that the EU - <snip> - represents Europe?
On Wed, 3 Nov 2021 08:30:27 +0000
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 03/11/2021 07:58, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
On Wed, 3 Nov 2021 07:27:04 +0000Do you really think that the EU - <snip> - represents Europe?
Pancho <Pancho.Dontmaileme@outlook.com> wrote:
The UK is no longer in Europe?
Correct. They took a referendum, voted to leave the EU, did so
and went through a protracted (more than two years!) leaving negotiation >>> process that ended up with essentially "no deal" and, since the start of >>> this year, are no longer in the EU, leaving a messy issue around the
Eire/Northern Ireland border.
Did you really miss all that happening ? Did you not encounter
the term Brexit ?
Well when the question is whether the UK (a political entity) is or
is not inside Europe then the context is political
and that points to the EU as the only all Europe political entity.
So yes in this context I do indeed think that the EU is what is meant by Europe because there's nothing else it could be in context.
On 03/11/2021 07:58, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
On Wed, 3 Nov 2021 07:27:04 +0000Do you really think that the EU - a small corrupt bureaucracy founded by
Pancho <Pancho.Dontmaileme@outlook.com> wrote:
The UK is no longer in Europe?
Correct. They took a referendum, voted to leave the EU, did so and >> went through a protracted (more than two years!) leaving negotiation
process that ended up with essentially "no deal" and, since the start of
this year, are no longer in the EU, leaving a messy issue around the
Eire/Northern Ireland border.
Did you really miss all that happening ? Did you not encounter the >> term Brexit ?
an Italian communist that gathers and redistributes taxes, and attempts
to be a self appointed undemocratic lawmaker for 27 countries whose politicians were bribed or blackmailed into entering it - represents
Europe?
On 03 Nov 2021 at 08:30:27 GMT, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 03/11/2021 07:58, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
On Wed, 3 Nov 2021 07:27:04 +0000
Pancho <Pancho.Dontmaileme@outlook.com> wrote:
The UK is no longer in Europe?
Correct. They took a referendum, voted to leave the EU, did so and
went through a protracted (more than two years!) leaving negotiation
process that ended up with essentially "no deal" and, since the start of >>> this year, are no longer in the EU, leaving a messy issue around the
Eire/Northern Ireland border.
Did you really miss all that happening ? Did you not encounter the
term Brexit ?
Do you really think that the EU - a small corrupt bureaucracy founded by
an Italian communist that gathers and redistributes taxes, and attempts
to be a self appointed undemocratic lawmaker for 27 countries whose
politicians were bribed or blackmailed into entering it - represents Europe?
The EU likes to paint itself as Europe. But it isn't.
On 03/11/2021 09:30, TimS wrote:
The EU likes to paint itself as Europe. But it isn't.
But does represent the greater part of it.
On 03 Nov 2021 at 12:50:26 GMT, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
On 03/11/2021 09:30, TimS wrote:
The EU likes to paint itself as Europe. But it isn't.
But does represent the greater part of it.
The EU represents nothing and no-one but itself. The EU would like to abolish referendums about EU membership. That would allow its unelected Commission (the only entity which can initiate EU lawmaking) with its equally unelected president to rule without interference. The current EU president "emerged" in the same way that Xi did in China.
The EU is a good thing if you're a bureaucrat who needs a fresh trough into which to put a snout.
On 03/11/2021 13:30, TimS wrote:
On 03 Nov 2021 at 12:50:26 GMT, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
On 03/11/2021 09:30, TimS wrote:
The EU likes to paint itself as Europe. But it isn't.
But does represent the greater part of it.
The EU represents nothing and no-one but itself. The EU would like to abolish
referendums about EU membership.
That would allow its unelected Commission
(the only entity which can initiate EU lawmaking) with its equally unelected >> president to rule without interference. The current EU president "emerged" in
the same way that Xi did in China.
The EU is a good thing if you're a bureaucrat who needs a fresh trough into >> which to put a snout.
Where is your *EVIDENCE* for all these crazed allegations? Until you
can provide it, we'll assume it's just the usual Brexshit lies and crap.
On 03 Nov 2021 at 10:35:59 GMT, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
Well when the question is whether the UK (a political entity) is or
is not inside Europe then the context is political
Wrong as Europe is a geographical, not a political, entity.
On 03/11/2021 09:30, TimS wrote:
On 03 Nov 2021 at 08:30:27 GMT, The Natural Philosopher
<tnp@invalid.invalid>
wrote:
On 03/11/2021 07:58, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
On Wed, 3 Nov 2021 07:27:04 +0000
Pancho <Pancho.Dontmaileme@outlook.com> wrote:
The UK is no longer in Europe?
Correct. They took a referendum, voted to leave the EU, did so and
went through a protracted (more than two years!) leaving negotiation
process that ended up with essentially "no deal" and, since the
start of
this year, are no longer in the EU, leaving a messy issue around the
Eire/Northern Ireland border.
Did you really miss all that happening ? Did you not encounter the
term Brexit ?
But we're still in Europe, just not, more fool us, the EU.
Do you really think that the EU - a small corrupt bureaucracy founded by >>> an Italian communist that gathers and redistributes taxes, and attempts
to be a self appointed undemocratic lawmaker for 27 countries whose
politicians were bribed or blackmailed into entering it - represents
Europe?
Still lying about the EU, I see.
The EU likes to paint itself as Europe. But it isn't.
But does represent the greater part of it.
On 3 Nov 2021 12:12:40 GMT
TimS <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
On 03 Nov 2021 at 10:35:59 GMT, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net>
wrote:
Well when the question is whether the UK (a political entity) is or >>> is not inside Europe then the context is political
Wrong as Europe is a geographical, not a political, entity.
The UK is a political entity, as the first entity mentioned it sets
the context.
On 03 Nov 2021 at 12:50:26 GMT, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
On 03/11/2021 09:30, TimS wrote:
The EU likes to paint itself as Europe. But it isn't.
But does represent the greater part of it.
The EU represents nothing and no-one but itself. The EU would like to abolish referendums about EU membership. That would allow its unelected Commission (the only entity which can initiate EU lawmaking) with its equally unelected president to rule without interference. The current EU president "emerged" in the same way that Xi did in China.
The EU is a good thing if you're a bureaucrat who needs a fresh trough into which to put a snout.
On 03/11/2021 13:30, TimS wrote:
On 03 Nov 2021 at 12:50:26 GMT, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
On 03/11/2021 09:30, TimS wrote:
The EU likes to paint itself as Europe. But it isn't.
But does represent the greater part of it.
The EU represents nothing and no-one but itself. The EU would like to
abolish
referendums about EU membership. That would allow its unelected
Commission
(the only entity which can initiate EU lawmaking) with its equally
unelected
president to rule without interference. The current EU president
"emerged" in
the same way that Xi did in China.
The EU is a good thing if you're a bureaucrat who needs a fresh trough
into
which to put a snout.
Where is your *EVIDENCE* for all these crazed allegations? Until you
can provide it, we'll assume it's just the usual Brexshit lies and crap.
On 03 Nov 2021 at 14:07:04 GMT, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
On 03/11/2021 13:30, TimS wrote:
On 03 Nov 2021 at 12:50:26 GMT, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote: >>>
On 03/11/2021 09:30, TimS wrote:
The EU likes to paint itself as Europe. But it isn't.
But does represent the greater part of it.
The EU represents nothing and no-one but itself. The EU would like to abolish
referendums about EU membership.
This has been mooted by EU bigwigs.
That would allow its unelected Commission
(the only entity which can initiate EU lawmaking) with its equally unelected
president to rule without interference. The current EU president "emerged" in
the same way that Xi did in China.
You trying to tell me the Commission members and President *are* elected? Funny, I must have missed those elections.
The EU is a good thing if you're a bureaucrat who needs a fresh trough into >>> which to put a snout.
Where is your *EVIDENCE* for all these crazed allegations? Until you
can provide it, we'll assume it's just the usual Brexshit lies and crap.
EU MEPs get expenses without having to account for them. That counts as an example of a trough to get your snout into, in my book.
On 03/11/2021 14:07, Java Jive wrote:
Show me how any member of the executive:
On 03/11/2021 13:30, TimS wrote:
On 03 Nov 2021 at 12:50:26 GMT, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote: >>>
On 03/11/2021 09:30, TimS wrote:
The EU likes to paint itself as Europe. But it isn't.
But does represent the greater part of it.
The EU represents nothing and no-one but itself. The EU would like to
abolish
referendums about EU membership. That would allow its unelected
Commission
(the only entity which can initiate EU lawmaking) with its equally
unelected
president to rule without interference. The current EU president
"emerged" in
the same way that Xi did in China.
The EU is a good thing if you're a bureaucrat who needs a fresh
trough into
which to put a snout.
Where is your *EVIDENCE* for all these crazed allegations? Until you
can provide it, we'll assume it's just the usual Brexshit lies and crap.
(a) got elected
(b) got sacked.
And look up ....
Altiero Spinelli (31 August 1907 – 23 May 1986) was an Italian communist politician, political theorist and European federalist, referred to as
one of the founding fathers of the European Union.
A communist and militant anti-fascist in his youth, he spent 10 years imprisoned by the Fascist regime. Having grown disillusioned with
Stalinism, he broke with the Italian Communist Party in 1937. Interned
in Ventotene during World War II he, along with fellow democratic
socialists, drafted the Manifesto for a free and united Europe (most
commonly known as the Ventotene Manifesto) in 1941, considered a
precursor of the European integration process.
He had a leading role in the foundation of the European federalist
movement, and had strong influence on the first few decades of
post-World War II European integration. Later, he helped to re-launch
the integration process in the 1980s. By the time of his death, he had
been a member of the European Commission for six years, a member of the European Parliament for ten years right up until his death. The main
building of the European Parliament in Brussels is named after him. The 1987–1988 academic year at the College of Europe and the 2009–2010 academic year of the European College of Parma were named in his honour.
So don't tell me I am lying. It's not me who is lying to you about the
EU...
Do you really think that the EU - a small corrupt
bureaucracy founded by an Italian communist that gathers and
redistributes taxes, and attempts to be a self appointed
undemocratic
lawmaker for 27 countries whose politicians were bribed or blackmailed
into entering it - represents Europe?
On 03/11/2021 12:50, Java Jive wrote:
On 03/11/2021 09:30, TimS wrote:
On 03 Nov 2021 at 08:30:27 GMT, The Natural Philosopher
<tnp@invalid.invalid>
wrote:
On 03/11/2021 07:58, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
On Wed, 3 Nov 2021 07:27:04 +0000
Pancho <Pancho.Dontmaileme@outlook.com> wrote:
The UK is no longer in Europe?
Correct. They took a referendum, voted to leave the EU, did so >>>>> and
went through a protracted (more than two years!) leaving negotiation >>>>> process that ended up with essentially "no deal" and, since the
start of
this year, are no longer in the EU, leaving a messy issue around the >>>>> Eire/Northern Ireland border.
Did you really miss all that happening ? Did you not encounter >>>>> the
term Brexit ?
But we're still in Europe, just not, more fool us, the EU.
Do you really think that the EU - a small corrupt bureaucracy
founded by
an Italian communist that gathers and redistributes taxes, and attempts >>>> to be a self appointed undemocratic lawmaker for 27 countries whose
politicians were bribed or blackmailed into entering it - represents
Europe?
Still lying about the EU, I see.
Nope. It's all fact.
The EU likes to paint itself as Europe. But it isn't.
But does represent the greater part of it.
Nope. It represents nobody but itself.
How could it? Why should it? Why would it? There are no democratically elected members on its executive. It is under no obligation to do
anything except stop other members leaving it.
On 03/11/2021 15:25, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
On 3 Nov 2021 12:12:40 GMT
TimS <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
On 03 Nov 2021 at 10:35:59 GMT, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net>
wrote:
Well when the question is whether the UK (a political entity) is
or is not inside Europe then the context is political
Wrong as Europe is a geographical, not a political, entity.
The UK is a political entity, as the first entity mentioned it
sets the context.
Europe however, is not.
It's a bit like asking whether the United States has left North
America.
On 03/11/2021 14:26, TimS wrote:
On 03 Nov 2021 at 14:07:04 GMT, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
On 03/11/2021 13:30, TimS wrote:
On 03 Nov 2021 at 12:50:26 GMT, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote: >>>>
On 03/11/2021 09:30, TimS wrote:
The EU likes to paint itself as Europe. But it isn't.
But does represent the greater part of it.
The EU represents nothing and no-one but itself. The EU would like to abolish
referendums about EU membership.
This has been mooted by EU bigwigs.
But where is your *EVIDENCE* for it?
That would allow its unelected Commission
(the only entity which can initiate EU lawmaking) with its equally unelected
president to rule without interference. The current EU president "emerged" in
the same way that Xi did in China.
Nonsense the EU Commission is the EU equivalent of our civil service and cabinet combined, and is accountable to the European Parliament, just as
our cabinet is accountable to the UK parliament.
You trying to tell me the Commission members and President *are* elected?
Funny, I must have missed those elections.
Neither is our civil service, and neither sometimes are our cabinet, if
they are a member of the House of Lords.
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2019/608873/IPOL_BRI(2019)608873_EN.pdf
"The EU executive, the European Commission, is accountable to the
European Parliament which has the power to dismiss it and may be also
subject to judicial oversight. Its financial activities are bound by
audit rules and political scrutiny by other institutions."
The EU is a good thing if you're a bureaucrat who needs a fresh trough into
which to put a snout.
What a conveniently short memory you have, I don't think anyone from the
UK has much right to lecture the EU equivalent of the civil service how
a civil service should be run!
Where is your *EVIDENCE* for all these crazed allegations? Until you
can provide it, we'll assume it's just the usual Brexshit lies and crap.
EU MEPs get expenses without having to account for them. That counts as an >> example of a trough to get your snout into, in my book.
What a conveniently short memory you have, I don't think anyone from the
UK has much right to lecture the EU about members' of parliament expenses!
On 03 Nov 2021 at 19:09:18 GMT, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
On 03/11/2021 14:26, TimS wrote:
On 03 Nov 2021 at 14:07:04 GMT, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote: >>>>
On 03/11/2021 13:30, TimS wrote:
On 03 Nov 2021 at 12:50:26 GMT, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote: >>>>>
On 03/11/2021 09:30, TimS wrote:
The EU likes to paint itself as Europe. But it isn't.
But does represent the greater part of it.
The EU represents nothing and no-one but itself. The EU would like to abolish
referendums about EU membership.
This has been mooted by EU bigwigs.
But where is your *EVIDENCE* for it?
That I recall it being mooted and reported in the media. If you want more than
that you'll have to look for it.
That would allow its unelected Commission
(the only entity which can initiate EU lawmaking) with its equally unelected
president to rule without interference. The current EU president "emerged" in
the same way that Xi did in China.
Nonsense the EU Commission is the EU equivalent of our civil service and
cabinet combined, and is accountable to the European Parliament, just as
our cabinet is accountable to the UK parliament.
It's only accountable in the crudest sense in that it can be sacked in toto by
the MEPs. Which has happened just the once in 30 years.
If it's the cabinet, which it is, then where is the shadow cabinet waiting to take over after an election?
Doesn't happen. So we have one-party government.
Where is the opposition party? There isn't one.
No wonder the fuckers are
arrogant, which was my small experience of them.
You trying to tell me the Commission members and President *are* elected? >>> Funny, I must have missed those elections.
Neither is our civil service, and neither sometimes are our cabinet, if
they are a member of the House of Lords.
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2019/608873/IPOL_BRI(2019)608873_EN.pdf
"The EU executive, the European Commission, is accountable to the
European Parliament which has the power to dismiss it and may be also
subject to judicial oversight. Its financial activities are bound by
audit rules and political scrutiny by other institutions."
Which means that provided it stays within certain boundaries, its one-party governemnt can continue unchecked ad infinitum - which is what happens.
The EU is a good thing if you're a bureaucrat who needs a fresh trough into
which to put a snout.
What a conveniently short memory you have, I don't think anyone from the
UK has much right to lecture the EU equivalent of the civil service how
a civil service should be run!
Yes we have. We can certainly lecture them on their democratic deficit.
Where is your *EVIDENCE* for all these crazed allegations? Until youEU MEPs get expenses without having to account for them. That counts as an >>> example of a trough to get your snout into, in my book.
can provide it, we'll assume it's just the usual Brexshit lies and crap. >>>
What a conveniently short memory you have, I don't think anyone from the
UK has much right to lecture the EU about members' of parliament expenses!
And we did something about it, as MPs are subject to public pressure (the only
sort that counts). The whole EU political structure, OTOH, can - and does - laugh at the public. It certainly laughs at mugs like you.
On Wed, 3 Nov 2021 17:34:25 +0000 The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 03/11/2021 15:25, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
On 3 Nov 2021 12:12:40 GMT TimS <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:Europe however, is not.
On 03 Nov 2021 at 10:35:59 GMT, Ahem A Rivet's Shot
<steveo@eircom.net>
wrote:
Well when the question is whether the UK (a political entity)
is
or is not inside Europe then the context is political
Wrong as Europe is a geographical, not a political, entity.
The UK is a political entity, as the first entity mentioned it
sets the context.
It's a bit like asking whether the United States has left North
America.
It would be if there were a political entity that could reasonably
be taken to be what was meant by "North America" in a political context. Rather more like asking "Has Wales left Britain" where the only
plausible interpretation is "Has Wales left the United Kingdom" since
all other interpretations are meaningless or extremely implausible.
On Wed, 3 Nov 2021 20:05:12 +0000, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
On Wed, 3 Nov 2021 17:34:25 +0000 The Natural Philosopher
<tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 03/11/2021 15:25, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
On 3 Nov 2021 12:12:40 GMT TimS <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:Europe however, is not.
On 03 Nov 2021 at 10:35:59 GMT, Ahem A Rivet's Shot
<steveo@eircom.net>
wrote:
Well when the question is whether the UK (a political entity) >>>>>> is
or is not inside Europe then the context is political
Wrong as Europe is a geographical, not a political, entity.
The UK is a political entity, as the first entity mentioned it
sets the context.
It's a bit like asking whether the United States has left North
America.
It would be if there were a political entity that could reasonably
be taken to be what was meant by "North America" in a political context.
Rather more like asking "Has Wales left Britain" where the only
plausible interpretation is "Has Wales left the United Kingdom" since
all other interpretations are meaningless or extremely implausible.
Exactly so. The only equivalent North American question is about states leaving the Union, for example:
Has Texas left the USA yet?
is very little different from asking:
Has the United Kingdom left the EU yet?
...the only difference is that Texas hasn't (yet) while the UK has.
Hey ...... can the UK make the chips we need for
our automotive systems ??? Why screw around with
China if they can do it ?
On 03/11/2021 07:58, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
On Wed, 3 Nov 2021 07:27:04 +0000Do you really think that the EU - a small corrupt bureaucracy founded by
Pancho <Pancho.Dontmaileme@outlook.com> wrote:
The UK is no longer in Europe?
Correct. They took a referendum, voted to leave the EU, did so and
went through a protracted (more than two years!) leaving negotiation
process that ended up with essentially "no deal" and, since the start of
this year, are no longer in the EU, leaving a messy issue around the
Eire/Northern Ireland border.
Did you really miss all that happening ? Did you not encounter the
term Brexit ?
an Italian communist that gathers and redistributes taxes, and attempts
to be a self appointed undemocratic lawmaker for 27 countries whose politicians were bribed or blackmailed into entering it - represents Europe?
On 03/11/2021 21:33, TimS wrote:
On 03 Nov 2021 at 19:09:18 GMT, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
On 03/11/2021 14:26, TimS wrote:
On 03 Nov 2021 at 14:07:04 GMT, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote: >>>>>
On 03/11/2021 13:30, TimS wrote:
On 03 Nov 2021 at 12:50:26 GMT, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote: >>>>>>
On 03/11/2021 09:30, TimS wrote:
The EU likes to paint itself as Europe. But it isn't.
But does represent the greater part of it.
The EU represents nothing and no-one but itself. The EU would like to abolish
referendums about EU membership.
This has been mooted by EU bigwigs.
But where is your *EVIDENCE* for it?
That I recall it being mooted and reported in the media. If you want more than
that you'll have to look for it.
I did, and ...
site:www.europarl.europa.eu referendum
... found nothing that looked likely and ...
Abolish referenda about leaving EU
... found even less.
So prove it.
That would allow its unelected Commission
(the only entity which can initiate EU lawmaking) with its equally unelected
president to rule without interference. The current EU president "emerged" in
the same way that Xi did in China.
Nonsense the EU Commission is the EU equivalent of our civil service and >>> cabinet combined, and is accountable to the European Parliament, just as >>> our cabinet is accountable to the UK parliament.
It's only accountable in the crudest sense in that it can be sacked in toto by
the MEPs. Which has happened just the once in 30 years.
If it's the cabinet, which it is, then where is the shadow cabinet waiting to
take over after an election?
You obviously have no idea how the EU functions democratically.
It works in a completely different way to UK government, many would say a better way.
Doesn't happen. So we have one-party government.
Where is the opposition party? There isn't one.
Some would say that's a good thing, the swings and roundabouts of UK confrontational politics have been damaging this country's interests for decades, if not centuries.
No wonder the fuckers are
arrogant, which was my small experience of them.
I wonder what their experience of you was? You bitch about the EU
seemingly having zilch idea how it works, and then accuse them of being arrogant? Jeez, there's nothing so toe-curlingly embarrassingly
arrogant and hypocritical as a bigoted Brit.
You trying to tell me the Commission members and President *are* elected? >>>> Funny, I must have missed those elections.
Neither is our civil service, and neither sometimes are our cabinet, if
they are a member of the House of Lords.
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2019/608873/IPOL_BRI(2019)608873_EN.pdf
"The EU executive, the European Commission, is accountable to the
European Parliament which has the power to dismiss it and may be also
subject to judicial oversight. Its financial activities are bound by
audit rules and political scrutiny by other institutions."
Which means that provided it stays within certain boundaries, its one-party >> governemnt can continue unchecked ad infinitum - which is what happens.
See above, it's not a party political institution, any more than is our
civil service. No-one accuses the civil-service of being a one-party government, so why should they the European Commission?
The Commission is also subject to public pressure via the European Parliament, which is voted in by public.
On 03 Nov 2021 at 23:03:14 GMT, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
On 03/11/2021 21:33, TimS wrote:
On 03 Nov 2021 at 19:09:18 GMT, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote: >>>
On 03/11/2021 14:26, TimS wrote:
On 03 Nov 2021 at 14:07:04 GMT, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote: >>>>>>
On 03/11/2021 13:30, TimS wrote:
On 03 Nov 2021 at 12:50:26 GMT, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
On 03/11/2021 09:30, TimS wrote:
The EU likes to paint itself as Europe. But it isn't.
But does represent the greater part of it.
The EU represents nothing and no-one but itself. The EU would like to abolish
referendums about EU membership.
This has been mooted by EU bigwigs.
But where is your *EVIDENCE* for it?
That I recall it being mooted and reported in the media. If you want more than
that you'll have to look for it.
I did, and ...
site:www.europarl.europa.eu referendum
... found nothing that looked likely and ...
Abolish referenda about leaving EU
... found even less.
So prove it.
All you've discovered is that it's not *official* policy. That they want to do
it has been reported in the papers.
That would allow its unelected Commission
(the only entity which can initiate EU lawmaking) with its equally unelected
president to rule without interference. The current EU president "emerged" in
the same way that Xi did in China.
Nonsense the EU Commission is the EU equivalent of our civil service and >>>> cabinet combined, and is accountable to the European Parliament, just as >>>> our cabinet is accountable to the UK parliament.
It's only accountable in the crudest sense in that it can be sacked in toto by
the MEPs. Which has happened just the once in 30 years.
If it's the cabinet, which it is, then where is the shadow cabinet waiting to
take over after an election?
You obviously have no idea how the EU functions democratically.
But it doesn't function democratically, that's the point.
It works in a completely different way to UK government, many would say a
better way.
And many would say a lot worse, because it lacks any democratic accountability.
Doesn't happen. So we have one-party government.
Where is the opposition party? There isn't one.
Some would say that's a good thing, the swings and roundabouts of UK
confrontational politics have been damaging this country's interests for
decades, if not centuries.
So you're happy with one-party government.
No wonder the fuckers are
arrogant, which was my small experience of them.
I wonder what their experience of you was? You bitch about the EU
seemingly having zilch idea how it works, and then accuse them of being
arrogant? Jeez, there's nothing so toe-curlingly embarrassingly
arrogant and hypocritical as a bigoted Brit.
You trying to tell me the Commission members and President *are* elected? >>>>> Funny, I must have missed those elections.
Neither is our civil service, and neither sometimes are our cabinet, if >>>> they are a member of the House of Lords.
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2019/608873/IPOL_BRI(2019)608873_EN.pdf
"The EU executive, the European Commission, is accountable to the
European Parliament which has the power to dismiss it and may be also
subject to judicial oversight. Its financial activities are bound by
audit rules and political scrutiny by other institutions."
Which means that provided it stays within certain boundaries, its one-party >>> governemnt can continue unchecked ad infinitum - which is what happens.
See above, it's not a party political institution, any more than is our
civil service. No-one accuses the civil-service of being a one-party
government, so why should they the European Commission?
Because the Commission is the body that decides and initiates the EU's legislative programme. No one else does.
That makes it the government;
the
government decides the programme, the civil service drafts laws to implement that.
Governments need oppositions to make them function better. Clearly
lacking in the EU's case.
The Commission is also subject to public pressure via the European
Parliament, which is voted in by public.
No one pays any attention to the EU parliament, or their MEPs, because they don't know who they are, or enything about them. What's worse, they are elected using the egregious PR List System, the worst form of PR, which is just used to reward party hacks.
Here, MPs and councillors in local government are elected on a constituency basis, meaning that they have to be responsive to the public continuously, not
just at election time. Otheriwse they're likely to be removed by the electorate. Generally, it gives you better public servants.
Hey ...... can the UK make the chips we need for our automotive
systems ??? Why screw around with China if they can do it ?
On Wed, 3 Nov 2021 23:53:53 -0400
1p166 <z24ba6.net> wrote:
Hey ...... can the UK make the chips we need for
our automotive systems ??? Why screw around with
China if they can do it ?
No the UK cannot there are very few 7nm fabs around, most of the working ones belong to TSMC and none are in the UK.
On Wed, 3 Nov 2021 23:53:53 -0400, 1p166 wrote:
Almost certainly not: IIRC back in the day when INMOS was going to be a
Hey ...... can the UK make the chips we need for our automotive
systems ??? Why screw around with China if they can do it ?
power in the land there was a chip foundry in Scotland. I don't know what happened to it, but it isn't there now.
Of course, that was back in the days of Wedgie Benn's "White-Hot Heat of Industrial Revolution" but a lot of Tory water has flowed through both parties since then.
After yesterday's shenanigans in the Commons how can you accuse others
of corruption with a straight face?
Of course, that was back in the days of Wedgie Benn's "White-Hot Heat of Industrial Revolution" but a lot of Tory water has flowed through both parties since then.
On 3 Nov 2021 at 08:30:27, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 03/11/2021 07:58, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
On Wed, 3 Nov 2021 07:27:04 +0000Do you really think that the EU - a small corrupt bureaucracy founded by
Pancho <Pancho.Dontmaileme@outlook.com> wrote:
The UK is no longer in Europe?
Correct. They took a referendum, voted to leave the EU, did so and
went through a protracted (more than two years!) leaving negotiation
process that ended up with essentially "no deal" and, since the start of >>> this year, are no longer in the EU, leaving a messy issue around the
Eire/Northern Ireland border.
Did you really miss all that happening ? Did you not encounter the
term Brexit ?
an Italian communist that gathers and redistributes taxes, and attempts
to be a self appointed undemocratic lawmaker for 27 countries whose
politicians were bribed or blackmailed into entering it - represents Europe?
After yesterday's shenanigans in the Commons how can you accuse others
of corruption with a straight face?
FALSE! It represent 448m out of 746m citizens of Europe.
On 04/11/2021 10:10, Martin Gregorie wrote:
Of course, that was back in the days of Wedgie Benn's "White-Hot Heat
of Industrial Revolution" but a lot of Tory water has flowed through
both parties since then.
Oh dear. So you dont think the left's preoccupation with what gender you identify with and 'rights for every minoriry under the sun, including my
per rat' rather then 'let's invest in a chip foundry and a few
technical colleges' has anything to do with it?
When the left captures the political agenda, you are only one step away
from the societal collapse thaty they venerate, as the natural precursor
to a better state.,
On 03/11/2021 19:24, Java Jive wrote:
FALSE! It represent 448m out of 746m citizens of Europe.
How can it when not one of them ever voted for it?
WE dont need 7nm fabs for a lot of stuff.
In fact larger dimensions would make for more reliable chips
On 04/11/2021 10:10, Martin Gregorie wrote:
Of course, that was back in the days of Wedgie Benn's "White-Hot Heat of
Industrial Revolution" but a lot of Tory water has flowed through both
parties since then.
Oh dear. So you dont think the left's [...]
On 04/11/2021 10:51, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 03/11/2021 19:24, Java Jive wrote:
FALSE! It represent 448m out of 746m citizens of Europe.
How can it when not one of them ever voted for it?
Nonsense, they vote for it every time they vote for an MEP.
On 04 Nov 2021 at 12:39:05 GMT, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
On 04/11/2021 10:51, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 03/11/2021 19:24, Java Jive wrote:
FALSE! It represent 448m out of 746m citizens of Europe.
How can it when not one of them ever voted for it?
Nonsense, they vote for it every time they vote for an MEP.
That's nothing more than the trappings of democracy; it's fool's gold and like
a mug, you think it's good.
With the List System, candidates are selected by the party. Those at the top of the list are pretty much guaranteed to be elected.
They need have no
contact with the public at all and cannot realistically be gotten rid of.
Once elected, MEPs can then *completely* ignore the public until next time.
On 04/11/2021 10:51, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 03/11/2021 19:24, Java Jive wrote:
FALSE! It represent 448m out of 746m citizens of Europe.
How can it when not one of them ever voted for it?
Nonsense, they vote for it every time they vote for an MEP.
On 04/11/2021 10:57, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 04/11/2021 10:10, Martin Gregorie wrote:
Of course, that was back in the days of Wedgie Benn's "White-Hot Heat of >>> Industrial Revolution" but a lot of Tory water has flowed through both
parties since then.
Oh dear. So you dont think the left's [...]
Oh dear, he's off on one of paranoid shitstreams again.
On 04/11/2021 12:41, Java Jive wrote:
On 04/11/2021 10:57, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 04/11/2021 10:10, Martin Gregorie wrote:
Of course, that was back in the days of Wedgie Benn's "White-Hot
Heat of
Industrial Revolution" but a lot of Tory water has flowed through both >>>> parties since then.
Oh dear. So you dont think the left's [...]
Oh dear, he's off on one of paranoid shitstreams again.
Oh dear, he's off on one of paranoid shitstreams again.
On 04/11/2021 16:02, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 04/11/2021 12:41, Java Jive wrote:
On 04/11/2021 10:57, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 04/11/2021 10:10, Martin Gregorie wrote:
Of course, that was back in the days of Wedgie Benn's "White-Hot
Heat of
Industrial Revolution" but a lot of Tory water has flowed through both >>>>> parties since then.
Oh dear. So you dont think the left's [...]
Oh dear, he's off on one of paranoid shitstreams again.
Oh dear, he's off on one of paranoid shitstreams again.
Parrotting doesn't win an argument. I presume that you do it because
you know you can not substantiate your paranoid tirade.
On 04/11/2021 16:41, Java Jive wrote:
On 04/11/2021 16:02, The Natural Philosopher wrote:Parrotting doesn't win an argument. I presume that you do it because
On 04/11/2021 12:41, Java Jive wrote:
On 04/11/2021 10:57, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 04/11/2021 10:10, Martin Gregorie wrote:
Of course, that was back in the days of Wedgie Benn's "White-Hot
Heat of
Industrial Revolution" but a lot of Tory water has flowed through
both
parties since then.
Oh dear. So you dont think the left's [...]
Oh dear, he's off on one of paranoid shitstreams again.
Oh dear, he's off on one of paranoid shitstreams again.
Parrotting doesn't win an argument. I presume that you do it because
you know you can not substantiate your paranoid tirade.
you know you can not substantiate your paranoid tirade.
On 04/11/2021 13:46, TimS wrote:
I can only suggest that you spend some time learning about a subject
before shooting your mouth off about it. As someone whose name sadly escapes me, American I think, once so aptly said: "It is better to keep your mouth shut and let everyone think you're a fool, than to open it
and remove all shadow of doubt!"
On 03/11/2021 15:25, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
On 3 Nov 2021 12:12:40 GMT TimS <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:Europe however, is not.
On 03 Nov 2021 at 10:35:59 GMT, Ahem A Rivet's Shot
<steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
Well when the question is whether the UK (a political entity)
is or is not inside Europe then the context is political
Wrong as Europe is a geographical, not a political, entity.
The UK is a political entity, as the first entity mentioned it
sets the context.
It's a bit like asking whether the United States has left North
America.
On 04 Nov 2021 at 12:39:05 GMT, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid>
wrote:
On 04/11/2021 10:51, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 03/11/2021 19:24, Java Jive wrote:
FALSE! It represent 448m out of 746m citizens of Europe.
How can it when not one of them ever voted for it?
Nonsense, they vote for it every time they vote for an MEP.
That's nothing more than the trappings of democracy; it's fool's gold
and like a mug, you think it's good.
With the List System, candidates are selected by the party. Those at
the top of the list are pretty much guaranteed to be elected. They
need have no contact with the public at all and cannot realistically
be gotten rid of.
Once elected, MEPs can then *completely* ignore the public until next
time.
TimS wrote on 5/11/2021 12:46 am:The salient point is that the MEPs have no power whatsoever to change
On 04 Nov 2021 at 12:39:05 GMT, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid>Gee, that sound just like any elected Parliament that I've heard of!!
wrote:
On 04/11/2021 10:51, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 03/11/2021 19:24, Java Jive wrote:
FALSE! It represent 448m out of 746m citizens of Europe.
How can it when not one of them ever voted for it?
Nonsense, they vote for it every time they vote for an MEP.
That's nothing more than the trappings of democracy; it's fool's gold
and like a mug, you think it's good.
With the List System, candidates are selected by the party. Those at
the top of the list are pretty much guaranteed to be elected. They
need have no contact with the public at all and cannot realistically
be gotten rid of.
Once elected, MEPs can then *completely* ignore the public until next
time.
The Natural Philosopher wrote on 4/11/2021 4:34 am:
On 03/11/2021 15:25, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
On 3 Nov 2021 12:12:40 GMT TimS <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:Europe however, is not.
On 03 Nov 2021 at 10:35:59 GMT, Ahem A Rivet's Shot
<steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
Well when the question is whether the UK (a political entity) is or
is not inside Europe then the context is political
Wrong as Europe is a geographical, not a political, entity.
The UK is a political entity, as the first entity mentioned it
sets the context.
It's a bit like asking whether the United States has left North
America.
Is it like when people are referring to "The United States of America"
but just say "America?? ;-P
TimS wrote on 5/11/2021 12:46 am:
On 04 Nov 2021 at 12:39:05 GMT, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid>Gee, that sound just like any elected Parliament that I've heard of!!
wrote:
On 04/11/2021 10:51, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 03/11/2021 19:24, Java Jive wrote:
FALSE! It represent 448m out of 746m citizens of Europe.
How can it when not one of them ever voted for it?
Nonsense, they vote for it every time they vote for an MEP.
That's nothing more than the trappings of democracy; it's fool's gold
and like a mug, you think it's good.
With the List System, candidates are selected by the party. Those at
the top of the list are pretty much guaranteed to be elected. They
need have no contact with the public at all and cannot realistically
be gotten rid of.
Once elected, MEPs can then *completely* ignore the public until next
time.
Java Jive wrote on 5/11/2021 1:43 am:
On 04/11/2021 13:46, TimS wrote:
<Snip>
I can only suggest that you spend some time learning about a subjectMight that have been Mark Twain, perhaps?? Sounds about right!
before shooting your mouth off about it. As someone whose name sadly
escapes me, American I think, once so aptly said: "It is better to
keep your mouth shut and let everyone think you're a fool, than to open
it and remove all shadow of doubt!"
On 19 Dec 2021 13:18:22 GMT, TimS wrote:
On 19 Dec 2021 at 09:37:28 GMT, Daniel65
<daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
TimS wrote on 5/11/2021 12:46 am:
On 04 Nov 2021 at 12:39:05 GMT, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid>Gee, that sound just like any elected Parliament that I've heard of!!
wrote:
On 04/11/2021 10:51, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 03/11/2021 19:24, Java Jive wrote:
FALSE! It represent 448m out of 746m citizens of Europe.
How can it when not one of them ever voted for it?
Nonsense, they vote for it every time they vote for an MEP.
That's nothing more than the trappings of democracy; it's fool's gold
and like a mug, you think it's good.
With the List System, candidates are selected by the party. Those at
the top of the list are pretty much guaranteed to be elected. They
need have no contact with the public at all and cannot realistically
be gotten rid of.
Once elected, MEPs can then *completely* ignore the public until next
time.
Any parliament where its MPs are elected via a list system, yes. With
FPTP you can vote an individual out. And of course, with the EU
parliament, there are no by-elections. If someone dies or resigns, the
next one on the list gets the nod automatically. How's that for
democracy!
FPTP needs to be replaced but the only sensible option is Single
Transferable Vote
FPTP needs to be replacedNo, it doesn't.
On 19 Dec 2021 at 09:37:28 GMT, Daniel65
<daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
TimS wrote on 5/11/2021 12:46 am:
On 04 Nov 2021 at 12:39:05 GMT, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid>Gee, that sound just like any elected Parliament that I've heard of!!
wrote:
On 04/11/2021 10:51, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 03/11/2021 19:24, Java Jive wrote:
FALSE! It represent 448m out of 746m citizens of Europe.
How can it when not one of them ever voted for it?
Nonsense, they vote for it every time they vote for an MEP.
That's nothing more than the trappings of democracy; it's fool's gold
and like a mug, you think it's good.
With the List System, candidates are selected by the party. Those at
the top of the list are pretty much guaranteed to be elected. They
need have no contact with the public at all and cannot realistically
be gotten rid of.
Once elected, MEPs can then *completely* ignore the public until next
time.
Any parliament where its MPs are elected via a list system, yes. With
FPTP you can vote an individual out. And of course, with the EU
parliament, there are no by-elections. If someone dies or resigns, the
next one on the list gets the nod automatically. How's that for
democracy!
On 19 Dec 2021 at 15:50:45 GMT, alister <alister.ware@ntlworld.com> wrote:
On 19 Dec 2021 13:18:22 GMT, TimS wrote:
On 19 Dec 2021 at 09:37:28 GMT, Daniel65
<daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
TimS wrote on 5/11/2021 12:46 am:
On 04 Nov 2021 at 12:39:05 GMT, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid>Gee, that sound just like any elected Parliament that I've heard of!!
wrote:
On 04/11/2021 10:51, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 03/11/2021 19:24, Java Jive wrote:
FALSE! It represent 448m out of 746m citizens of Europe.
How can it when not one of them ever voted for it?
Nonsense, they vote for it every time they vote for an MEP.
That's nothing more than the trappings of democracy; it's fool's gold >>>>> and like a mug, you think it's good.
With the List System, candidates are selected by the party. Those at >>>>> the top of the list are pretty much guaranteed to be elected. They
need have no contact with the public at all and cannot realistically >>>>> be gotten rid of.
Once elected, MEPs can then *completely* ignore the public until next >>>>> time.
Any parliament where its MPs are elected via a list system, yes. With
FPTP you can vote an individual out. And of course, with the EU
parliament, there are no by-elections. If someone dies or resigns, the
next one on the list gets the nod automatically. How's that for
democracy!
FPTP needs to be replaced but the only sensible option is Single
Transferable Vote
No, it doesn't need replacing at all. Anyway we had a vote on this 10 years ago, no dice.
On 19/12/2021 15:50, alister wrote:
FPTP needs to be replacedNo, it doesn't.
It always - nearly always gives a clear working majority to a single party. People who say it isn't 'fair' have a childish view of democracy. It
isn't there to 'represent the people' it is there to be able to sack the executive without a (civil) war.
And it is not even correct to say that the EU represents the citizens of
the 27 countries that still are in it. It doesn't. It represents a
narrow cadre of elitists, and some people who fund it to pass laws
favouring their (EU made) products.
Its currency is a shambles and has plunged its southern states into
poverty and debt, it has no army, it cannot police its borders as
millions of middle eastern immigrants flood in, and it is now in a state
of abject energy crisis because of it reliance on toy windmills and
solar panels.
The Baltic states of Lithuania Latvia and estonia, are openly talking
about Russian control - after all there seems to be little difference
between Brussels and the Kremlin.
On 19/12/2021 15:54, TimS wrote:
On 19 Dec 2021 at 15:50:45 GMT, alister <alister.ware@ntlworld.com> wrote: >>The disaster that no overall parliamentary majority becomes with 'proportional representation' is illustrated by a minority party with perhaps only 10% of the popular vote becoming an indispensable coalition partner and having more influence on government than Carrie Symonds.
On 19 Dec 2021 13:18:22 GMT, TimS wrote:
On 19 Dec 2021 at 09:37:28 GMT, Daniel65
<daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
TimS wrote on 5/11/2021 12:46 am:Any parliament where its MPs are elected via a list system, yes. With
On 04 Nov 2021 at 12:39:05 GMT, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid>Gee, that sound just like any elected Parliament that I've heard of!! >>>>
wrote:
On 04/11/2021 10:51, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 03/11/2021 19:24, Java Jive wrote:
FALSE! It represent 448m out of 746m citizens of Europe.
How can it when not one of them ever voted for it?
Nonsense, they vote for it every time they vote for an MEP.
That's nothing more than the trappings of democracy; it's fool's gold >>>>>> and like a mug, you think it's good.
With the List System, candidates are selected by the party. Those at >>>>>> the top of the list are pretty much guaranteed to be elected. They >>>>>> need have no contact with the public at all and cannot realistically >>>>>> be gotten rid of.
Once elected, MEPs can then *completely* ignore the public until next >>>>>> time.
FPTP you can vote an individual out. And of course, with the EU
parliament, there are no by-elections. If someone dies or resigns, the >>>> next one on the list gets the nod automatically. How's that for
democracy!
FPTP needs to be replaced but the only sensible option is Single
Transferable Vote
No, it doesn't need replacing at all. Anyway we had a vote on this 10 years >> ago, no dice.
Java Jive wrote on 5/11/2021 1:43 am:
On 04/11/2021 13:46, TimS wrote:
<Snip>
I can only suggest that you spend some time learning about a subjectMight that have been Mark Twain, perhaps?? Sounds about right!
before shooting your mouth off about it. As someone whose name sadly
escapes me, American I think, once so aptly said: "It is better to keep
your mouth shut and let everyone think you're a fool, than to open it
and remove all shadow of doubt!"
On 19 Dec 2021 13:18:22 GMT, TimS wrote:
On 19 Dec 2021 at 09:37:28 GMT, Daniel65
<daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
TimS wrote on 5/11/2021 12:46 am:
On 04 Nov 2021 at 12:39:05 GMT, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid>Gee, that sound just like any elected Parliament that I've heard of!!
wrote:
On 04/11/2021 10:51, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 03/11/2021 19:24, Java Jive wrote:
FALSE! It represent 448m out of 746m citizens of Europe.
How can it when not one of them ever voted for it?
Nonsense, they vote for it every time they vote for an MEP.
That's nothing more than the trappings of democracy; it's fool's gold
and like a mug, you think it's good.
With the List System, candidates are selected by the party. Those at
the top of the list are pretty much guaranteed to be elected. They
need have no contact with the public at all and cannot realistically
be gotten rid of.
Once elected, MEPs can then *completely* ignore the public until next
time.
Any parliament where its MPs are elected via a list system, yes. With
FPTP you can vote an individual out. And of course, with the EU
parliament, there are no by-elections. If someone dies or resigns, the
next one on the list gets the nod automatically. How's that for
democracy!
FPTP needs to be replaced but the only sensible option is Single
Transferable Vote
if no candidate has a majority then the lowest candidate is removed &
their votes added to the 2nd choice candidate of each voter - repeat as necessary (it may need a 3rd choice etc depending on the number of candidates).
alister wrote on 20/12/21 2:50 am:
On 19 Dec 2021 13:18:22 GMT, TimS wrote:
On 19 Dec 2021 at 09:37:28 GMT, Daniel65
<daniel47@eternal-september.org> wrote:
TimS wrote on 5/11/2021 12:46 am:
On 04 Nov 2021 at 12:39:05 GMT, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid>Gee, that sound just like any elected Parliament that I've heard of!!
wrote:
On 04/11/2021 10:51, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 03/11/2021 19:24, Java Jive wrote:
FALSE! It represent 448m out of 746m citizens of Europe.
How can it when not one of them ever voted for it?
Nonsense, they vote for it every time they vote for an MEP.
That's nothing more than the trappings of democracy; it's fool's gold >>>>> and like a mug, you think it's good.
With the List System, candidates are selected by the party. Those at >>>>> the top of the list are pretty much guaranteed to be elected. They
need have no contact with the public at all and cannot realistically >>>>> be gotten rid of.
Once elected, MEPs can then *completely* ignore the public until next >>>>> time.
Any parliament where its MPs are elected via a list system, yes. With
FPTP you can vote an individual out. And of course, with the EU
parliament, there are no by-elections. If someone dies or resigns, the
next one on the list gets the nod automatically. How's that for
democracy!
FPTP needs to be replaced but the only sensible option is Single
Transferable Vote
if no candidate has a majority then the lowest candidate is removed &
their votes added to the 2nd choice candidate of each voter - repeat as
necessary (it may need a 3rd choice etc depending on the number of
candidates).
Hmm! Here in Australia, we call that "First Past The Post"!
FPTP needs to be replaced but the only sensible option is Single
Transferable Vote
if no candidate has a majority then the lowest candidate is removed &
their votes added to the 2nd choice candidate of each voter - repeat as necessary (it may need a 3rd choice etc depending on the number of candidates).
The salient point is that the MEPs have no power whatsoever to change anything. They are neither the originators nor the passers of policy.
They are in effect an 'upper house' a senate, a house of lords, who can
at best stop legislation if they can be bothered to read it or attend parliament. Most do not. It is a purely ceremonial position.
In the EU, the power is with the commissioners and the various
Presidents none of who undergo popular election. Like every other
communist state a Party of bureacrats controls everything, the
elections are just for show, and nothing ever changes in response to
popular demand.
Lobbyists from multinational corporations dictate policy.
The people are there to buy their product and shut up.
There was in the end only one democratic vote that an EU nation could
have, and Britain took it.
Britain will now be desroyed for daring to.
Assisted by Zombie Joe.
Any parliament where its MPs are elected via a list system, yes. With FPTP you
can vote an individual out. And of course, with the EU parliament, there are no by-elections. If someone dies or resigns, the next one on the list gets the
nod automatically. How's that for democracy!
I'm just re-reading my copy of The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, by William Shirer. He has a lot to say about how the Weimar Republic's stability was not helped by its PR system of selecting deputies - lots of small single-issue parties.
On 19 Dec 2021 at 15:50:45 GMT, alister <alister.ware@ntlworld.com> wrote:
FPTP needs to be replaced but the only sensible option is Single
Transferable Vote
No, it doesn't need replacing at all. Anyway we had a vote on this 10 years ago, no dice.
The disaster that no overall parliamentary majority becomes with 'proportional representation' is illustrated by a minority party with perhaps only 10% of the popular vote becoming an indispensable coalition partner and having more influence on government than Carrie Symonds.
Unlike with the EU where the executive isn't sackable within the meaning of the Act. Indeed, in the case of its president, we don't even know why or how she was selected, by what process, and whether there were any other candidates.
On 19/12/2021 15:50, alister wrote:
FPTP needs to be replaced
No, it doesn't.
It always - nearly always gives a clear working majority to a single party. People who say it isn't 'fair' have a childish view of democracy. It
isn't there to 'represent the people' it is there to be able to sack the executive without a (civil) war.
And it is not even correct to say that the EU represents the citizens of
the 27 countries that still are in it. It doesn't. It represents a
narrow cadre of elitists, and some people who fund it to pass laws
favouring their (EU made) products.
Its currency is a shambles and has plunged its southern states into
poverty and debt,
it has no army,
it cannot police its borders as
millions of middle eastern immigrants flood in,
and it is now in a state
of abject energy crisis because of it reliance on toy windmills and
solar panels.
Ultimately you have to ask whether a 19th century top down colonial bureaucracy designed by an Italian communist is an appropriate way to
run a continent.
Time will tell.
On 19/12/2021 15:50, alister wrote:
FPTP needs to be replaced
No, it doesn't.
It always - nearly always gives a clear working majority to a single party. People who say it isn't 'fair' have a childish view of democracy. It
isn't there to 'represent the people' it is there to be able to sack the executive without a (civil) war.
Ultimately British democracy is a delicate balance between looking after
an elite who fund the party, and an electorate who have to be convinced
it is working in their best interests.
That balance does not exist in the EU. And because the nations have
signed away their sovereignty, national elections make little difference.
We already know how it really works: an unelected dictatorship with no opposition and with the public having no opportunity to affect that.
On 19/12/2021 17:57, TimS wrote:
Unlike with the EU where the executive isn't sackable within the meaning of >> the Act. Indeed, in the case of its president, we don't even know why or how >> she was selected, by what process, and whether there were any other
candidates.
See the links given in my reply to the The Unnatural Pillock for how the
EU system of government really works.
On 19/12/2021 15:57, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 19/12/2021 15:50, alister wrote:
FPTP needs to be replaced
No, it doesn't.
Yes it does ...
It always - nearly always gives a clear working majority to a single party. >> People who say it isn't 'fair' have a childish view of democracy. It
isn't there to 'represent the people' it is there to be able to sack the
executive without a (civil) war.
In other words, it nearly always leads to an elected dictatorship for
four years.
Ultimately the sovereign rights of nations need to become as
obsolete as the rights of feudal lords, which they are the remnant of.
The world is too small for nations, they do stupid things like fighting
wars and squabbling over resources. Look at the way the United States is constantly in need of an enemy, whenever one goes away they have to find
a new one.
On 20 Dec 2021 at 22:30:31 GMT, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
On 19/12/2021 17:57, TimS wrote:
Unlike with the EU where the executive isn't sackable within the meaning of >>> the Act. Indeed, in the case of its president, we don't even know why or how
she was selected, by what process, and whether there were any other
candidates.
See the links given in my reply to the The Unnatural Pillock for how the
EU system of government really works.
We already know how it really works: an unelected dictatorship with no opposition and with the public having no opportunity to affect that.
On 21/12/2021 09:20, TimS wrote:
We already know how it really works: an unelected dictatorship with no
opposition and with the public having no opportunity to affect that.
I'll vote for that!
On 19/12/2021 10:36, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
The salient point is that the MEPs have no power whatsoever to change
anything. They are neither the originators nor the passers of policy.
They are in effect an 'upper house' a senate, a house of lords, who
can at best stop legislation if they can be bothered to read it or
attend parliament. Most do not. It is a purely ceremonial position.
In the EU, the power is with the commissioners and the various
Presidents none of who undergo popular election. Like every other
communist state a Party of bureacrats controls everything, the
elections are just for show, and nothing ever changes in response to
popular demand.
Lobbyists from multinational corporations dictate policy.
The people are there to buy their product and shut up.
When are you going to stop lying about the EU???!!!
This is how the EU actually works, either read and understand it, or
don't bother and stop speaking out of your arse about things that you
can't be arsed to understand:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Parliament https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Council https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Commission
In fact when are going to stop lying, full stop???!!!
Like most countries, Britain does most of its trade with its nearest geographical neighbours,
in the EU, it never made any sense at all for us to leave,
reason we did so being the prevalence of bigoted and shameless liars
like you. If you don't like what is happening to the country now, blame yourself, because you've lied about the EU for decades, voted to leave
it, and thereby voted to make this country poorer, so you have directly contributed to the shit we're in, so stop moaning and shut the fuck up.
On 19/12/2021 10:56, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
And it is not even correct to say that the EU represents the citizens
of the 27 countries that still are in it. It doesn't. It represents a
narrow cadre of elitists, and some people who fund it to pass laws
favouring their (EU made) products.
Stop lying about the EU, I'm going to keep posting these links until you
stop speaking out of your arse:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Parliament https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Council https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Commission
Its currency is a shambles and has plunged its southern states into
poverty and debt,
Our currency fell on the Brexit vote and has never recovered since, so
if the EU's currency is a shambles, ours must be even worse.
it has no army,
It doesn't need one, and any sensible person would think that's a good
thing.
it cannot police its borders as millions of middle eastern immigrants
flood in,
I thought the general complaint was the immigrants were flooding into
the UK, not Europe? Otherwise why are they risking drowning crossing
the Channel in unsuitable craft.
and it is now in a state of abject energy crisis because of it
reliance on toy windmills and solar panels.
Bollocks, where is your *EVIDENCE* for this claim?
[snip usual The Unnatural Pillock whingeing]
Ultimately you have to ask whether a 19th century top down colonial
bureaucracy designed by an Italian communist is an appropriate way to
run a continent.
A top down colonial bureaucracy is exactly how the UK is run, even
though we don't really have colonies any more.
Time will tell.
But, either way, you'll still be lying your arse off.
The EU as an institution fundamentally exists as a mechanism for
the nations of Europe to relinquish sovereign rights together in the interests of the people of Europe
On 21 Dec 2021 at 14:02:42 GMT, Martin Gregorie <martin@mydomain.invalid> wrote:
On Tue, 21 Dec 2021 08:43:32 +0000, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
Ultimately the sovereign rights of nations need to become asSpot on. Having just read David Abulafia's "The Great Sea" (its about
obsolete as the rights of feudal lords, which they are the remnant of.
The world is too small for nations, they do stupid things like fighting
wars and squabbling over resources. Look at the way the United States is >>> constantly in need of an enemy, whenever one goes away they have to find >>> a new one.
Mediterranean history from the Ionian era to the present) the fact that
the USA had a naval force in the Mediterranean fighting corsairs even
before its 25th anniversary really me sit up. I didn't know anything
about that and I bet not many US citizens do either.
Are you positing this to be a bad thing? Perhaps you're unaware that the Barbary Coast of North Africa (present-day Tunisia/Morocco) was a hotbed of piracy back then. These pirates raided southern France, Malta, even as far as England and Ireland, and those they captured were taken back and sold into slavery. This is not even to mention the arabs of the middle-east, who raided down much of the east coast of Africa, again with a view to capturing the inhabitants to be sold as slaves.
Of course it's not PC to mention this, since we all know that slavery is all the fault of whitey.
On Tue, 21 Dec 2021 08:43:32 +0000, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
Ultimately the sovereign rights of nations need to become asSpot on. Having just read David Abulafia's "The Great Sea" (its about Mediterranean history from the Ionian era to the present) the fact that
obsolete as the rights of feudal lords, which they are the remnant of.
The world is too small for nations, they do stupid things like fighting
wars and squabbling over resources. Look at the way the United States is
constantly in need of an enemy, whenever one goes away they have to find
a new one.
the USA had a naval force in the Mediterranean fighting corsairs even
before its 25th anniversary really me sit up. I didn't know anything
about that and I bet not many US citizens do either.
I don't believe in voting for someone who will benefit us the most;
he doesn't exist. I vote for the one who will hurt us the least -
although in extreme cases I'll hold my nose and vote for the one
most likely to stop the one who could hurt us the most.
There is also a theory, that the reason why Europe arise to dominance in
the middle ages is precisely because it comprised tens of little principalities always at war with each other and looking for 'Lebensraum'.
The massive pace of technological development between 1935 and 2000 was
the direct result of pouring resources into warcraft, and the massive
spinoff of high tech that ensued .
On 20/12/2021 22:03, Java Jive wrote:
When are you?
On 19/12/2021 10:36, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
The salient point is that the MEPs have no power whatsoever to change
anything. They are neither the originators nor the passers of policy.
They are in effect an 'upper house' a senate, a house of lords, who
can at best stop legislation if they can be bothered to read it or
attend parliament. Most do not. It is a purely ceremonial position.
In the EU, the power is with the commissioners and the various
Presidents none of who undergo popular election. Like every other
communist state a Party of bureacrats controls everything, the
elections are just for show, and nothing ever changes in response to
popular demand.
Lobbyists from multinational corporations dictate policy.
The people are there to buy their product and shut up.
When are you going to stop lying about the EU???!!!
This is how the EU actually works, either read and understand it, or
don't bother and stop speaking out of your arse about things that you
can't be arsed to understand:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Parliament
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Council
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Commission
Those exactly confirms what I have said, the European parliament is an 'upper' house only - it does not debate policy, merely rubber stamps it.
The council has no power to initaiate or execute policy. it is just
another taklkingshop
Only the unelected commissioners initiate policy, and they do so
according to whatever takes their fancy, or whoever lines their bank
accounts
In fact when are going to stop lying, full stop???!!!
I am not lying. You are.
Like most countries, Britain does most of its trade with its nearest
geographical neighbours,
No, it doesn't.
and as our nearest geographical neighbours are
in the EU, it never made any sense at all for us to leave,
total bollocks. trade is but one tiny part of it and trade is global.
for anyone who isn't a head in the sand dyed in the wool swivel eyed begammoned little Europeaner.
The world is bigger than Brussels.
the only
reason we did so being the prevalence of bigoted and shameless liars
like you. If you don't like what is happening to the country now,
blame yourself, because you've lied about the EU for decades, voted to
leave it, and thereby voted to make this country poorer, so you have
directly contributed to the shit we're in, so stop moaning and shut
the fuck up.
I see you are indeed a head in the sand dyed in the wool swivel eyed begammoned little Europeaner. And in total denial.
On 20/12/2021 22:43, Java Jive wrote:
On 19/12/2021 10:56, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
And it is not even correct to say that the EU represents the citizens
of the 27 countries that still are in it. It doesn't. It represents a
narrow cadre of elitists, and some people who fund it to pass laws
favouring their (EU made) products.
Stop lying about the EU, I'm going to keep posting these links until
you stop speaking out of your arse:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Parliament
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Council
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Commission
Thise completely provces my point. Have ytou actually READ them?
Its currency is a shambles and has plunged its southern states into
poverty and debt,
Our currency fell on the Brexit vote and has never recovered since, so
if the EU's currency is a shambles, ours must be even worse.
Not really, we dont havce te unemployment te EU hgas.
it has no army,
It doesn't need one, and any sensible person would think that's a good
thing.
it cannot police its borders as millions of middle eastern immigrants
flood in,
I thought the general complaint was the immigrants were flooding into
the UK, not Europe? Otherwise why are they risking drowning crossing
the Channel in unsuitable craft.
They are flooding into the UK VIA the EU.
Idiot,.
and it is now in a state of abject energy crisis because of it
reliance on toy windmills and solar panels.
Bollocks, where is your *EVIDENCE* for this claim?
Well look at this
https://www.energylive.cloud/
how come energy prices are *5 times* what they are from coal or nuclear.,
[snip usual The Unnatural Pillock whingeing]
Ultimately you have to ask whether a 19th century top down colonial
bureaucracy designed by an Italian communist is an appropriate way to
run a continent.
A top down colonial bureaucracy is exactly how the UK is run, even
though we don't really have colonies any more.
No, it isnt. You are more ignorant about UK politics than the EUs.
No, you are, but I will excuse that on the grounds that you are simplyTime will tell.
But, either way, you'll still be lying your arse off.
to stupid to realise it. As is typical for fanatical EU supporters. All emotion, no reason, they are right everyone else is wrong,. misled,
stupid, etc etc.
In reality its you elitists that drank the EU Koolaid, not people who
spent years considering their options before deciding to leave a corrupt mafia style self-legalising protection racket.
On 21/12/2021 09:20, TimS wrote:
And the irony is, that the links he supplied totally confirm that!
On 20 Dec 2021 at 22:30:31 GMT, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
See the links given in my reply to the The Unnatural Pillock for how the >>> EU system of government really works.
We already know how it really works: an unelected dictatorship with no
opposition and with the public having no opportunity to affect that.
On 20 Dec 2021 at 22:28:33 GMT, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
On 19/12/2021 15:57, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 19/12/2021 15:50, alister wrote:
FPTP needs to be replaced
No, it doesn't.
Yes it does ...
It always - nearly always gives a clear working majority to a single party. >>> People who say it isn't 'fair' have a childish view of democracy. It
isn't there to 'represent the people' it is there to be able to sack the >>> executive without a (civil) war.
In other words, it nearly always leads to an elected dictatorship for
four years.
After which there's a chance to remove it, which is the point.
I saw an example of how coalitions can be bad during my (brief) stint as a parish councillor. Before 1997, Cambridgeshire County Council was run by a Lib-Lab coalition. During that time, Social Services was a mess and there were
many instances of child neglect being poorly handled with some instances of death resulting. I asked the local Lib-Dem County Councillor why this was. He thought for a minute and then said that it was most likely due to the lack of clear political control of Social Services. Each of the two parties had its own appointee there, but no one was in overall charge.
With an elected dictatorship, you know where the buck stops. I detested the Blair Labour Govt, but at least you knew who was in charge and it's up to the Opposition to point out it's failings.
On 21/12/2021 10:08, Pancho wrote:
On 21/12/2021 09:20, TimS wrote:
We already know how it really works: an unelected dictatorship with no
opposition and with the public having no opportunity to affect that.
I'll vote for that!
You may. It will have no effect whatsoever.!
Hitler also came to power democratically, but he didn't leave power that
way.
Suddenly everyone is talking nuclear, instead of renewables.
Consider the potential imposition of veganism across say the EU, for
alleged reasons of health and climate change.
I voted to leave the EU primarily for one reason unique to me.
I wanted to stop this insane expensive gouging of the consumer to
produce energy from unreliable intermittent sources. I talked to my MP,
he said it is government policy, I talked to ministers, they said it was
an EU directive, I talked to my MEP, and he laughed and said 'we can't
stop it, we are only MEPS, we have no power to do anything, but the pay
is good!' And I asked 'where does the policy come from' And they said 'Siemens lobbied the commissioners along with Vattenfall, they are
making a fortune out of it, that's why the directive is not about carbon dioxide, reduction at all, it is simply promoting a technology that is
very quick to make a fast profit on, and the Greens like, that means we
still burn just as much oil and gas, so the oil companies are sanguine
too.'
That was when I realised that the only democratic path left to a
concerned UK citizens was to work tirelessly to leave the EU. People
make mistakes, and if you can't sack them when they keep on making them
why would they bother not to?
Ultimately the sovereign rights of nations need to become as
obsolete as the rights of feudal lords, which they are the remnant
of. The world is too small for nations, they do stupid things like
fighting wars and squabbling over resources.
Look at the way the United States is constantly in need of an
enemy, whenever one goes away they have to find a new one.
The real problem being that British politicians don't know how to put personal politics and ambition aside to compromise and work for the
common good.
With an elected dictatorship, you know where the buck stops. I detested
the Blair Labour Govt, but at least you knew who was in charge and it's
up to the Opposition to point out it's failings.
And we got embroiled in a foreign war.
Are you positing this to be a bad thing? Perhaps you're unaware that the Barbary Coast of North Africa (present-day Tunisia/Morocco) was a hotbed
of piracy back then. These pirates raided southern France, Malta, even
as far as England and Ireland, and those they captured were taken back
and sold into slavery. This is not even to mention the arabs of the middle-east, who raided down much of the east coast of Africa, again
with a view to capturing the inhabitants to be sold as slaves.
Of course it's not PC to mention this, since we all know that slavery is
all the fault of whitey.
On 21/12/2021 09:19, TimS wrote:
With an elected dictatorship, you know where the buck stops. I detested the >> Blair Labour Govt, but at least you knew who was in charge and it's up to the
Opposition to point out it's failings.
And we got embroiled in a foreign war.
Ah, a bit like the EU then, that tried and failed in the Balkans. NATO
had to come and save them.
On 21 Dec 2021 22:08:14 GMT, TimS wrote:
The EU has never had a military so, by definition, NATO could not have
Ah, a bit like the EU then, that tried and failed in the Balkans. NATO
had to come and save them.
'come in and saved them'.
In any case, everything that went down in 1991/2 seems to have been an
purely internal Yugoslavian matter. Yugoslavia was Tito's construct post
WW2. It was essentially assembled post WW2 by Tito from a number of small kingdoms who historically hated each other, and didn't stop doing so
during WW2.
If you want the whole story, read "Eastern Approaches" by Fitzroy Mclean,
who was there during the 2nd half of WW2 and knew Tito really well. The
book is a rattling good read, too: the old boy did some amazing
travelling pre-war and was a founding member of the SAS during it, but I digress.
With its history, its scarcely surprising that Yugoslavia disintegrated
when and how it did:
Tito had died in 1980
and the Soviet Union was in
the process of rapid unplanned disassembly in progress in 1991/2. I
remember that very well: I was at a sporting event in Zrenjanin in summer 1991 when it all kicked off and we were VERY pleased to make it back into Hungary and, before you ask, Hungary wasn't in the EU then - it didn't
join until 2004.
In fact the only part of the former Yugoslavia that ever has been an EU member is Croatia, which joined in 2013. Serbia applied to join in 2014
but still hasn't done so.
On 21/12/2021 14:37, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
When are you?
When are you going to stop lying about the EU???!!!
I posted links that explain how EU democracy actually works, that is not lying, whereas you are always spouting lies about the EU.
This is how the EU actually works, either read and understand it, or
don't bother and stop speaking out of your arse about things that you
can't be arsed to understand:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Parliament
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Council
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Commission
Those exactly confirms what I have said, the European parliament is
an 'upper' house only - it does not debate policy, merely rubber
stamps it.
The council has no power to initaiate or execute policy. it is just
another taklkingshop
Only the unelected commissioners initiate policy, and they do so
according to whatever takes their fancy, or whoever lines their bank
accounts
ALL FALSE! READ THE LINKS AND STOP LYING!
On Tue, 21 Dec 2021 15:46:23 +0000
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
There is also a theory, that the reason why Europe arise to dominance in
the middle ages is precisely because it comprised tens of little
principalities always at war with each other and looking for 'Lebensraum'.
This seems like a very reasonable theory - and Europeans exploded across the world because attacking the neighbours was becoming too difficult/dangerous.
The massive pace of technological development between 1935 and 2000 was
the direct result of pouring resources into warcraft, and the massive
spinoff of high tech that ensued .
For sure, and that has directly resulted in the world becoming too small and fragile compared to our destructive capabilities for us to
indulge in hobbies like war - it is not been safe to pack a picnic and go
and watch the lads fight for a while now. These days it's best to watch from a different continent by TV but it'll get dodgy sharing the same planet if the more enthusiastic lads ever get their way.
On 21/12/2021 14:40, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 21/12/2021 10:08, Pancho wrote:
On 21/12/2021 09:20, TimS wrote:
We already know how it really works: an unelected dictatorship with no >>>> opposition and with the public having no opportunity to affect that.
Bollocks, read the links given up thread about how the EU really works
and stop lying out of your arse.
I'll vote for that!
You may. It will have no effect whatsoever.!
Hitler also came to power democratically, but he didn't leave power
that way.
Whereas EU functions democratically.
On 21/12/2021 14:38, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 21/12/2021 09:20, TimS wrote:
And the irony is, that the links he supplied totally confirm that!
On 20 Dec 2021 at 22:30:31 GMT, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote: >>>>
See the links given in my reply to the The Unnatural Pillock for how
the
EU system of government really works.
We already know how it really works: an unelected dictatorship with no
opposition and with the public having no opportunity to affect that.
No they don't read them properly and stop lying about the EU.
In fact the only part of the former Yugoslavia that ever has been an EU member is Croatia, which joined in 2013. Serbia applied to join in 2014
but still hasn't done so.
On 21/12/2021 16:51, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
On Tue, 21 Dec 2021 15:46:23 +0000
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
There is also a theory, that the reason why Europe arise to dominance
in the middle ages is precisely because it comprised tens of little
principalities always at war with each other and looking for
'Lebensraum'.
This seems like a very reasonable theory - and Europeans
exploded across the world because attacking the neighbours was becoming
too difficult/dangerous.
The massive pace of technological development between 1935 and 2000 was
the direct result of pouring resources into warcraft, and the massive
spinoff of high tech that ensued .
For sure, and that has directly resulted in the world becoming
too small and fragile compared to our destructive capabilities for us to indulge in hobbies like war - it is not been safe to pack a picnic and
go and watch the lads fight for a while now. These days it's best to
watch from a different continent by TV but it'll get dodgy sharing the
same planet if the more enthusiastic lads ever get their way.
Well you aren't as deep a student of warcraft as you should be. War is
not carried out by other means than the massive hammer blow of a megaton nuclear strike.
Even Desert Storm is a bit outdated. What you do now is precision
strikes on opposition leaders, or cyber war, or propaganda and AgitProp.
But all this conveniently ignores the role of those Africans and Arabs
who provided the slaves who ended up in the Caribbean and 'The Deep
South' of America.
There seems to be remarkably little difference between the mental
capacity and attitudes of the ruling classes to their subjects,
regardless of whether those were called serfs, slaves, millhands,
labourers or zero-hour contractors and whether the rulers were called Alexander The Great, Julius Cesar, King Henry VIII, Beneto Mussolini,
Comrade Stalin, Ayatollah Khomeini, Robert Mugabe, Donald Trump or
Alexander Lukashenko
.
But all this conveniently ignores the role of those Africans and Arabs
who provided the slaves who ended up in the Caribbean and 'The Deep
South' of America.
On 21 Dec 2021 at 18:49:28 GMT, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
On 21/12/2021 09:19, TimS wrote:
With an elected dictatorship, you know where the buck stops. I detested the >>> Blair Labour Govt, but at least you knew who was in charge and it's up to the
Opposition to point out it's failings.
And we got embroiled in a foreign war.
Ah, a bit like the EU then, that tried and failed in the Balkans. NATO had to come and save them.
On 21 Dec 2021 at 20:25:59 GMT, Martin Gregorie <martin@mydomain.invalid> wrote:
But all this conveniently ignores the role of those Africans and Arabs
who provided the slaves who ended up in the Caribbean and 'The Deep
South' of America.
Those African kings and Chieftains who raided their neighbours and took prisoners for slavery, you mean? Who'd been doing that for years and who were quite happy to sell them on to slave traders when that opportunity arose. Well
of course that's something else that's not to be mentioned in polite, oops, PC
society.
Those African kings and Chieftains who raided their neighbours and took prisoners for slavery, you mean? Who'd been doing that for years and who were quite happy to sell them on to slave traders when that opportunity arose.
On Wed, 22 Dec 2021 10:53:50 +0000
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 21/12/2021 16:51, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
On Tue, 21 Dec 2021 15:46:23 +0000Well you aren't as deep a student of warcraft as you should be. War is
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
There is also a theory, that the reason why Europe arise to dominance
in the middle ages is precisely because it comprised tens of little
principalities always at war with each other and looking for
'Lebensraum'.
This seems like a very reasonable theory - and Europeans
exploded across the world because attacking the neighbours was becoming
too difficult/dangerous.
The massive pace of technological development between 1935 and 2000 was >>>> the direct result of pouring resources into warcraft, and the massive
spinoff of high tech that ensued .
For sure, and that has directly resulted in the world becoming
too small and fragile compared to our destructive capabilities for us to >>> indulge in hobbies like war - it is not been safe to pack a picnic and
go and watch the lads fight for a while now. These days it's best to
watch from a different continent by TV but it'll get dodgy sharing the
same planet if the more enthusiastic lads ever get their way.
not carried out by other means than the massive hammer blow of a megaton
nuclear strike.
Of course, that's only been done once, ever since then the hammer
has been held behind the back, but it's still there.
Even Desert Storm is a bit outdated. What you do now is precision
strikes on opposition leaders, or cyber war, or propaganda and AgitProp.
Have you seen Gaza recently ? Some folks are behind the times, and
some of them have nuclear toys. Also the combination of cyber war and automated weapons is not a pretty one to contemplate.
On 21/12/2021 18:43, Java Jive wrote:
On 21/12/2021 14:40, The Natural Philosopher wrote:The EU does not even function, let alone democratically.
On 21/12/2021 10:08, Pancho wrote:
On 21/12/2021 09:20, TimS wrote:
We already know how it really works: an unelected dictatorship with no >>>>> opposition and with the public having no opportunity to affect that.
Bollocks, read the links given up thread about how the EU really works
and stop lying out of your arse.
I'll vote for that!
You may. It will have no effect whatsoever.!
Hitler also came to power democratically, but he didn't leave power
that way.
Whereas EU functions democratically.
Tell me, as an EU citizen, how you, for example get rid of Von der
Leyen, and put in someone else, or who you vote for to, for example, get
rid of the directive on renewable obligations?
The short answer is that you are powerless. Even if you change your
national government by democratic process
On 21 Dec 2021 22:08:14 GMT, TimS wrote:
Ah, a bit like the EU then, that tried and failed in the Balkans. NATO
had to come and save them.
The EU has never had a military so, by definition, NATO could not have
'come in and saved them'.
If you want the whole story, read "Eastern Approaches" by Fitzroy Mclean,
who was there during the 2nd half of WW2 and knew Tito really well. The
book is a rattling good read, too: the old boy did some amazing
travelling pre-war and was a founding member of the SAS during it, but I digress.
On 21/12/2021 18:45, Java Jive wrote:
On 21/12/2021 14:38, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 21/12/2021 09:20, TimS wrote:
And the irony is, that the links he supplied totally confirm that!
We already know how it really works: an unelected dictatorship with no >>>> opposition and with the public having no opportunity to affect that.
No they don't read them properly and stop lying about the EU.
I did read them properly, But I cant help you being in denial and not
reading them properly yourself.
Examine the myth of 'equality'. Mediaeval society realised that
literacy and numeracy were pointless in and unaffordable by the
labouring classes. Basically you could have a few educated people, or no educated people.
They decided on the former, and society prospered
Today we have the latter, and society is collapsing
What works, is what works. Today's progressive 'full Marx for everyone' society will either succeed in creating willing slaves of us all, or it
will collapse due to lack of anybody with any specialist skills. Or in
fact both.
And someone who hits on a nasty repressive illiberal and totally fascist solution will come in and take over.
Take your pick between Islam and the CCP. They know what to do with
LBGT and dissidents in an overpopulated world....
The Liberal Left are all romantic hand wavey ideologues focussing on
what their simple minds conceive the world *ought* to be.
Whilst completely ignoring the hard inescapable reality of what it
actually *is*. Outside of their 'safe space' kindergartens.
Well if it lasts, I will be surprised. Its not nearly as stable as a
police state.
EU has always strutted and fretted its hour upon the stage, hiding
behind the skirts of NATO, telling tales invented by idiots, full of
moral indignation and
signifying nothing.
I have come to the conclusions that those who want to return to it, are
like the plantation slaves of the deep south, who, shorn of their
shackles, wept, because now they couldn't handle not being told what to do.
Cradle to the grave socialism, that's what those slaves had.
The face of the enemy on the other side of the asymmetry is ExtinctionRebellion, Black LivesMatter, Greenpeace...etc etc. All good AgitProp teams ready to create as much dissension within a culture as possible. Mind fuck versus hi tech.
Ask the same questions about the UK government! How do yo get rid of a proven liar while holding office, who therefore should be detained at
her majesty's pleasure in one of Her Majesty's prisons, not Her
Majesty's Prime Minister's accommodation, and has betrayed the best
interests of the country, and allowed thousands of its citizens to die avoidably, and who wasn't elected by the majority of the electorate?
On 21/12/2021 18:40, Java Jive wrote:
On 21/12/2021 14:37, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
When are you?
When are you going to stop lying about the EU???!!!
I posted links that explain how EU democracy actually works, that is
not lying, whereas you are always spouting lies about the EU.
This is how the EU actually works, either read and understand it, or
don't bother and stop speaking out of your arse about things that
you can't be arsed to understand:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Parliament
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Council
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Commission
Those exactly confirms what I have said, the European parliament is
an 'upper' house only - it does not debate policy, merely rubber
stamps it.
The council has no power to initaiate or execute policy. it is just
another taklkingshop
FALSE! See contrary example above.Only the unelected commissioners initiate policy, and they do so
according to whatever takes their fancy, or whoever lines their bank
accounts
ALL FALSE! READ THE LINKS AND STOP LYING!
Read the links which confirm what I say, and show you are lying, and
calm down,
Fake news kills!
On 22/12/2021 11:04, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 21/12/2021 18:45, Java Jive wrote:
On 21/12/2021 14:38, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 21/12/2021 09:20, TimS wrote:
And the irony is, that the links he supplied totally confirm that!
We already know how it really works: an unelected dictatorship with no >>>>> opposition and with the public having no opportunity to affect that. >>>>>
No they don't read them properly and stop lying about the EU.
I did read them properly, But I cant help you being in denial and not
reading them properly yourself.
No you didn't, you're just lying again, quote the parts that say the the
EU is an unelected dictatorship.
On 22/12/2021 16:30, Java Jive wrote:
On 22/12/2021 11:04, The Natural Philosopher wrote:no, you tell me how anyone in the EU can remove von der leyen or any commissioner by means of a democratic vote.
On 21/12/2021 18:45, Java Jive wrote:
On 21/12/2021 14:38, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 21/12/2021 09:20, TimS wrote:
And the irony is, that the links he supplied totally confirm that!
We already know how it really works: an unelected dictatorship with no >>>>>> opposition and with the public having no opportunity to affect that. >>>>>>
No they don't read them properly and stop lying about the EU.
I did read them properly, But I cant help you being in denial and not
reading them properly yourself.
No you didn't, you're just lying again, quote the parts that say the the
EU is an unelected dictatorship.
The USSR had elections too, and called itself a democracy.
But most people would say it was in the end an unelected dictatorship,
and only one party ever won, and the people who ran it were all selected
by officials from that party.
If you want to live in a neo communist/fascist totalitarian state,
fuck off and move.
I don't and Brexit won. More people in Britain wanted to leave it than
wanted to stay.
British democracy is always about how to change the CEO without having
to behead him and have a civil war.
EU is all about never being able to change the CEO except by having a
civil war, as les gilet jaunes will tell you
On 22/12/2021 16:27, Java Jive wrote:
Ask the same questions about the UK government! How do yo get rid of
a proven liar while holding office, who therefore should be detained
at her majesty's pleasure in one of Her Majesty's prisons, not Her
Majesty's Prime Minister's accommodation, and has betrayed the best
interests of the country, and allowed thousands of its citizens to die
avoidably, and who wasn't elected by the majority of the electorate?
You give him a sinecure with the EU and send him off to be middle east
envoy, after first having voted him out and the tories in.
I assume of course you meant Blair. Well it took some doing for people
to realise what a lying twofaced britain hating cunt he was, but we know
now.
The way it works is quite simple. A by election is held
None of that is possible in the EU. The officials are immune from
prosecution and can only be dismissed by a unanimous vote, which has
never ever happened.
On 22/12/2021 16:30, Java Jive wrote:
On 22/12/2021 11:04, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 21/12/2021 18:45, Java Jive wrote:
On 21/12/2021 14:38, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 21/12/2021 09:20, TimS wrote:
And the irony is, that the links he supplied totally confirm that!
We already know how it really works: an unelected dictatorship
with no
opposition and with the public having no opportunity to affect that. >>>>>>
No they don't read them properly and stop lying about the EU.
I did read them properly, But I cant help you being in denial and not
reading them properly yourself.
No you didn't, you're just lying again, quote the parts that say the
the EU is an unelected dictatorship.
no, you tell me how anyone in the EU can remove von der leyen or any commissioner by means of a democratic vote.
If you want to live in a neo communist/fascist totalitarian state,
fuck off and move.
I don't and Brexit won.
More people
in Britain wanted to leave it than
wanted to stay.
British democracy is always about how to change the CEO without having
to behead him and have a civil war.
EU is all about never being able to change the CEO except by having a
civil war, as les gilet jaunes will tell you
EU is all about never being able to change the CEO except by having a
civil war, as les gilet jaunes will tell you
Protests in EU countries are always notably violent.
Poor old JJ. He keeps posting links, as if documenting the undemocratic nature
of the EU somehow excuses it.
On 22/12/2021 16:34, Java Jive wrote:
Fake news kills!
That makes you a murderer then
As I keep saying, you don't understand how the EU works, because it's
never happened in the UK either - when was the last time an unanimous
vote was held to dismiss all the senior civil servants, who are the
nearest UK equivalent of the Commission?
On 22/12/2021 17:42, TimS wrote:
EU is all about never being able to change the CEO except by having a
civil war, as les gilet jaunes will tell you
Protests in EU countries are always notably violent.
Where is your *EVIDENCE* that protest within the EU are any more or less violent compared with ours.
On 22 Dec 2021 at 17:59:26 GMT, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
On 22/12/2021 17:42, TimS wrote:
EU is all about never being able to change the CEO except by having a
civil war, as les gilet jaunes will tell you
Protests in EU countries are always notably violent.
Where is your *EVIDENCE* that protest within the EU are any more or less
violent compared with ours.
Any news programme on the box.
Don't talk cock. Civil servants don't initiate legislation, unlike the Commission, which does.
Where is your *EVIDENCE* that protest within the EU are any more or
less violent compared with ours.
Any news programme on the box.
On 22 Dec 2021 at 19:22:33 GMT, John Hasler <john@sugarbit.com> wrote:
Java Jive writes:
Where is your *EVIDENCE* that protest within the EU are any more or
less violent compared with ours.
TimS writes:
Any news programme on the box.
USA newsies are unlikely to consider nonviolent protests in the EU
newsworthy (and EU newsies are unlikely to consider nonviolent protests
in the USA newsworthy).
I'm not talking about non-violent protests. I'm talking about those such as gilets-jaunes, where there have been some deaths. That they might or might not
have been reported in the USA is neither here nor there.
One may note that protests in the US are often violent, too, and for the same fundamental reason: lack of any meaningful political change possible at the ballot box.
Java Jive writes:
Where is your *EVIDENCE* that protest within the EU are any more or
less violent compared with ours.
TimS writes:
Any news programme on the box.
USA newsies are unlikely to consider nonviolent protests in the EU
newsworthy (and EU newsies are unlikely to consider nonviolent protests
in the USA newsworthy).
Java Jive writes:
Where is your *EVIDENCE* that protest within the EU are any more or
less violent compared with ours.
TimS writes:
Any news programme on the box.
USA newsies are unlikely to consider nonviolent protests in the EU
newsworthy (and EU newsies are unlikely to consider nonviolent protests
in the USA newsworthy).
On 22 Dec 2021 at 19:22:33 GMT, John Hasler <john@sugarbit.com> wrote:
Java Jive writes:
Where is your *EVIDENCE* that protest within the EU are any more or
less violent compared with ours.
TimS writes:
Any news programme on the box.
USA newsies are unlikely to consider nonviolent protests in the EU
newsworthy (and EU newsies are unlikely to consider nonviolent protests
in the USA newsworthy).
I'm not talking about non-violent protests. I'm talking about those such as gilets-jaunes, where there have been some deaths. That they might or might not
have been reported in the USA is neither here nor there.
One may note that protests in the US are often violent, too, and for the same fundamental reason: lack of any meaningful political change possible at the ballot box.
And there are lethal riots in the UK too, so I repeat where is your *EVIDENCE* that protest within the EU are any more or less violent
compared with ours.
The Left runs on all this bullshit, trying to modify the way we see the
world from plain common sense to moralising puritans.
On Thu, 23 Dec 2021 08:41:50 +0000
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
The Left runs on all this bullshit, trying to modify the way we see the
world from plain common sense to moralising puritans.
All political movements of all stripes run on "all this bullshit"
the only difference is the flavour of bullshit they run on - this is the fundamental difference between politics and engineering, politics is about people (irrational, fearful, self-interested, dishonest ...) while engineering is about things (they just are). No matter how much we may wish otherwise the world of people is run by politics not engineering - the
tricky part is to avoid being led over the edge of the cliff by the politicians.
On Thu, 23 Dec 2021 08:41:50 +0000 The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
The Left runs on all this bullshit, trying to modify the way we see the world from plain common sense to moralising puritans.
All political movements of all stripes run on "all this bullshit" the only difference is the flavour of bullshit they run on - this is the fundamental difference between politics and engineering, politics is about people (irrational, fearful, self-interested, dishonest ...) while engineering is about things (they just are). No matter how much we may wish otherwise the world of people is run by politics not engineering - the
tricky part is to avoid being led over the edge of the cliff by the politicians.
In message <20211223093706.babfd67ae742f3bcdbf86d5e@eircom.net>
Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
On Thu, 23 Dec 2021 08:41:50 +0000 The Natural Philosopher
<tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
The Left runs on all this bullshit, trying to modify the way we see the
world from plain common sense to moralising puritans.
All political movements of all stripes run on "all this bullshit" the >> only difference is the flavour of bullshit they run on - this is the
fundamental difference between politics and engineering, politics is about >> people (irrational, fearful, self-interested, dishonest ...) while
engineering is about things (they just are). No matter how much we may wish >> otherwise the world of people is run by politics not engineering - the
tricky part is to avoid being led over the edge of the cliff by the
politicians.
... and the conspiracy theorists.
The latter have caused the deaths of countless people by spreading
ant-vax lies. The anti-renewable-energy lot (it's difficult to
accept that people really can be so stupid as to claim that renewable
energy doesn't/can't work, given the huge numbers of examples of it
working, now, in the real world)
deaths from pollution. So their victims have, in effect, been led
over the edge of the cliff.
David
On 23/12/2021 19:00, David Higton wrote:
In message <20211223093706.babfd67ae742f3bcdbf86d5e@eircom.net>
Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
On Thu, 23 Dec 2021 08:41:50 +0000 The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
The Left runs on all this bullshit, trying to modify the way we see
the world from plain common sense to moralising puritans.
All political movements of all stripes run on "all this bullshit" the only difference is the flavour of bullshit they run on - this is the fundamental difference between politics and engineering, politics is about people (irrational, fearful, self-interested, dishonest ...)
while engineering is about things (they just are). No matter how much
we may wish otherwise the world of people is run by politics not engineering - the tricky part is to avoid being led over the edge of
the cliff by the politicians.
... and the conspiracy theorists.
The latter have caused the deaths of countless people by spreading
ant-vax lies. The anti-renewable-energy lot (it's difficult to accept
that people really can be so stupid as to claim that renewable energy doesn't/can't work, given the huge numbers of examples of it working,
now, in the real world)
It works to make money.It doesn't work to generate reliable electricity
and it doesnt work to reduce carbon emissions
But you need to understand engineering to see that.
will continue to cause countless
deaths from pollution. So their victims have, in effect, been led over
the edge of the cliff.
The people who will kill millions are the people who mandated renewable energy.
On 23/12/2021 19:00, David Higton wrote:
... and the conspiracy theorists.
The latter have caused the deaths of countless people by spreading
ant-vax lies. The anti-renewable-energy lot (it's difficult to
accept that people really can be so stupid as to claim that renewable
energy doesn't/can't work, given the huge numbers of examples of it
working, now, in the real world)
It works to make money.It doesn't work to generate reliable electricity
and it doesnt work to reduce carbon emissions
But you need to understand engineering to see that.
The people who will kill millions are the people who mandated renewable energy.
On 22/12/2021 21:37, Java Jive wrote:
And there are lethal riots in the UK too, so I repeat where is your
*EVIDENCE* that protest within the EU are any more or less violent
compared with ours.
[Snip bullshit too long and totally devoid of links to *EVIDENCE* to be worth reading]
Ah well, you need to hit an alt-right site like Breitbart to get any
news at all that isn't 'onLiberalMessage' and then you have to apply the inverseRedneck™ filter to remove the bias *there*..
I now see that you are nothing but a troll,
and without the understanding
of engineering that you claim.
On 23/12/2021 09:35, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 22/12/2021 21:37, Java Jive wrote:
And there are lethal riots in the UK too, so I repeat where is your
*EVIDENCE* that protest within the EU are any more or less violent
compared with ours.
[Snip bullshit too long and totally devoid of links to *EVIDENCE* to
be worth reading]
I repeat where is your *EVIDENCE* that protests within the EU are any
more or less violent compared with ours.
On 23/12/2021 19:39, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 23/12/2021 19:00, David Higton wrote:
... and the conspiracy theorists.
The latter have caused the deaths of countless people by spreading
ant-vax lies. The anti-renewable-energy lot (it's difficult to
accept that people really can be so stupid as to claim that renewable
energy doesn't/can't work, given the huge numbers of examples of it
working, now, in the real world)
It works to make money.It doesn't work to generate reliable
electricity and it doesnt work to reduce carbon emissions
But you need to understand engineering to see that.
Again, if it's simply a matter of engineering, you should be able to
provide a link to support this claim with *EVIDENCE*, but you don't,
because you know you can't, because it's just another of your endless lies.
The people who will kill millions are the people who mandated
renewable energy.
Again, where is your *EVIDENCE* in support of this claim?
On 23/12/2021 22:27, David Higton wrote:
I now see that you are nothing but a troll,
... most decidedly ...
and without the understanding
of engineering that you claim.
He is reputed to have had some at one time, but I've never seen the
slightest evidence of it in any of his posts, which are clearly from a bigoted fool who's senility is becoming all too obvious to ignore.
In message <sq2j9f$769$1@dont-email.me>
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 23/12/2021 19:00, David Higton wrote:
In message <20211223093706.babfd67ae742f3bcdbf86d5e@eircom.net>
Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
On Thu, 23 Dec 2021 08:41:50 +0000 The Natural Philosopher
<tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
The Left runs on all this bullshit, trying to modify the way we see
the world from plain common sense to moralising puritans.
All political movements of all stripes run on "all this bullshit" the >>>> only difference is the flavour of bullshit they run on - this is the
fundamental difference between politics and engineering, politics is
about people (irrational, fearful, self-interested, dishonest ...)
while engineering is about things (they just are). No matter how much
we may wish otherwise the world of people is run by politics not
engineering - the tricky part is to avoid being led over the edge of
the cliff by the politicians.
... and the conspiracy theorists.
The latter have caused the deaths of countless people by spreading
ant-vax lies. The anti-renewable-energy lot (it's difficult to accept
that people really can be so stupid as to claim that renewable energy
doesn't/can't work, given the huge numbers of examples of it working,
now, in the real world)
It works to make money.It doesn't work to generate reliable electricity
and it doesnt work to reduce carbon emissions
But you need to understand engineering to see that.
will continue to cause countless
deaths from pollution. So their victims have, in effect, been led overThe people who will kill millions are the people who mandated renewable
the edge of the cliff.
energy.
I now see that you are nothing but a troll, and without the understanding
of engineering that you claim.
David
On 23/12/2021 23:20, Java Jive wrote:
I repeat where is your *EVIDENCE* that protests within the EU are any
more or less violent compared with ours.
I told you. carefully concealed.
On 23/12/2021 23:38, Java Jive wrote:
He is reputed to have had some at one time, but I've never seen the
slightest evidence of it in any of his posts, which are clearly from a
bigoted fool who's senility is becoming all too obvious to ignore.
And that shows me precisely what you are.
"a bigoted fool who's senility is becoming all too obvious to ignore."
On 23/12/2021 23:35, Java Jive wrote:
On 23/12/2021 19:39, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
The people who will kill millions are the people who mandated
renewable energy.
Again, where is your *EVIDENCE* in support of this claim?
Its all there in the data and what is happening to Western grids and in
the spiralling electricity prices
I am not interested in convincing bigots. Time will show whether or not
what I claim has merit.
On 24/12/2021 08:35, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
I have a first class honours degree in electrical engineeringI have a 1st Class Honours Degree in Mathematics & Computing,
I have a first class honours degree in electrical engineering
I have been researching the subject over 10 years.
You? Ah. you read it in the NY times I guess.
In an article written by an Art Student
On 24/12/2021 08:35, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
I have a first class honours degree in electrical engineering
I have been researching the subject over 10 years.
You? Ah. you read it in?? the NY times I guess.
In an article written by an Art Student
I have a 1st Class Honours Degree in Mathematics & Computing, and I've
been debunking for over 10 years your continuous lies about climate
change, the EU, nuclear power, and various others of your endless
bigotries as when they are endlessly recycled.
Java Jive wrote:
On 24/12/2021 08:35, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
I have a first class honours degree in electrical engineering
I have a 1st Class Honours Degree in Mathematics & Computing,
In German we have a word for that: "Schwanzvergleich".
On 2021-12-24, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
I have a 1st Class Honours Degree in Mathematics & Computing, and I've
been debunking for over 10 years your continuous lies about climate
change, the EU, nuclear power, and various others of your endless
bigotries as when they are endlessly recycled.
you noticed did you :-)
Why not just killfile him or ignore him. He likes the attention.
On 24/12/2021 20:08, Jim Jackson wrote:
On 2021-12-24, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
I have a 1st Class Honours Degree in Mathematics & Computing, and I've been debunking for over 10 years your continuous lies about climate change, the EU, nuclear power, and various others of your endless bigotries as when they are endlessly recycled.
you noticed did you :-) Why not just killfile him or ignore him. He likes the attention.
Yes, it's a problem that, by answering, you encourage the troll, but I
think worse is that by not answering and not debunking his shit, it
remains around for ever as dog-shit for others to step in - at least
this way every lie is debunked, so the next thing that people read after
the lie is the debunking, and thus can avoid being misled by the lies.
On 24/12/2021 18:09, Axel Berger wrote:
Java Jive wrote:
On 24/12/2021 08:35, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
I have a first class honours degree in electrical engineering
I have a 1st Class Honours Degree in Mathematics & Computing,
In German we have a word for that: "Schwanzvergleich".
Translates literally as "tail comparison", so I presume the vernacular
would be "arse comparison" :-)
On 24/12/2021 08:35, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 23/12/2021 23:20, Java Jive wrote:
I repeat where is your *EVIDENCE* that protests within the EU are any
more or less violent compared with ours.
I told you. carefully concealed.
In other words, there wasn't any, and you're just lying.
On 24/12/2021 18:09, Axel Berger wrote:
Java Jive wrote:
On 24/12/2021 08:35, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
I have a first class honours degree in electrical engineering
I have a 1st Class Honours Degree in Mathematics & Computing,
In German we have a word for that: "Schwanzvergleich".
Translates literally as "tail comparison", so I presume the vernacular
would be "arse comparison" :-)
On 24/12/2021 08:35, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
I have a first class honours degree in electrical engineering
I have been researching the subject over 10 years.
You? Ah. you read it in the NY times I guess.
In an article written by an Art Student
I have a 1st Class Honours Degree in Mathematics & Computing,
been debunking for over 10 years your continuous lies about climate
change, the EU, nuclear power, and various others of your endless
bigotries as when they are endlessly recycled.
In message <sq5d5q$v6b$1@dont-email.me>
Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
On 24/12/2021 20:08, Jim Jackson wrote:
On 2021-12-24, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
I have a 1st Class Honours Degree in Mathematics & Computing, and I've >>>> been debunking for over 10 years your continuous lies about climate
change, the EU, nuclear power, and various others of your endless
bigotries as when they are endlessly recycled.
you noticed did you :-) Why not just killfile him or ignore him. He likes >>> the attention.
Yes, it's a problem that, by answering, you encourage the troll, but I
think worse is that by not answering and not debunking his shit, it
remains around for ever as dog-shit for others to step in - at least
this way every lie is debunked, so the next thing that people read after
the lie is the debunking, and thus can avoid being misled by the lies.
Since he lies about everything, it seems reasonable to assume he lied
about the degree too - after all, there is no evidence that it has
done any good to his thought processes.
Java Jive wrote:
On 24/12/2021 08:35, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
I have a first class honours degree in electrical engineeringI have a 1st Class Honours Degree in Mathematics & Computing,
In German we have a word for that: "Schwanzvergleich".
On 24/12/2021 18:09, Axel Berger wrote:
Java Jive wrote:
On 24/12/2021 08:35, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
I have a first class honours degree in electrical engineering
I have a 1st Class Honours Degree in Mathematics & Computing,
In German we have a word for that: "Schwanzvergleich".
Translates literally as "tail comparison", so I presume the vernacular
would be "arse comparison" :-)
On 24/12/2021 08:37, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 23/12/2021 23:35, Java Jive wrote:
On 23/12/2021 19:39, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
The people who will kill millions are the people who mandated
renewable energy.
Again, where is your *EVIDENCE* in support of this claim?
Its all there in the data and what is happening to Western grids and
in the spiralling electricity prices
Still no *EVIDENCE* given, c'mon, where is it?
I am not interested in convincing bigots. Time will show whether or
not what I claim has merit.
Time is already showing that your bigoted claims above have no merit whatsoever.
On 24/12/2021 17:46, Java Jive wrote:
Illogical bigoted inference. How absolutely in character.
On 24/12/2021 08:35, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 23/12/2021 23:20, Java Jive wrote:
I repeat where is your *EVIDENCE* that protests within the EU are
any more or less violent compared with ours.
I told you. carefully concealed.
In other words, there wasn't any, and you're just lying.
https://www.brusselstimes.com/brussels-2/194630/brussels-riots-aftermath-44-arrests-3-injured-officers-and-a-lot-of-damage
But don't worry your pretty little head, its obviously fake news if you didn't read it in the Guardian.
On 24/12/2021 17:48, Java Jive wrote:
I'm the one who has been linking to facts here, you're the one
repeating baseless bigotry.
No.
I think I will leave it for others to judge that
On 2021-12-24, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
On 24/12/2021 18:09, Axel Berger wrote:
Java Jive wrote:
On 24/12/2021 08:35, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
I have a first class honours degree in electrical engineering
I have a 1st Class Honours Degree in Mathematics & Computing,
In German we have a word for that: "Schwanzvergleich".
Translates literally as "tail comparison", so I presume the vernacular
would be "arse comparison" :-)
"Schwanz" can also mean penis, so penis comparison
As in "penis size war" https://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803100315230
On 24/12/2021 21:09, Java Jive wrote:
On 24/12/2021 18:09, Axel Berger wrote:No dear. its willy waving.
Java Jive wrote:
On 24/12/2021 08:35, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
I have a first class honours degree in electrical engineering
I have a 1st Class Honours Degree in Mathematics & Computing,
In German we have a word for that: "Schwanzvergleich".
Translates literally as "tail comparison", so I presume the vernacular
would be "arse comparison" :-)
Cant even use google. Typical computer scientist.
On 24/12/2021 17:54, Java Jive wrote:
Not on today as its christmas
On 24/12/2021 08:37, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 23/12/2021 23:35, Java Jive wrote:
On 23/12/2021 19:39, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
The people who will kill millions are the people who mandated
renewable energy.
Again, where is your *EVIDENCE* in support of this claim?
Its all there in the data and what is happening to Western grids and
in the spiralling electricity prices
Still no *EVIDENCE* given, c'mon, where is it?
https://www.energylive.cloud/
I am not interested in convincing bigots. Time will show whether or
not what I claim has merit.
Time is already showing that your bigoted claims above have no merit
whatsoever.
so much hatred and ad hominems. Your renewable/climate denialism is strong
On 24/12/2021 17:52, Java Jive wrote:
On 24/12/2021 08:35, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
I have a first class honours degree in electrical engineering
I have been researching the subject over 10 years.
You? Ah. you read it in the NY times I guess.
In an article written by an Art Student
I have a 1st Class Honours Degree in Mathematics & Computing,
So you know fuck all about engineering then.
Or computer modelling in the earth sciences
and I've
been debunking for over 10 years your continuous lies about climate
change, the EU, nuclear power, and various others of your endless
bigotries as when they are endlessly recycled.
I think it was your claim back around 2010 that 'by 2020 the country
will be running entirely on renewable energy' that got me started into wondering whether that was a realistic statement
From being a complete believer in climate change in the 1990s I moved
to being utterly sceptical the more I learnt about the details of the so called science.
Unlike you, I kept an open mind and let the data, not the Guardian and
the BBC, form my worldview.
On 24/12/2021 22:34, David Higton wrote:
Since he lies about everything, it seems reasonable to assume he lied
about the degree too - after all, there is no evidence that it has
done any good to his thought processes.
There are people who know me who can confirm that and indeed my careers
in engineering and business.
Your attempts to ad hominen and cancel what I have to say by imputing
that I dont know what I am talking about are typical symptoms of those
who deny the truth about climate change and renewable energy - namely
that the first is 90% natural certainly not unprecedented and of no
great concern, and the second is a profitable scam.
But as I say, it doesn't matter. Having poured trillions into windmills
and locked the whole world down,. the rise in CO2 hasn't changed one
iota,
and all that has happened is that the European and UK grids are in
danger of collapse
and electricity prices are now 8 times what they were
20 years ago.
And Energiewende Germany is producing more CO2 per MWh than any other
nation in Europe.
*shrug*
You don't need to follow the detailed arguments, you just need to look
at te overall emissions of heavily renewable countries, the cost of electricity across Europe, and the day ahead price spikes that show the
grids are exceeding full capacity on windless and sunless days..
Children are still knowing what snow is, polar bears are thriving,
the
antarctic and many glaciers are increasing glaciation.
No islands have
disappeared under the sea,
and crop yields have never been higher.
If this is climate change, bring it on.
Sadly looking out of the window, this christmas is as cold and dismal as
all te other UK christmasses I can remember. Right back to te 1950s. The
only difference is towns are warmer, because everyone has central heating
On 25/12/2021 09:12, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 24/12/2021 17:48, Java Jive wrote:
I'm the one who has been linking to facts here, you're the one
repeating baseless bigotry.
No.
I think I will leave it for others to judge that
Fine, others have already given their opinions, mostly seemingly against
you.
He's not very convincing is he?
Of course there are schills out there actually paid to
spread FUD over climate change - like there were people paid to do the
same to discredit the link of smoking to cancer.
On 25/12/2021 21:35, Jim Jackson wrote:
Of course there are schills out there actually paid to
spread FUD over climate change - like there were people paid to do the
same to discredit the link of smoking to cancer.
On 26/12/2021 12:37, Java Jive wrote:
On 25/12/2021 21:35, Jim Jackson wrote:
Of course there are schills out there actually paid to
spread FUD over climate change - like there were people paid to do the
same to discredit the link of smoking to cancer.
What a fabulous conspiracy theory.
On 26/12/2021 14:32, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 26/12/2021 12:37, Java Jive wrote:
On 25/12/2021 21:35, Jim Jackson wrote:
Of course there are schills out there actually paid to spread FUD
over climate change - like there were people paid to do the same to discredit the link of smoking to cancer.
What a fabulous conspiracy theory.
We notice that you deliberately snipped all the evidence, proving yet
again that there's none so blind as *WILL* not see!
ant-vax lies. The anti-renewable-energy lot (it's difficult to
accept that people really can be so stupid as to claim that renewable
energy doesn't/can't work, given the huge numbers of examples of it
working, now, in the real world) ...
On 23/12/2021 22:27, David Higton wrote:~~~~~~~
I now see that you are nothing but a troll,
... most decidedly ...
and without the understanding
of engineering that you claim.
He is reputed to have had some at one time, but I've never seen the
slightest evidence of it in any of his posts, which are clearly from a bigoted fool who's senility is becoming all too obvious to ignore.
On 24/12/2021 08:35, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
I have a first class honours degree in electrical engineering
I have been researching the subject over 10 years.
You? Ah. you read it in the NY times I guess.
In an article written by an Art Student
I have a 1st Class Honours Degree in Mathematics & Computing, and ...
The latter have caused the deaths of countless people by spreading
ant-vax lies. The anti-renewable-energy lot (it's difficult to
accept that people really can be so stupid as to claim that renewable
energy doesn't/can't work, given the huge numbers of examples of it
working, now, in the real world) will continue to cause countless
deaths from pollution. So their victims have, in effect, been led
over the edge of the cliff.
On 23 Dec 2021 at 19:00:10 GMT, David Higton <dave@davehigton.me.uk> wrote:
ant-vax lies. The anti-renewable-energy lot (it's difficult to
accept that people really can be so stupid as to claim that renewable
energy doesn't/can't work, given the huge numbers of examples of it
working, now, in the real world) ...
Sure it works, for some value of "works". Here in the UK we just had a week when our 11,000 wind turbines could only produce 3% of our electricity requirement, and solar produced zero. Why? Because of a blocking high pressure
area - this happens a couple of times each winter, giving a period when the gas powered power stations plus nuclear have to pretty much produce all the rest. And no one has a credible plan as to how to replace the gas component.
On 23 Dec 2021 at 19:00:10 GMT, David Higton <dave@davehigton.me.uk> wrote:
The latter have caused the deaths of countless people by spreading
ant-vax lies. The anti-renewable-energy lot (it's difficult to
accept that people really can be so stupid as to claim that renewable
energy doesn't/can't work, given the huge numbers of examples of it
working, now, in the real world) will continue to cause countless
deaths from pollution. So their victims have, in effect, been led
over the edge of the cliff.
You could always look at gridwatch.org.uk to see what is actually happening minute to minute with UK electricity - or French for that matter.
On 24 Dec 2021 at 17:52:30 GMT, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
On 24/12/2021 08:35, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
I have a first class honours degree in electrical engineering
I have been researching the subject over 10 years.
You? Ah. you read it in the NY times I guess.
In an article written by an Art Student
I have a 1st Class Honours Degree in Mathematics & Computing, and ...
Mathematics and Computing doesn't cut it, I'm afraid. See my sig below. You're
just a bean-counter.
Everyone knows that the real answer to all this heath robinson grid
rubbish, the museum piece windmills, the massive grid extensions and international links, the batteries, the energy insecurity is to simply
throw in nuclear power to replace all the fossil power stations.
There are no problems with nuclear that cannot be and have not been
solved at one third the cost of the *overall* renewable solution - which
doesn't even effectively work as it was supposed to anyway.
On Mon, 27 Dec 2021 01:12:55 +0000
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
Everyone knows that the real answer to all this heath robinson grid
rubbish, the museum piece windmills, the massive grid extensions and
international links, the batteries, the energy insecurity is to simply
throw in nuclear power to replace all the fossil power stations.
It is an obvious and probably effective solution from a purely engineering perspective to the problem of "How do we get from depending on coal and oil for our energy to something else before the coal and oil
become too expensive to use".
The trouble is of course that the engineering aspects of the
problem are the smallest aspects. The real problems are social and
political.
There are no problems with nuclear that cannot be and have not been
solved at one third the cost of the *overall* renewable solution - which
There is one problem with nuclear that you ignore, and for which
nobody has yet found a solution - it has become increasingly difficult to site and fund a nuclear power plant ever since the Three Mile Island plant had troubles.
Nuclear plants are extremely expensive to build at the best of times
but when each and every one requires a decades long campaign to find a site there's no way we can ever get enough of the things built. Also CND did far too good a job of hammering home the relationship between nuclear power and nuclear weapons as it was then. As for siting a reprocessing plant - good luck with that!
Toshiba tried really hard with their 4S design to create a market
for a commodity fit-and-forget nuclear power plant and failed.
If some bright spark invents a table-top fusion reactor with no
output other than electricity and heat that costs like a microwave oven to build and produces a gigawatt hour out of a teaspoon of water ... they'd better not use the word "nuclear" when describing it.
doesn't even effectively work as it was supposed to anyway.
Back in 1973 when the idea that there wasn't an infinite supply of cheap oil first started to rattle in people's heads there was a claim made that the UK did not have to worry unduly because there was enough coal
under Wales to keep the UK in energy for the next three centuries - I
somehow doubt it but it may in fact be true, and more to the point it may have been believed.
Starting from the rejection of nuclear power as the major player,
at least in the short term, where do you go ? One obvious option would have been to build more and more coal power stations fuelled by a revitalised mining industry. I'll take the wind turbines, solar panels, gas generators and batteries in preference to that!
One day somebody may come up with a marketable version of nuclear
power or a way to overcome the massive popular resistance to the idea.
Perhaps one way is to first get rid of all the coal and oil generators
aided by a huge wave of public opinion and build up a flaky concoction of wind, solar, hydro, battery and gas when needed that just about hangs together but clearly needs a little extra - and *then* bring in the new
model safe and reliable nuclear plants - unless something better comes
along in time to save us needing them.
Yes it looks just like your version - except that it takes in the
"how do we get there from here" which you completely ignore because of
course as soon as the engineering is clearly explained and the lies are revealed everyone will do the right thing. Do the sums, work out how many nuclear power plants need to be built in the UK to carry the base load and ask yourself how long a government would last after stating the intention
to build that many plants.
Have you met any human beings ? In groups ? In *large* groups ?
They're not an engineering problem - unless you mean social engineering
which is a very different thing.
I seriously doubt that there's any grand plan or big conspiracy
though - I think it's all just people winging it with whatever they can get to work today.
There is one problem with nuclear that you ignore, and for which
nobody has yet found a solution - it has become increasingly difficult to site and fund a nuclear power plant ever since the Three Mile Island plant had troubles.
One day somebody may come up with a marketable version of nuclear
power or a way to overcome the massive popular resistance to the idea. Perhaps one way is to first get rid of all the coal and oil generators
aided by a huge wave of public opinion and build up a flaky concoction of wind, solar, hydro, battery and gas when needed that just about hangs together but clearly needs a little extra - and *then* bring in the new
model safe and reliable nuclear plants - unless something better comes
along in time to save us needing them.
One day somebody may come up with a marketable version of
nuclear power or a way to overcome the massive popular resistance to
the idea.
They have oddly,
It's called 'renewable energy'.
On 27/12/2021 02:14, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Mathematicians have computer models, trying to solve Napier Stokes
equations by piecewise integration.
Engineers use wind tunnels, because the physics of turbulent flow is
simply too difficult to model accurately in a computer.
You can't model the whole earth's system in a wind tunnel, which leaves
only computerised mathematical modelling.
On 26/12/2021 22:42, TimS wrote:
On 24 Dec 2021 at 17:52:30 GMT, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
On 24/12/2021 08:35, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
I have a first class honours degree in electrical engineering
I have been researching the subject over 10 years.
You? Ah. you read it in the NY times I guess.
In an article written by an Art Student
I have a 1st Class Honours Degree in Mathematics & Computing, and ...
Mathematics and Computing doesn't cut it, I'm afraid. See my sig
below. You're just a bean-counter.
And engineering isn't really science at all. Its a collection of ways to
work out what may in fact work to meet a given specification (and more significantly, what will not, like extracting usable energy from traffic moving over a road surface, and other 'green' perpetual motion
machines), and then 'doing for 5 bob what any damned fool can do for a
quid'. As Neville Shute remarked.
Mathematicians have computer models, trying to solve Napier Stokes
equations by piecewise integration.
Engineers use wind tunnels, because the physics of turbulent flow is
simply too difficult to model accurately in a computer.
50% of the heat loss from this planets surface, where we, the plants
and animals, and the oceans live, is via turbulent convection. No
climate models do more than put in a vague 'parameter' which is
adjusted...to give any result you want.
Likewise the figures for 'positive feedback' which is presumed to exist *because the models of climate change dominated by the physics of CO2
didn't fit the data*.
Compare e.g. central European floods of 1342
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Mary_Magdalene%27s_flood)
with this years floods. No comparison.
We are however running out of abundant cheap fossil fuel , and something
will need to plug the gap, and renewables cannot do it, so it will be nuclear.
It's all we have, that actually works...
[Snip more claims unsubstantiated by any *EVIDENCE*]
On 27 Dec 2021 at 12:47:03 GMT, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
On 27/12/2021 02:14, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Mathematicians have computer models, trying to solve Napier Stokes
equations by piecewise integration.
Engineers use wind tunnels, because the physics of turbulent flow is
simply too difficult to model accurately in a computer.
You can't model the whole earth's system in a wind tunnel, which leaves
only computerised mathematical modelling.
Just because that's all it leaves, doesn't mean that it's going to work. And remember that models don't TELL you anything; they make predictions.
On Mon, 27 Dec 2021 01:12:55 +0000
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
Everyone knows that the real answer to all this heath robinson grid
rubbish, the museum piece windmills, the massive grid extensions and
international links, the batteries, the energy insecurity is to simply
throw in nuclear power to replace all the fossil power stations.
The trouble is of course that the engineering aspects of the
problem are the smallest aspects. The real problems are social and
political.
There are no problems with nuclear that cannot be and have not been
solved at one third the cost of the *overall* renewable solution - which
doesn't even effectively work as it was supposed to anyway.
Back in 1973 when the idea that there wasn't an infinite supply of cheap oil first started to rattle in people's heads there was a claim made that the UK did not have to worry unduly because there was enough coal
under Wales to keep the UK in energy for the next three centuries - I
somehow doubt it but it may in fact be true, and more to the point it may have been believed.
On Mon, 27 Dec 2021 10:10:48 +0000
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
One day somebody may come up with a marketable version of
nuclear power or a way to overcome the massive popular resistance to
the idea.
They have oddly,
It's called 'renewable energy'.
Ah you spotted the point, well done. We couldn't have gone straight from coal to nuclear - there was too much opposition.
Renewable energy OTOH
was an easy sell and it might just be made workable (all it takes is a Shipstone grade battery to be invented and all the problems vanish - don't tell me how unlikely that is, I know)
but if not there's always nuclear to
fall back on and it will be a much easier sell with coal and oil firmly on the reject pile and gas in the "'ow mmmuccchh gggrraannnvvvillle" pile.
On 27 Dec 2021 at 06:08:34 GMT, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
There is one problem with nuclear that you ignore, and for which
nobody has yet found a solution - it has become increasingly difficult to
site and fund a nuclear power plant ever since the Three Mile Island plant >> had troubles.
Only because of lies told by Greenpeace etc, aided and abetted by the media. Some media are starting to change and are remembering that no one died or was even injured at TMI or Fukushima, and that thousands *didn't* die at Chernobyl.
One day somebody may come up with a marketable version of nuclear
power or a way to overcome the massive popular resistance to the idea.
Perhaps one way is to first get rid of all the coal and oil generators
aided by a huge wave of public opinion and build up a flaky concoction of
wind, solar, hydro, battery and gas when needed that just about hangs
together but clearly needs a little extra - and *then* bring in the new
model safe and reliable nuclear plants - unless something better comes
along in time to save us needing them.
Is this the "it's got to get worse before it can get better" approach? Sadly there may be something in that. Plenty of us remember how it was well known in
the 50s and 60s that the Unions needed a big-time kick in the nuts, but no one
thought it was possible, until we had the Winter of Discontent, which Maggie was able to capitalise on.
On 27/12/2021 06:08, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
There is one problem with nuclear that you ignore, and for which
nobody has yet found a solution - it has become increasingly difficult to
site and fund a nuclear power plant ever since the Three Mile Island
plant
had troubles.
Nuclear plants are extremely expensive to build at the best of times
Actually they are not., they are comparable with coal in terms of raw material and construction labour.
but when each and every one requires a decades long campaign to find a
site
there's no way we can ever get enough of the things built. Also CND
did far
too good a job of hammering home the relationship between nuclear
power and
nuclear weapons as it was then. As for siting a reprocessing plant - good
luck with that!
The greens have with massive assistance form the various fossil cule
interest managed to make windmills acceptable. And demonise nuclear,
It wouldn't take much of a reversal to turn propaganda against windmills
and pro nuclear - in fact its already happening
Oh, and we already have an internationally famous reprocessing plant. In
full operation
I seriously doubt that there's any grand plan or big conspiracy
though - I think it's all just people winging it with whatever they
can get to work today.
No, its not even that. Perhaps the best way of looking at it is
commercially and politically.
On 27/12/2021 13:01, TimS wrote:
On 27 Dec 2021 at 12:47:03 GMT, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
On 27/12/2021 02:14, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Mathematicians have computer models, trying to solve Napier Stokes
equations by piecewise integration.
Engineers use wind tunnels, because the physics of turbulent flow is
simply too difficult to model accurately in a computer.
You can't model the whole earth's system in a wind tunnel, which leaves
only computerised mathematical modelling.
Just because that's all it leaves, doesn't mean that it's going to
work. And
remember that models don't TELL you anything; they make predictions.
Well it's usual Jive illogic.
Windmill vendors are like anti-vaxxers, selfish and without any conscience.
On 27/12/2021 11:42, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
Ah you spotted the point, well done. We couldn't have gone straight >> from coal to nuclear - there was too much opposition.
We could have and we did, but then the gas business stared to use the
ecology moment to demonise nuclear and club it to death with scare
stories over regulaton and interest rate rises finnaly killed it
Once Maggie had fucked the coal unions her party couldn't wait to fuck
her - job done, now let the establishment chaps run things.
[Snip yet more claims unsubstantiated by any *EVIDENCE*!]
You're sig
Fake news kills!
Java Jive wrote:
You're sig
Fake news kills!
Why should I fake them?
On 26/12/2021 22:52, TimS wrote:
You could always look at gridwatch.org.uk to see what is actually
happening
minute to minute with UK electricity - or French for that matter.
[Snip yet more claims unsubstantiated by any *EVIDENCE*]
During WW2 there were posters in bars and other public meeting places
which said something like: "Careless talk costs lives!"
On Mon, 27 Dec 2021 14:27:51 +0000
Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
During WW2 there were posters in bars and other public meeting places
which said something like: "Careless talk costs lives!"
"Loose lips sink ships" IIRC.
There is one problem with nuclear that you ignore, and for which
nobody has yet found a solution - it has become increasingly difficult to site and fund a nuclear power plant ever since the Three Mile Island plant had troubles.
If some bright spark invents a table-top fusion reactor with no
output other than electricity and heat that costs like a microwave oven to build and produces a gigawatt hour out of a teaspoon of water ... they'd better not use the word "nuclear" when describing it.
Have you met any human beings ? In groups ? In *large* groups ?
They're not an engineering problem - unless you mean social engineering
which is a very different thing.
On Mon, 27 Dec 2021 14:27:51 +0000
Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
During WW2 there were posters in bars and other public meeting places
which said something like: "Careless talk costs lives!"
"Loose lips sink ships" IIRC.
On 27/12/2021 15:40, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
On Mon, 27 Dec 2021 14:27:51 +0000
Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
During WW2 there were posters in bars and other public meeting places
which said something like: "Careless talk costs lives!"
"Loose lips sink ships" IIRC.
Not here in the UK, I've never heard that one before, my version was
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 296 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 72:48:09 |
| Calls: | 6,657 |
| Calls today: | 3 |
| Files: | 12,203 |
| Messages: | 5,332,378 |
| Posted today: | 1 |
