UK Government Thread

I see this thread is still just negativity about everything and anything, sweet

I guess these threads provide an outlet for people for all sorts of things that are better in an Internet setting than real life.

Ganging up, collective sanctimony, aggressive cross-examination in the hope of tripping people up, willingly blinkered worship, dogma masquerading as idealism, convenient short-term memory loss…

It’s all here!

Why’s Rone still not answered my reasonable question about investment flow.

Look at you all commando.

a) I haven’t actually seen it.

b) I don’t have a duty to respond to anyone. I have a life outside this forum and don’t spend all my spare time fretting over every single challenge.

c) I might not be able to answer it.

d) Go on then for laugh.

You were talking about CCS in the UK. At least try to be consistent.

If we’re going to dance on pinheads, then yes, you’re right. In turn, I sad gas and coal. Gas is still 1/3 approx, isn’t it, and won’t go away in the near future.

I think your comment is fundamentally misguided, for the reasons I gave and Ed set out succinctly.

Now, if Ed (and Somafunk) had said something like that, then maybe they’d have got a better response.

I see this thread is still just negativity about everything and anything, sweet

That’s on the Labour party – coming to power with the shoddiest first 100 days I can remember.

All they had to do was come with a great expansive plan to start to turn the country around. They didn’t. They opened the gates for a load of deserved shit flinging.

Instead they babbled on about black-holes and misrepresented government finances, attacked pensioners and didn’t remove the 2 child cap. Looks like they’re going to mess up the VAT on private schools. We haven’t even got to GB energy yet…

Game is up, they’re shit and have given the right a ton of ammo.

Well done the grown-ups.

Centrism has been rumbled as not having any half-decent progressive ideas – but we all knew it didn’t we. Not only that but Starmer and Reeves are rubbish at the politics.

Still time to turn it all around but I reckon it’s downhill from here.

Iknew knew you’d slag off the links, pot kettle black.

my home is well insulated

Let’s see, my house isn’t even passive and I’ve got:

Floors: R=3 100mm of plyester wool

Roof/ 100mm wood fibre R2.8 crossed with 100mm cotton/lin/hemp R2.8 and 66mm polyurethane R=3 and in most of it there’s 100 of rock wool in the ceiling tooat R=3

Walls: varaibale between R=3.2 and R=5.2 depending on material used. (a typical UK cavity wall with insulation in the cavity is R=1.5)

Windows: triple glazed uw 0.9 or 1.0

Check out the energy bills threads to see what people spend on gas to get an idea of the energy demand of what most people consider a “well insulated house” to be. But how many would give up 100mm of space and make the investment in money and time and inconvenience to properly insulate. Very very few on this forum.

Now yours.

You apparnetly know a lot about black holes. Well I published on the impact of atmosperic pollution in the journal of environmental management decades ago, have maintained an interest in pollution ever since, have the whole geological history of the planet in my head to make comparison with and haven’t lost my geologist approach to science.

Don’t continue the debate, or stick around and maybe you’ll see that sometimes you just might have fallen for some clever greenwashing and oil industry propaganda.

Have a read of this thread, just my posts from the page I’ve linked if you want to see where I’m coming from. You’ll note that STW was way more confrontational than it is now. Those of us still around are fairly thick skinned. I’ve got even older threads in my book marks but I covered most of the important points in the linked thread:

Global warming update!

So what’s everyones thoughts on the shakeup at No. 10 today?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cdenx2p32jxo

Overall it seems like a good move, probably inevitable too.

If we’re going to dance on pinheads, then yes, you’re right. In turn, I sad gas and coal. Gas is still 1/3 approx, isn’t it, and won’t go away in the near future.

Erm, this is a UK government initiative discussed in a thread about the UK government. Coal is not relevant in this context. If you want to talk about something else, please start that new thread you keep banging on about.

Now, if Ed (and Somafunk) had said something like that, then maybe they’d have got a better response.

I don’t believe you responded to what I said, or Ed’s succinct summary of why CCS should be low down the priority order.

a) I haven’t actually seen it.

It’s half way down p59, you linked a Sam Coates twitter post and I asked for some clarification.

b) I don’t have a duty to respond to anyone. I have a life outside this forum and don’t spend all my spare time fretting over every single challenge.

You see, to me it’s more like a pattern of behaviour where “find a critical article, post it maybe with some additional (and sometimes false) embellishment, and when called out on it, nowhere to be seen”  If you’re going to post an article be prepared to defend or justify it. Otherwise it feels a bit like flinging shit.

c) I might not be able to answer it.

If you don’t understand it, why post it? Other than (b)

d) Go on then for laugh.

Sorry – don’t follow?

Centrism has been rumbled as not having any half-decent progressive ideas – but we all knew it didn’t we. Not only that but Starmer and Reeves are rubbish at the politics.

Even centrist commentators have had enough: it’s not often I agree with Will Hutton but his analysis of their political failures is interesting.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/oct/06/after-100-days-of-mistakes-we-need-to-hear-labours-underlying-philosophy

All they had to do was come with a great plan to start to turn the country around.

Oh, is that all? Well then, they must be utter shite.

They opened the gates for a load of deserved shit flinging.

This they did. And it was the one thing I thought I could at least rely on Starmer not to do.

Instead they babbled on about black-holes and misrepresented government finances

If ‘misrepresentation’ is a synonym for ‘representing what 150+ other nations also believe’ then yes. Otherwise no.

It’s been a mixed bag.

Now, if Ed (and Somafunk) had said something like that, then maybe they’d have got a better response.

I would have directly linked to reports from folk with the education and background to refute what you posted but links are not embedding so I surmised what they wrote

I see this thread is still just negativity about everything and anything, sweet

no it isnt.

I think I’ll pop into the thread another day.

I don’t believe you responded to what I said, or Ed’s succinct summary of why CCS should be low down the priority order.

I’m just “the easily fooled who believe the bollocks who has fallen for some clever greenwashing and oil industry propaganda” and would just be “parrotting information given to me by others”, why are you interested?

I’ve made my opinion clear, even if they are based on info from others. That CCUS has a place in the transition strategy and investment into developing it is to be welcomed alongside all the other things we need to do. Just because it isn’t efficient now – that’s part of the purpose of the investment into development. You say it doesn’t and won’t work, other equally qualified people disagree.

Erm, this is a UK government initiative discussed in a thread about the UK government. Coal is not relevant in this context.

But gas is, isn’t it?

Now yours.

Yep, you win on that. Can I retract or at least modify to ‘by UK standards’. Rafter depth of blown cellulose and then 200mm rockwool laid over except for a boarded central area. Filled cavity walls. Triple glazing, 1w/m2. Floor is a solid slab, celings not done. 7yo gas boiler which will be replaced by ashp when it starts going wrong.

I would have directly linked to reports from folk with the education and background to refute what you posted but links are not embedding so I surmised what they wrote

and that came out as

Yeah it’s utter bollox this CC bullshit but when you see the Labour Party sucking from the lobbyists teets

and you really expect that to lead to reasoned debate?

and you really expect that to lead to reasoned debate?

It’s exactly how I would phrase it if you were stood in front of me, don’t see the issue.

and I’d just shake my head and walk away as there’s no point arguing at that level.

Overall it seems like a good move, probably inevitable too.

I think it’s a very bad move. To me it signals a shift from no10 prioritising running the government, and in turn the country… to a focus on headline management and handling the press.

and I’d just shake my head and walk away as there’s no point arguing at that level.
Posted 1 minute ago

Ask Norway how its going with their carbon capture, dale Vince and others have ridiculed the idea.

spend 22b on insulating homes, a much greaterretrn

Ask Norway how its going with their carbon capture, dale Vince and others have ridiculed the idea.

You see, I could engage with that.

There was actually an interesting Dale Vince LI thread on it, but again the problem is that even there the anti- soon resort to “insults” – eg: Carbon capture is an absolute scam; My sisters out of tune recorder playing skills are more useful than carbon capture and storage; etc. Any reasoned responses are ridiculed or dismissed. Just ruining any serious debate.

and I’d just shake my head and walk away as there’s no point arguing at that level.

Pleeeeeze

Up to eight quotes from other members in  one post with antagonistic replies

Completely ignores linked info and dismisses it as unreliable sources whilst treating official propaganda as gospel.

Makes claims on own lifestyle but fails to back them up

Constantly criticises other members attitudes and posting style whilst posting in a heavy-handed and arrogant manner.

Slags off the “level of argument” whilst using all the tricks in the STW book.

Accuses members of getting personal having already got personal.

Assumes other STW members are ignorant plebs unworthy of arguing with him

We can see what you’re doing, man. Anyhow it’s getting late and I’ve just had to remind myself, “don’t feed the troll”.

Sleep tight.

to a focus on headline management and handling the press.

But all the headlines and press focus was due to an internal Labour Party battle. The victor has now claimed his prize so presumably there will now be less reasons for Labour apparatchiks to brief against each other, a good thing, no?

What I would like to know is whether like Sue Gray Morgan McSweeney will be paid more than the Prime Minister. Since McSweeney is probably doing most of Starmer’s thinking for him it seems reasonable that he should.

Although unless another clash of personalities occurs and they start briefing against each other I suppose we will never know.

I’m just “the easily fooled who believe the bollocks who has fallen for some clever greenwashing and oil industry propaganda” and would just be “parrotting information given to me by others”, why are you interested?

You’re right: I’m intensely uninterested in you playing the victim, and likewise, you’ve made it clear that you’re not interested in my opinion.

But gas is, isn’t it?

Absolutely. So why were you talking about coal?

You say it doesn’t and won’t work, other equally qualified people disagree.

Is it possible to store CO2? Yes. Is it something we should be prioritizing? No.

Yeh, you’re right it’s all on me.

sorry – just read Ed’s post and WTF

Up to eight quotes from other members in  one post with antagonistic replies

Like this one. But if you raise lots of points it’s easier to answer them line by line

Completely ignores linked info and dismisses it as unreliable sources whilst treating official propaganda as gospel.

Not ignored and not dismissed but I think it’s reasonable to show who the source is and if they have a position or not.

Makes claims on own lifestyle but fails to back them up

I did. Maybe not as good as you, which I recognised.

Constantly criticises other members attitudes and posting style whilst posting in a heavy-handed and arrogant manner.

Yep, fair. But again, it was your “easily fooled who believe the bollocks” that started the annoyance.

Slags off the “level of argument” whilst using all the tricks in the STW book.

Yep, also fair probably.

Accuses members of getting personal having already got personal.

You started it, expect it back.

Assumes other STW members are ignorant plebs unworthy of arguing with him

Maybe. That started with an Ernie challenge and then festered. I’ll try not to.

We can see what you’re doing, man. Anyhow it’s getting late and I’ve just had to remind myself, “don’t feed the troll”.

Not a troll. Not a sealion either which has also been levelled – I just think if someone posts something that is incorrect, or vague/misleading then they should be expected to answer to it. Maybe others are OK with that, but it’s a pattern among some posters on politics threads in particular.

it was your “easily fooled who believe the bollocks” that started the annoyance

Which was in reply to a quote from another member’s post not you. It was absolutely not aimed at you personally as others have realised and pointed out to you. It’s a specific aspect of carbon capture I reacted to.

It really is getting late now on this side of the chanel.

Assumes other STW members are ignorant plebs unworthy of arguing with him

Maybe. That started with an Ernie challenge and then festered. I’ll try not to.

So your behaviour is my fault now?

And I have never challenged you about anything. I posted a link to a Guardian article about Thames water quality, with I think a one sentence comment from me . You decided to challenge both the article and my comment, I ignored your challenge which apparently really wound you up and you repeatedly demanded that I answer some question or other accusing me of being either a liar or ignorant.

Two weeks later you were still banging on about it and now yet again a week or two later and you are still referring to it, what is wrong with you?

And on the question of “ignorant plebs” I have repeatedly told you that I claim no expertise on any subject other than how to swing a hammer. So I frankly couldn’t give a monkeys if you dismiss everything I say as nonsense.

Hope that helps and please carry on having your bad tempered argument with Ed and ransos without involving me. :thumbs:

And I have never challenged you about anything.

Sorry Ernie, but that is false. You’re not even referring to the right incident.

End of Aug (I can only tell because you actually made the effort to message me about it, and the messages are still there), I said there was lots of good stuff going on in gov but I’m not at liberty to say what, and you said words to the effect of “why should I believe you, to me you’re just a random cyclist on the internet”

So, possibly against my better judgement I posted my LI. And as i said to you –

I’ve never actually hidden who I am / who I work for behind an obtuse pen name and if I’m going to claim a level of expertise or knowledge in a subject then I’m happy to back that up.

And when others turn up claiming a level of expertise and then say stuff that doesn’t sound right, or make assertions that don’t match my experience – then yes, I wonder why they aren’t held to the same scrutiny. If that comes across as

Assumes other STW members are ignorant plebs unworthy of arguing with him

then I don’t mean it to, but to paraphrase Ernie, you’re just random internet personas.

I frankly couldn’t give a monkeys if you dismiss everything I say as nonsense.

You see I do care (maybe too much, about my credibility) – but if you post an article or make a claim I think you need to be able to speak to it / justify the comments, and that might include some idea of whether you actually know what you’re talking about. When TiRed talks about vaccines, or DrP about medical, or AA about teaching – their opinions carry weight because of who they are. Others…. not so clear.

 I posted a link to a Guardian article about Thames water quality,

That’s long gone, stop bringing it up 😉

@theotherjonv – for the record – my sealion comment several pages back wasn’t aimed at you 🙂

It was absolutely not aimed at you personally as others have realised and pointed out to you. It’s a specific aspect of carbon capture I reacted to.

I read it and still read it as a comment on those who see CCUS as a future transitional need worth investing in, but if that was not the intent then I apologise for that. It wasn’t clear.

If you want then to be honest – my response to that comment wasn’t actually that unfair. I said there are plenty of scientists that believe it and I align more with them, (and my own colleagues who I spoke to on Friday) than (and I should have chosen better words at the time) general comment on the internet.

Then things escalated and I take my fair share of the blame for that – but also to be fair others started piling in at that stage including a couple that seem to have a problem with me (and in fairness me with them) and that is what then ensued.

I shoulder responsibility for my part but I’m not accepting it’s all of my own making and your (Ed’s) ‘assassination’ and accusation of trolling I think also needs review. I’ll leave that with you, if you want to.

@ad

thanks, I wasn’t sure but I’m being accused of all sorts recently, best I plead on everything and anything 😉

Talking about the current discussion, not individuals posting in it.

I think it’s easy to lose perspective on STW, particularly on the political threads as all the posters on here want a better country (and world) and understandably are pretty passionate about it. Passionate about the best way of achieving it too and so hills are chosen to die on and a perma-war kicks off.

I’ve chosen a few humdingers (hills) myself over the years. Hell, I’m a veteran of the Ling Wars™ thread. I was there man, I was there. 😉

Something I’ve never admitted to but I lost sleep over that thread. I’d never been subject of a real STW pile on and it was not a great place to be. Still, it was the hill I chose and that’s *entirely* on me.

However…

It’s worth remembering that behind the usernames there are real people with real lives and all the complexities that go with that. 

Very few people on here are empirically correct, it’s all mired in opinion and bias whether we like it or not, whether we see it or not. Anyone that thinks otherwise? Well, herein lies the problem and I am part of that problem on occasion for sure.

Yours, Poopscoop. Veteran of the Ling Wars™ thread. I was there man, I was there.

(Also available for group therapy, hypnotherapy and electroconvulsive therapy on Tuesday evenings, by appointment only.)

End of Aug

Jeezus. Do you never let anything go? Yes you are just some random punter on a MTB forum to me. You can make claims that you have inside knowledge which you can’t divulge about the government, and which you claim is positive, but it’s up to me whether I think that is a convincing argument or not for me.

I didn’t challenge you beyond saying that I wasn’t convinced by a claim based on mysterious information that can’t be divulged, I think  it is my prerogative what I believe, don’t you?

Try using a different tactic if you want to convince people that the current government is going in the right direction. According to polls most voters think it is going in the wrong direction – should Starmer be saying  “listen we have secret spending plans which we can’t divulge but everything is going to be great, trust me, I’m the prime minister” ?

And I completely fail to understand why you apparently care so much what I or anyone else thinks anyway. I am completely relaxed if everything I post is dismissed as nonsense, why should it bother me?

Jeezus. Do you never let anything go?

When you refer to the wrong event in a claim that you haven’t ever challenged me on anything, I should just let it ride? Even if it was a few weeks ago.

I think  it is my prerogative what I believe, don’t you?

Absolutely. It’s mine to challenge when I think people are not being entirely truthful.

should Starmer be saying  “listen we have secret spending plans which we can’t divulge but everything is going to be great, trust me, I’m the prime minister” ?

Put like that, then no. However – when phrased as ‘there’s currently a budget and SR process ongoing and you should judge once the plans are announced’ – then personally, I think so.

And I completely fail to understand why you apparently care so much what I or anyone else thinks anyway. I am completely relaxed if everything I post is dismissed as nonsense, why should it bother me?

Lucky you. I’m not wired that way. Doesn’t make you right and me wrong, or v/v, we are just different.

Anyway – I said I was done here and then like an addict I came back.

I’m really trying so I’ve reported my post and asked the Mods to ban me, until my subscription lapses anyway. Getting into arguments like this is affecting my mental health – or maybe my mental health is getting me into these arguments (Poopscoop, dead right) and what I’m getting from this place now isn’t worth the effort.

I’m sure you’ll be back to say I’ve said it already, hence the need to ask for the ban. To those that have helped over the years; thanks. I apologise to anyone I’ve annoyed, particularly recently.

I’m really trying so I’ve reported my post and asked the Mods to ban me, until my subscription lapses anyway. Getting into arguments like this is affecting my mental health – or maybe my mental health is getting me into these arguments

No you don’t you daft beggar!

Take a step back from the thread, you aren’t allowed to “self terminate” your membership as Cougar once put it when he was going to step away from the forum.

Do what I do on occasion, enact the H.F. Protocol.

The Honourable Flounce. I do it all the time in the political threads. Make a post, if it’s challenged (highly bloody likely! Lol) perhaps make a counter argument in one post (two if you are feeling brave) then move on saying that’s its ok to disagree. Job done and have a read of the other less contentious threads on here and pop back in another time to see what hill is being fought over that day. It’ll likely be a different one.

Yeah, the Honourable Flounce, I highly recommend it! 😀

That escalated quickly……

You see, to me it’s more like a pattern of behaviour where “find a critical article, post it maybe with some additional (and sometimes false) embellishment, and when called out on it, nowhere to be seen” If you’re going to post an article be prepared to defend or justify it.

As I said to you before, you are taking this WAY too seriously. If people reply to you it is up to them, it is not their job, they can choose to spend whatever time they want answering whatever questions they want and positing whatever they want. Just look back at the this page and see how much you are demanding.
I do think ‘discussions’ on forums can take their toll when taken too seriously not helped by the nature of delayed response to questions that would not happen face to face.

DrP about medical

DrJ is the real doc who is quite handsome, drives a… and rides a… and lives in… with… X having…

DrP is nearly my age, not so handsome and we have some other things in common. He likes spartan modern furnishings or did in his last place anyhow. Now back in the UK after… drives a…

Just teasing, but seriously anyone taking a minimum of notice soon builds up a mental profile of the people on here, I could sit down with a pen and write more than a A4 page on some without thinking too hard. I’ve even been accused of stalking and having files on you all – I did make a quip to that effect but have infact only have kept one record or rather two, lists of in and out when the original Brexit thread was running, long since binned. It’s just the way my memory works (and sometimes doesn’t) that seems to surprise people. I bookmark some pages too when I make predictions to see how they hold up.

People post about their medical issues, private lives, holidays, passions, problems and all sorts of wonderful shit, and some of  remains in my head, I can’t help it. I know more about at least 20 people here than I know about the club members who I’ve ridden an MTB with on a Saturday mornings for 20 odd years and who’ve invited me into their homes.

So to me anyhow you’re not Internet Randoms, you’re a bunch of people I like enough to virtually hang out with. You can’t get on with all the people all the time and as in real life I know those I share values with and those I don’t. I have a lot of respect for some I don’t share all values too. In disputes I sometimes stay out of  the playground gangs it but sometimes as in yesterday dive in – Ernie is one hell off a sharp carpenter and wields a political banner with just just as much precision as his hammer – he doesn’t deserve the “attention” he’s getting. He’s visibly been trying to diffuse rather than escalate but even ignoring the provocation has been provocative apparently.

Vive STW and all who sail in her !

Signed a ex Welsh Water scientist who enjoyed reading the Thames Water article that apparently started all this. 🙂

I think we should all do a little “descriptor” of ourselves- here’s mine

Looks – pound shop Al Murray crossed with Shrek (not as green)

Interested in – pointless political discussion and obsessed with 20th century social history.

Likes – Red wine Beer and Pork scratchings

Dislikes – Reform, Tories and any **** with no social responsibility

Social status – externally middle class internally Northern working class scumbag.

Drives – Nissan Navara (baby Robin killer) but I do live in the sticks..

Ailments – way too many to list.

Pet hates – **** on ebay who don’t put measurements on listing’s.

Employment – cyber security

Marital status – she hates me