piglinbland

Does anybody else get the feeling we've just become lab-rats for the EU?

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/131215

At least climate change has stopped and we can smoke in pubs again.

And to call it democracy is laughable. It was Russian Roulette.

No, but we're looking :censored:ing stupid.

We've Farage, Boris and no plan. And I wouldn't be surprised if the new P.M. bottles it and doesn't trigger article 50

I hope we can find some direction now it's done. Talk about pissing in your chips...

Compelling. And nail biting. This is going to go to the wire.

There is always someone out there with mettle who is on the look-out for a restoration project - the more abject, the better. He who succeeds with OAFC will have the added kudos of having started with an absolute basket case...

Good post. UK has the presidency in 2017. Lets get in there and kick arse.

He said the 'F' word to me!

What have you got the hump for - I was sharing something that made me laugh. Or is humour banned in the right-wing, isolationalist, zionist, climate-change denying, muslim-hating, regressionalist "out" camp that you appear to belong to???

Just seen this on FB and it made me chuckle - "friday's going to be amazing! i'm going to wake up in my Union Jack jim-jams to the sound of a squadron of Spitfires racing overhead and leaving a trail of hot buttered crumpets behind them I'll run to the corner shop past all the british children who are laughing and squealing with excitement as they make a beautiful statue of the queen out of happy wriggling bulldog puppies - with two corgis for her eyebrows! bunting flutters everywhere and the man from the betting shop steps into the street - "guess what! England just won the World Cup & The Ashes & The Grand National and here's the best bit - Boris put a bet on it for everyone! you're all MILLIONAIRES!!!" the red arrows fly overhead dropping fish and chips as i walk into the corner shop, get my morning paper and go to the counter. "how much please?" i say to the asian lad there. "1 pence, everything in the whole shop now costs just 1p!" he laughs, "leave it on the counter, i'm off back to pakistan - we all are!" and he's right! outside in the streets jolly old nigel farage is leading a huge crowd of happy foreigners - turks, poles, romanians, syrians - there's even a few English people with heavy suntans mixed up in there! nigel's playing Rule Britannia on a long pipe, rather like the pipe that takes the gas into your oven, and they're all following and smiling and talking foreign, bless them! just then boris flies overhead in a concorde made of Bank of England gold - "don't worry!" he laughs "I've cut out all the bits the French made!" and with that he crashes into the ground at 1200 miles an hour, along with the economy, the country and all the dozy nostalgic foreigner-fearing :censored:wits who fell for his bull:censored:. grow up. wake up. IN"

http://buff.ly/28KpKbZ

I suppose I should post some twaddle from the Guardian to counter that - but I can't be bothered. So here is another article from the very same extremely right-wing journal, this time refuting climate change on the grounds that there is no empirical proof. (Empirical proof requires scientific comparison, or a control - impossible because anthropic climate change is unique, there is no comparable event). Yet again this link between quack Brexit, quack climate and the loony right. Home About News Comment The Tea Room Podcast Contact Despite the guff, no proof on man-made climate change 95 percent is no more a proof than 9.5 percent. It still means there isn't a proof. But there's money and ideology at stake here, as the really top scientists know Where are all the polar bears? the commentatorOn 27 September 2013 12:41 0 inShare Email You may have noticed the tidal wave. This one wasn't caused by global warming, though wait for the BBC and, sad to say after recent coverage, Sky NEWS too, to make a claim that it was. It's the tidal wave of illogical, anti-scientific spittle over the release today of the latest report from the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). We did a, very widely read, curtain raiser on the matter at the beginning of the week ,and offered a right to reply to any serious party who could refute our points. Answer came there none! So, now, we're just going to focus on one single issue that has formed the top line for pretty well every news report that has been running today: "UN 95% sure humans cause global warming", as the BBC's headline had it. 95 percent? Sounds pretty convincing, right? Except that scientific rigour does not allow for percentage point grades to be attached to a proof. The case either is proven or it isn't. It isn't as though 20 percent would be given a, "good try, but we need more" ranking; while 55 percent would be given a, "yum, you're on to something, and you could be right" ranking; with a 90 percent-plus given a, "well, now you're talking" ranking. 95 percent is no more a proof than 9.5 percent. It still means there isn't a proof. So how does the IPCC get to 95 percent anyway? Obviously, it's the political and financial pressures that are driving this. The IPCC, like the wider UN, is dominated by a political-ideological consensus that needs man-made climate change to be true. In addition, there are vast sums of money for research grants that sustain the livelihoods of the scientists involved. Confirmation bias is an obvious problem. Shall we put the likelihood of that at 95 percent? Between the IPCC's 95 percent certainty and the 100 percent necessary to offer a proof, there is also the "process-of-elimination" issue to address. Know the point? It's key. As many top climate scientists who are excluded from the IPCC's reckoning have pointed out for years, climate scientists do not know why the climate has been warming since the early 20th century; not in the sense of being able to prove it. Most think the sun is not the issue. Most also dismiss natural variation, and many other putative causes. Given that it is objectively correct to point out that the climate has warmed (though not for the last 15 years; against all IPCC predictions by the way) and given that man-made carbon emissions are new, then by process of elimination they have deduced that that must be the cause. It is an elementary, though oh-so-tempting, analytical error. There could well be causal factors that we don't know about. But since we don't know about them, we'll work with what we think we have! Oh dear, go to the bottom of the class... Trillions of dollars are being wasted on that fallacy. Are you still 95 percent certain? You'd better be because your taxes are paying for those wasted trillions. p.s. In contrast with the alarmists, we are totally open minded. If we're wrong, we're wrong. Jut show us why. We keep offering a right to reply for serious parties. It's telling that they run a mile...

I accept wholly that the 3% you suggest is feasible. But even 3% (not withstanding protectionism) is a far, far higher percentage than our EU deficit is to the GNP as a whole, or for that matter, the percentage of immigrants "swamping" us from the EU against the total population of Britain - the 2 arguments I hear the most for leaving the EU. I think it's dishonest to have based a referendum campaign on these popularist premises (I know they aren't the only issues but I think the bulk of the 'out' voice is very much carried by anti-Europe sentiment), especially as even the most fervent 'Brexit' supporter will acknowledge that it would indeed be a step into the unknown. As I stated previously, tiny inputs cause huge changes. I disagree too with your negative portrayal of the EU which gives the impression of it being a spiraling vortex of debt in an otherwise prospering world - whereas the reality is that almost every corner of the globe is suffering the economic effects of over-population, climate change and world recession.

Not responding to the debate, just the many flippant remarks referring to German cars and things being 'alreet'.

Brexit - 1/ Leave. 2/ Wait for Europe to come begging. 3/ Buy some tasty Beemers. 4/ Sorted.

The fact we can't sort things out from within the EU is indicative to me as to how well we would sort things out after a 'brexit'. I get the distinct impression that we're piling all our own shortcomings, frustrations and grievances onto an imagined 'bogeyman' - the EU - and people are thinking we would wake up on the 24th June in some way exorcised, cleansed and purged, ready to make a glorious new start. In my opinion it would be the biggest collective mistake in our island history.

To the detriment of other what?

If it's easier and cheaper, why weren't we buying from there in the first place?

It was bought from a supplier in canada - So we can circulate people and goods freely and equally within the EU.

The great product never hit the shelves because the vital raw material was stuck in a warehouse at Dieppe.

...the only thing we will be negotiating is our retreat from the world stage.

Sort what out? If Britain leaves, Europe becomes our competitor. Nothing we could negotiate will change that. And we subsequently become a less interesting proposition to the rest of the world ...