Jump to content

Chach

Members
  • Posts

    1,294
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Everything posted by Chach

  1. How are you now drawing Chelsea into the conspiracy, they were happy to take him with the injury. It's much more likely, looking at it with both eyes that he fancied going to Spurs or another team who weren't prepared to take him injured so decided to get fit and look at his options, its not like he thought he was walking into the first 11 of Chelsea week in week out. What I don't get and I am happy to hear the opposing argument is what is this idea that we are entitled to wring every penny out a player who by and large has been decent servant to the club and in the context of football cost us nothing?
  2. That relationship was symbiotic though Palfy, there are other less monomaniacal lenses to view the situation through in the spirit of even handedness for someone who as you say was home grown and an Everton fan. If you are leaving your boyhood club to try and better yourself for what will likely be the best contract you sign in your career is it not a reasonable expectation between the player and club that you go in circumstances that give you the best chance of succeeding rather than straight to the treatment table? Now to add to the conspiracy he must have faked an injury! At the time I thought his relationship with balloon head was one of the main factors that contributed to his departure, now in the cold light of day and with 20/20 hindsight it might have been he was best placed as someone who had grown up with the club to see the writing on the wall, you don't have to be a Rhodes scholar to see there's a problem with the culture under the new ownership.
  3. We've got a diamond called Ross BarkleyA toffee that comes from WavertreeHe plays along side Abdoulaye DoucouréTogether at Everton FCAnd when you're in the blueWe'll sing this song for youBecause Barkley is a toffee through and through. It's a yes from me.
  4. We had one local case of a backpacker who came over the border with it from Queensland and the Premier cancelled all major NYE music events, reintroduced compulsory masks indoors in public places and banned dancing except at weddings, we are now up to about 5 local cases. We're scheduled to open up intrastate and international borders on Feb 5 when we reach 90% double jabbed, we've had so little practice I suspect it's going to be a shit show.
  5. Completely relevant, the technology is identical and the early advancement to use in humans helps demonstrate it's safety. The majority of experts surveyed conclusively agree genome editing poses no significant risks to the economy, environment, human health or society. This sample of experts thought existing national regulations work to discourage genome editing in many countries; a view that was strongly held in Europe.The current generation of genomic technologies, including genome editing, challenges existing precautionary-based governance approaches. The 2018 CJEU ruling on mutagenesis and the resulting experts' reaction reflect such challenges. A number of EU states are calling for a coalition to update the EU GM legislation with regards to NBTs (Fortuna, 2019). This signals that respective regulatory systems are dysfunctional as they do not support advancement of innovative plant breeding. Our expert panel suggest this is because discussions concerning the risks associated with genome editing, and targeted breeding techniques generally, are driven more by socio-political factors than by scientific principles.
  6. What's that supposed to mean, did you even read the article? Gene editing /therapy are going to be at the forefront of medical breakthroughs, since the discovery of CRISPR Cas9 in 2006 it's already progressed to human trials to treat disease caused by genetic mutations formed the *natural* way.
  7. Not even close old mate, you live in a country where every politician in the parliament are all varying flavours of milquetoast liberal, the rest of the western world are voting in people with roots in actual fascism and actual nazism https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-36130006 We have been living in the most peaceful, prosperous period of human history for the last 85 years and a good part of that has to be attributed to relatively benign US hegemony. The Dunning-Kreuger effect is a cognitive bias that it's very useful to be aware of but cognitive distortions are probably doing the most damage to our politics right now. Have a read up on catastrophising and have a cup of tea. https://www.psychologytoday.com/au/basics/catastrophizing
  8. Well we'll have to agree to disagree I think the the context was perfectly clear, but I do agree that I was saying the left/liberal members of this forum pile on the few conservatives who post on here in a dishonest way. Making extreme strawmans of their arguments when they even bother to address the actual argument. This is a demonstrable fact. Nobody on these forums "gets to me" at all, particularly people that aren't even liberal and who don't see other members of society as their political equals. Those people are the reasons that democracies fail and become autocratic and all side of politics should censure them even when it's not convenient.
  9. My style is to attack your political arguments when I disagree with them Palfy, you might take it personally it's perfect natural but it still doesn't make it a personal attack. I think one of the main problems here is your inclination to take comments literally rather than figuratively, a political circle jerk is a slang term for people in a political echo chamber who only like to have their opinions repeated back to them it is not literally people wanking, same if someone paraphrases a famous quote about "best argument against democracy" it's just a rhetorical device, not an empirical truth. Let me know if you required any further clarification with "riddles" above.
  10. You're not saying anything that bothers or offends me Palfy. Telling me I don't have to participate if I don't like it is not an argument or any kind of meaningful contribution to the discussion and don't make me responsible for the way my posts make you feel I have never attacked you personally, the way you do me. You've typed out paragraphs there and barely made an argument other than you don't like my style which is also not an argument. If you don't think there's any substance take some of your own advice stop fucking replying. Close the politics threads? Don't be so fucking ridiculous.
  11. I don't think I've ever said that I think I have any answers Palf, but I'd like to think that I am not ignorant to the vast complexities of the situations we're discussing so I am always surprised that pointing out that calling the other side selfish/nazis/fascists/c*nts is a bad strategy is met with either opprobrium or silence. For the record there's no argument against democracy, it's not perfect because it has human nature rooted in tribalism to contend with but has demonstrably delivered the fairest societies in the history of humanity.
  12. FFS Pete, this is what you do every time your wafer thin arguments are taken apart, refuse to engage with the actual argument, strawman the fuck out of everything. demand I provide a list of non related evidence to something that was a hypothetical. If you can't engage with the actual argument then you will be ignored, and not with the ignore button just regular ignored like you way you ignore a small petulant child.
  13. You're getting warm Petey, if someone is promoting an idea that they are superior to another group of people on the basis of immutable characteristics then that person is a racist and you can comfortably refer to them as such, voting for Brexit on the other hand or being concerned that immigration isn't all upside for everyone is not necessarily racist. Being pro rape people is not a political viewpoint that anyone holds in polite society and you thinking it reinforces the point demonstrates how muddy your thinking is.
  14. Its all there in black and white in the other thread for anyone to read, Pete.
  15. Its all there in black and white in the other thread for anyone to read, Pete. You posted an article by a left wing think tank arguing that the government didn't spend enough money making people aware that their poor lifestyle choices could lead to early death and then peddled that as evidence that the government were analogous to murderers. I pointed the fallacious nature of the argument, you went mental. I made the point not to say that left wing think tanks shouldn't be making those arguments, but that the other side of the aisle have a perfectly reasonable counter argument that people should also take some responsibility for their own health and that it might not be the taxpayers job to fund everything that your caring heart desires and that not telling people not to smoke is not the same as giving them lung cancer. You then went off half cocked demanding evidence that they hadn't murdered people with their outrageous lack of spending which was where your dishonesty increased to the point you didn't deserve a response. I predict we'll get somewhere close to that position with your next post.
  16. I don't engage with you Pete because you're not an honest interlocutor. Ironically with all your anti-conservative ranting, from what I've seen from you on here you don't even believe in liberal values and spout more hate than the people you accuse of the same thing.
  17. As a species we really have come a long way in our tolerance and acceptance of people who don't look like us, but fuck me have we got a way to go with people who don't think like us. I have no doubt that if we survive the coming multapocalypses this sort of myopic political intolerance will be viewed as something akin to the way we look at racism now. For now though the best argument against democracy must surely be 5 minutes reading this thread. At lease we chased off the last conservatives though hey, wank on fellas!
  18. To be fair to the pollsters she did win the popular vote by 2% and was predicted to win by 3%. They break out a few other weighting issues in this piece, https://www.pewresearch.org/methods/2019/11/19/a-field-guide-to-polling-election-2020-edition/ Apparently a lot of undecideds went disproportionately Trump's way which is curious, I would love to know why that might have been. This poll called it for Trump the entire campaign, have dug around to find out what they might do differently but no joy. Will certainly be watching this one this campaign, but if this was supposed to predict popular vote, technically and ironically it was the furthest out.
  19. I meant do you think any others are winnable, a couple of polls have come out since saying its tight in Texas and North Carolina.
  20. Such a dick move. https://www.politico.com/news/2020/04/28/amash-announces-exploratory-committee-for-president-219357
  21. Texas! That would be something else. I just checked, they haven't elected a Democratic President since Jimmy Carter.
  22. Is there any other other states in play in your opinion other than Iowa, Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio (seems unlikely) Penn and Florida?
  23. Holy fuck mate you are just getting worse and worse and ironically proving my point, you have your intuitions and you're not interested in looking at any evidence that contradicts it, exactly like Trump voters. You've been presented with mountain of good analysis/data by experts in the field but then declare you're going to stick with your n of 1 anecdotes. What your are actually proposing is a blank slate view of humanity which has been debunked to death, explains nothing about anything. If you dig down to the actual reasons of our current political discord they actually explain quite lot, not only that but you also see it parallels with history which you are doomed to repeat if you ignore it. Try and explain the US Civil War, or Reagan and Thatcher with your "biased media preying on people" hypothesis, see how far you get. Edit: if you want a bigger than N of 1 but still not scientific example of how things get polarised with no one giving an inch and descending into uncivilised behaviour you need only go and have a look at the Brexit/GE whatever thread. Read the first few pages and see how reasonable everyones position is and contrast it with the end of the thread.
  24. Provide any replicable study that can demonstrate this phenomenon you describe here is actually a thing. Just one. I've said i before and I'll keep saying it, this is the social/political science version of flat earth theory/climate change denial.
  25. Read my first post, its WWE for low information people with a conservative bias. Identifying that and then making causal links that can't be established with any actual data is just a different kind of low information analysis that doesn't really add anything to the conversation. It's just left wing liberals wanting to feel informed about the situation rather than getting informed about wtf is actually going on. Two sides of the same very basic coin.
×
×
  • Create New...