I couldn’t believe that when that fashion came along. It was as if you looked traditional then that somehow equated to low emissions. Yes, if you chose the right fuel it was ‘sustainable’, but as you correctly say, so is lung damage.
I applied for a 100m wind turbine in my 3m by 3m garden but ‘unfortunately’ everybody else on my housing estate are climate change deniers & objected. So I’m stuck with ‘dirty’ solar giving me ‘free’ elastic trickery (when the sun shines…not that often…‘unfortunately’ )
I watched the first two seasons of Mindhunter. It was pretty entertaining and with some good direction and high production values - loved all the period cars hired in great abundance for the shoots - although all looked like they had just come out of a show room , which no American, traffic filled street ever looks like as their standards for what is allowed on the road are way below ours in the EU.
Think the writers have missed a bit of a trick, to my mind. The series is set up for a very decent run given the amount of ‘interesting/fascinating’ case load over the years. Even so they’ve chosen to veer off into the private, and I’m sure largely made up, lives of the main protagonists which is never going to be as interesting, even though they have chosen some rather unlikely story lines to intersect.
From my point of view of academic interest, a little disappointing, although I’m sure I’ll catch subsequent series as they come along.
P.S. I trust you have seen the 80s film Manhunter? Based on the book Red Dragon and much better than the subsequent remake named after the book. Harris was, of course, a crime writer journo who experienced many serial killers in L.A. and California even though his first book didn’t touch on that subject. He hit the jackpot with Hannibal Lecter in his second book, Red Dragon though.
I think woodburners are only a problem in urban areas, especially if the owners are not burning properly seasoned wood. In rural areas the there is little risk of causing lung damage due to low density housing levels. I still regard wood burners as relatively green.
Frog in a tree
My mistake, he was in New York during Son of Sam killings - I’m got mixed up with another writer from L.A. who has also covered similar material.
Quite seriously I’ve had my eye out for a while for a small, domestic wind turbine unit for over a decade now and they just don’t seem to come in that scale. Anyone know of anything on the market these days? I have seen such things very occasionally in Poland, stuck up on poles about 4 or 5 metres high, mostly on small farms. No idea of their source though, or how useful they actually are.
I live in a valley in Sheffield that channels almost every prevailing wind up it and our flat blocks could easily use such turbines to reduce the community lighting bills - whereas solar panels, preferred by everyone else, have regulatory issues due to the gas flues all directed to the tops of the flats now. So, nothing has been done…
Its “elicit” not “illicit”. Unless you meant you want to illegally plug into a gas main?
It wouldn’t be the first time - and I was typing v. fast.
One of last night’s bloodfest offerings on Freeview (“Murderers and their mothers”) was about this serial killer in your Polish neck of the woods:
Not a very sophisticated crim.
JW - hi
Didn’t try it … I’m a Brexiteer so ‘old school’ and traditionalist
None of these modern cockney slang expressions m8
“I expect that ii have a concern with anti-vacc conspiracy theory being posted on their message boards.”
I don´t even think I have stated anything remotely that controversial apart from the picture which is a U.S. government department. Measels etc was just a thing everyone grew up with. 1/100,00 will suffer an adverse reaction. It doesn´t sound that much but when you consider that amount of vacines that are given it beomes a serious issue. You are dealing with live virus material.
None of you have come up with any meaningful material over vaccines. Vaccines only work if you keep topping up, statistically the NHS would fall apart if this ever were to happen. Are we a less sick nation than the 1970´s?
oilo - hi
So far, Brexit has meant 3 years of undemocratic whingeing!
I watched a bit of Johnson’s Conference speech. God the audience were an ugly bunch. But they loved his drivel of course, as they are all as thick as two short planks.
He came out with his usual one -liners and sound bites interspersed with lies. Much of it he just made up as he went along.
How low the country has sunk.
I agree…way too much moaning from Brexiteers that asking ‘the people’ to resolve Brexit would be somehow ‘undemocratic’…what a joke, huh?!
Almost like they don’t trust ‘the people’ to make the correct choice!
But instead, keep them in the dark, feed them with false information and let a handful of far-right ‘elite’ MP’s in Parliament decide what people were voting for in 2016.
oilo - hi
We did … and they did in 2016
The problem is the losers (sorry Remainers), didn’t accept the referendum result.
A key component of any democracy is the concept of ‘losers consent’. A summary of what it means…
Losers’ Consent: Elections and Democratic Legitimacy
Christopher J. Anderson, André Blais, Shaun Bowler, Todd Donovan, and Ola Listhaug
Print publication date: 2005 Print ISBN-13: 9780199276387
Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: July 2005
_Democratic elections are designed to create unequal outcomes—for some to win, others have to lose. This book examines the consequences of this inequality for the legitimacy of democratic political institutions and systems. Using survey data collected in old and new democracies around the globe, the authors argue that losing generates ambivalent attitudes towards political authorities. Because the efficacy and ultimately the survival of democratic regimes can be seriously threatened if the losers do not consent to their loss,
Strange though. The losers gave the winners all the powers they required, including a massive dedicated department, to achieve Brexit. And the failed. They even admitted it wasn’t possible to do it in the way they had previously said (lied) that it would be.
So, ancient history. A failed outcome that no longer carries any legitimacy.
Eadwig - hi
I guess that makes you a ‘democracy denier’ then.
Great speech by Boris , just hearing that it has been met with a plenty of support from both sides, roll on the queens speech on the 14th and a well earned break from the 8th Oct onwards for prep work …little EU Groupies have been blindsided
And what form of Brexit did ‘the people’ vote for in 2016…‘No’ deal…TM’s deal…Canada+++…or some other fantasy Brexit? I must have missed that section on the voting paper…all mine had was ‘Yes’ & ‘No’. Which doesn’t really tell me ‘What Brexit meant’. Not TM’s deal (apparently)…the ERG didn’t like that, did they?
Jar, do you actually understand what you post? ‘Losers consent’ is a concept whereby in a ‘democracy’ it’s a good idea to get the consent of the losing minority (or to include them in the process…I suspect). The ‘winner takes all’ philosophy that Brexiteers espouse is divisive and not good for ‘democracy’ (from what you posted)
You’ve just proven the point…that a 52 to 48% 2016 referendum split doesn’t justify a ‘No’ deal Brexit.
You rhetorically asked since when measles, smallpox etc. are dangerous. That is enough to qualify you as a conspiracy believer