Pinkiebee

What is keeping Johnson in power or the conservatives? The second is the complete 9inability of the labour party to come up with an electable leader or policies What keeping Johnson in power is his complete lack of shame and his grip on the Tory parliamentary party . Coupled with the chancellor throwing him self under the bus and the lack of any other viable candidates. All that considered if you want him out. Voting in the local elections is the only feasible way of convincing Tory MP to get rid of him. I'm not at all convinced that even land slide losses will get rid of him. But it is the only practical or legal way to do it

In the spiritof a friendly and hopefully honest discusion I was asking you for a plausible explination. I mean clearly you must have run through some sort of logic to reach the conclusion you have. It's a quick glimpse of that I'd like. I've no intrest in spending my afternoon wading through other peole logic particular as they are not freely available to support it themselves or indeed a host of you tube vids. Let's start with" electromagnetism has been renamed gravity." How does that work with non magnetic thing like say squirrels. Clearly it may work with cars You must have asked yourself a similar question before accepting it as true Please share

I think that is extremely accurate. Boris despite appearance to the contrary is a very clever man who has plotted his rise up the greasy pole of power with cynicism and focus groups/ opinion surveys What will get his core vote back onside ? Tackling immigration particularly channel migrants. That's what the focus groups are telling him He really only needs this to run for another couple of weeks till the local elections. He has two years to hatch another plot for the elections The more controversy it creates the more good it does him. It will almost certainly be ruled illegal by the high court. Which doesnt matter as he will still get credit for trying.

This is what I find most strange about the whole affair People who are of a conspiratorial mind and extremely sceptical of what they are told make by far the best scientist if they have the intellect to actualy go out and disprove established dogma. We would be nowhere as a species if they didnt exist. For the rest of us. Insisting that claims are explained is a very healthy state of mind. But you do need the concentration span to get to the end of the explination. Which does seem a bit lacking. But then some people doubt everything from one sub set of the population but lap up every word issued by another subset with no skepticism at all. This leaves them extremly vulnerable to being exploited. Yet they seem incapable of seeing their victimisation. In fact they seem to embrace it

That's not really a hypothesis. How does magnetism effect squirrels . And how could density effects ever occure with out gravity. Just map out a plausible explination for discusion purposes

That's making a big deal out of the views of Casey luskins. Who somewhat deceptively calls him self a " scientist" he has allegedly got " scientiific" qualifications. Though given his track record for telling lies that may be questionable. He is not however working as a scientist by any reasonable use of the term And He is not however qualifed in any sort of biological area at all. Even by his own admission. He is very skilled at misinterpreting facts. Quote mining and just making things up in a way that sounds convincing to the layman. Possibly his qualification as a lawyer helps in this Luskins is paid by the discovery institute who's whole perpose is to take gullible people and exploit them for their own ends. Luskins and his ilk are genuinely evil. They earn a good living from the gullible just delibrately deceiving them

Yes it does but some what less as they are by defintion smaller . It being tied to the mass of the two objects in question You need to pop out into space away from huge objects if you want small things to "suck" together Gravity seems to be the silliest of things to deny. As you exsperiance it every day. I mean yea quarks could be contested. No ones ever seen one of them. Why is it you doubt its existance and what's your alternative hypothesis for squirrels not flying off on their own

Do you know I never had the slightest problem buying pasta or toilet paper in the lock down or any other household staple come to that. Bicycle inner tubes were hard to find.

Your standing on it.

When was that filmed ? It must be decades old to make sense of the time line and her aparent age and the 1980s hair style. If the impending alien invasion hasnt happened in the last 30 odd years of be tempted to breath a sigh of relief Maybe there is grid lock near Polaris

Gravity isnt actualy caused by rocks sucking together. Its caused by time dilation.

That might help the pharmaceutical companies or it might not. The govenment is just replacing one exspensive population with another The whole thing makes no financial or political sense. To anyone First find a motive then find a conspiracy to fit

We have a pension time bomb because a) medical science has improved vastly and b) the govenment are prepared to pay for it. It's also some what counter inituative to implicate the drugs companies in a plot to kill old people when they are a key beneficiary of increased life expectancy And there are a lot simpler ways of reducing it than either releasing a vacine that ends up costing more than it saves or even just inventing a virus as a pretext for killing them another way

Can you give a couple of examples of evolutionary biologists that have gone on the record about masks. I'm not doubting you. it's just not really their field of expertise The problem with damming them for that is. If you ask a " scientist " how to stop a killer virus. They will come up with more of less what we got. It's not out right wrong if the question is accurate If you ask a sociologist if it will work or the damage it will do to society or an economist if it's good idea or a logistics exspert if it can be organised. Youl get a different answer As it is. The virus wasnt that deadly so every thing was over the top ( in fact at times completly irrational . Not helped by the policemen enforcing laws that didnt exist)and ignored the people actually at risk nearly completly and no body considered the other issues at all it seems. Masks may have had at least some effect. If they had been surgery grade. What was commonly used were just placebos

Well no I wouldnt like it nor its seems did anyone else out side of a looney fringe. But they seem to be evolving in their protests. Grid locking london did nothing for gaining support for their cause. If fact it was a Pr disaster . Manure bombing the daily mail on the other hand gets them both publicity and support. As are the police evolving. an arrest for breaking the highways act is a bit hard to justify under PACE A potential dangerous driving charge a lot more so

I'm not concvince by the argument that you can switch over a lot of factories to war production at all let alone in the time frame. Unless they are making war bicycles etc. Or that China doesnt already have a munitions capability that will meet its needs. China invading Taiwan however or those contested islands etc is far from unlikely . They may even fancy a bit of Russia. With the Russians a) distracted and b) having demonstrated their army is rubbish

Freaky. That the very last thing I saw on you tube before comming here.

The gunners didnt know but the govenment did and kept doing it. Because...well that's an open question. They are estimated to have killed half the people who died in an average raid. So over a 100 a time whilst shooting down very nearly no planes at all. There were also no food shortages in Britain in WW2 . Less food perhaps of certain types bananas perhaps and sugar. But not by much. Yet rationing was introduced

This is what I wish I'd wrote. I used 5 paragraphs to say the same thing half as well ". In general, evolution is a non-Euclidian energy density landscape in flattening motion."

I think its long hand for a person

Energy is really all there is. Quarks would be needed for any structure

Well nothing. Energy is the building block of the universe. energy makes up every thing else Nb there isnt a law of entropy. It's a law of thermodynamics. Nnb a pile of stones is a wall

It's just occurred to me. You havent misunderstood the second law of thermodynamics. You havent read it at all. Just picked something up off a web site and ran with it God I'm I'm slow today

I think you most probably could build a wall throwing stones. It wouldnt be very high and a bit wonky. But a wall never the less.

My god man. You have some stuff booked marked. Cheers on my list