FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > Reform uk
Reform uk
Jump to: Newest in thread
"In the absence of an effective opposition, someones got to step up and challenge government?
I thought you liked scrutiny and holding to account ?"
I'd suggest challenging the 1 policy that has actually saved lives is not the best place to start.
Still I'm sure Farage and his ilk are just looking iur for working people |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
 |
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"In the absence of an effective opposition, someones got to step up and challenge government?
I thought you liked scrutiny and holding to account ?"
Indeed. Parliament need an effective opposition to scrutinise them.
I hardly think an anti-science far right party are the ones to do that though. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"In the absence of an effective opposition, someones got to step up and challenge government?
I thought you liked scrutiny and holding to account ?
Indeed. Parliament need an effective opposition to scrutinise them.
I hardly think an anti-science far right party are the ones to do that though."
anti-science?
I thought science could be interpreted many different ways... you remember the "alternative" SAGE group that had an alternative take on what we should be doing differently to what the actual SAGE were recommending?
Vaccines going well, top 4 cohorts (the most vulnerable) done by 15 February ... why are government still locking things down?
The party may portray a leaning to the right but thats not to say it can't pressure an issue that is neither left, right or centre.
If folks are uncomfortable with who is behind the party, begs the question why it takes this bunch of individuals who can adapt and reform themselves to any of the important issues of the day ... really puts shame on all the MPs from the other parties, yes? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"In the absence of an effective opposition, someones got to step up and challenge government?
I thought you liked scrutiny and holding to account ?
Indeed. Parliament need an effective opposition to scrutinise them.
I hardly think an anti-science far right party are the ones to do that though.
anti-science?
I thought science could be interpreted many different ways... you remember the "alternative" SAGE group that had an alternative take on what we should be doing differently to what the actual SAGE were recommending?
Vaccines going well, top 4 cohorts (the most vulnerable) done by 15 February ... why are government still locking things down?
The party may portray a leaning to the right but thats not to say it can't pressure an issue that is neither left, right or centre.
If folks are uncomfortable with who is behind the party, begs the question why it takes this bunch of individuals who can adapt and reform themselves to any of the important issues of the day ... really puts shame on all the MPs from the other parties, yes?"
Science isn't ambiguous. The way people and politicians respond to it can be "alternative".
I would suggest that a main policy of profit before human life, especially the lives of the most vulnerable people in society is as far to the right as you can get.
Yes I am uncomfortable with Farage's loose relationship with the truth, and with his history of using race hate as a political tool. So even if, for some bizarre reason, he started a party with something positive to bring to the table like a pro-environment party as an example, I would be suspicious. Someone less cynical than me would suggest that he's desperately trying to stay relevant.
I would be curious to know who's funding him this time though. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"In the absence of an effective opposition, someones got to step up and challenge government?
I thought you liked scrutiny and holding to account ?
Indeed. Parliament need an effective opposition to scrutinise them.
I hardly think an anti-science far right party are the ones to do that though.
anti-science?
I thought science could be interpreted many different ways... you remember the "alternative" SAGE group that had an alternative take on what we should be doing differently to what the actual SAGE were recommending?
Vaccines going well, top 4 cohorts (the most vulnerable) done by 15 February ... why are government still locking things down?
The party may portray a leaning to the right but thats not to say it can't pressure an issue that is neither left, right or centre.
If folks are uncomfortable with who is behind the party, begs the question why it takes this bunch of individuals who can adapt and reform themselves to any of the important issues of the day ... really puts shame on all the MPs from the other parties, yes?
Science isn't ambiguous. The way people and politicians respond to it can be "alternative".
I would suggest that a main policy of profit before human life, especially the lives of the most vulnerable people in society is as far to the right as you can get.
Yes I am uncomfortable with Farage's loose relationship with the truth, and with his history of using race hate as a political tool. So even if, for some bizarre reason, he started a party with something positive to bring to the table like a pro-environment party as an example, I would be suspicious. Someone less cynical than me would suggest that he's desperately trying to stay relevant.
I would be curious to know who's funding him this time though."
I would disagree that the science isn't ambiguous - but thats probably for a different forum 
Reform (Scotland) put their hat in the ring on a pro-union ticket
Reform (Uk) backing more scrutiny on the way government are locking down the nation..
Seems to be issues that are for a positive difference, that some clearly feel are not being promoted or challenged in a positive or timely way.
I wonder if hospitality, travel industry would back them? They would be crazy not to? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *obka3Couple
over a year ago
bournemouth |
"In the absence of an effective opposition, someones got to step up and challenge government?
I thought you liked scrutiny and holding to account ?
Indeed. Parliament need an effective opposition to scrutinise them.
I hardly think an anti-science far right party are the ones to do that though.
anti-science?
I thought science could be interpreted many different ways... you remember the "alternative" SAGE group that had an alternative take on what we should be doing differently to what the actual SAGE were recommending?
Vaccines going well, top 4 cohorts (the most vulnerable) done by 15 February ... why are government still locking things down?
The party may portray a leaning to the right but thats not to say it can't pressure an issue that is neither left, right or centre.
If folks are uncomfortable with who is behind the party, begs the question why it takes this bunch of individuals who can adapt and reform themselves to any of the important issues of the day ... really puts shame on all the MPs from the other parties, yes?
Science isn't ambiguous. The way people and politicians respond to it can be "alternative".
I would suggest that a main policy of profit before human life, especially the lives of the most vulnerable people in society is as far to the right as you can get.
Yes I am uncomfortable with Farage's loose relationship with the truth, and with his history of using race hate as a political tool. So even if, for some bizarre reason, he started a party with something positive to bring to the table like a pro-environment party as an example, I would be suspicious. Someone less cynical than me would suggest that he's desperately trying to stay relevant.
I would be curious to know who's funding him this time though."
Of course science can be ambiguous. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"In the absence of an effective opposition, someones got to step up and challenge government?
I thought you liked scrutiny and holding to account ?
Indeed. Parliament need an effective opposition to scrutinise them.
I hardly think an anti-science far right party are the ones to do that though.
anti-science?
I thought science could be interpreted many different ways... you remember the "alternative" SAGE group that had an alternative take on what we should be doing differently to what the actual SAGE were recommending?
Vaccines going well, top 4 cohorts (the most vulnerable) done by 15 February ... why are government still locking things down?
The party may portray a leaning to the right but thats not to say it can't pressure an issue that is neither left, right or centre.
If folks are uncomfortable with who is behind the party, begs the question why it takes this bunch of individuals who can adapt and reform themselves to any of the important issues of the day ... really puts shame on all the MPs from the other parties, yes?
Science isn't ambiguous. The way people and politicians respond to it can be "alternative".
I would suggest that a main policy of profit before human life, especially the lives of the most vulnerable people in society is as far to the right as you can get.
Yes I am uncomfortable with Farage's loose relationship with the truth, and with his history of using race hate as a political tool. So even if, for some bizarre reason, he started a party with something positive to bring to the table like a pro-environment party as an example, I would be suspicious. Someone less cynical than me would suggest that he's desperately trying to stay relevant.
I would be curious to know who's funding him this time though.
I would disagree that the science isn't ambiguous - but thats probably for a different forum
Reform (Scotland) put their hat in the ring on a pro-union ticket
Reform (Uk) backing more scrutiny on the way government are locking down the nation..
Seems to be issues that are for a positive difference, that some clearly feel are not being promoted or challenged in a positive or timely way.
I wonder if hospitality, travel industry would back them? They would be crazy not to?"
Sure. If they prioritise their profits over human life. They might back it.
Could make their businesses unpopular if their policies cause loss of life. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"In the absence of an effective opposition, someones got to step up and challenge government?
I thought you liked scrutiny and holding to account ?
Indeed. Parliament need an effective opposition to scrutinise them.
I hardly think an anti-science far right party are the ones to do that though.
anti-science?
I thought science could be interpreted many different ways... you remember the "alternative" SAGE group that had an alternative take on what we should be doing differently to what the actual SAGE were recommending?
Vaccines going well, top 4 cohorts (the most vulnerable) done by 15 February ... why are government still locking things down?
The party may portray a leaning to the right but thats not to say it can't pressure an issue that is neither left, right or centre.
If folks are uncomfortable with who is behind the party, begs the question why it takes this bunch of individuals who can adapt and reform themselves to any of the important issues of the day ... really puts shame on all the MPs from the other parties, yes?
Science isn't ambiguous. The way people and politicians respond to it can be "alternative".
I would suggest that a main policy of profit before human life, especially the lives of the most vulnerable people in society is as far to the right as you can get.
Yes I am uncomfortable with Farage's loose relationship with the truth, and with his history of using race hate as a political tool. So even if, for some bizarre reason, he started a party with something positive to bring to the table like a pro-environment party as an example, I would be suspicious. Someone less cynical than me would suggest that he's desperately trying to stay relevant.
I would be curious to know who's funding him this time though.
Of course science can be ambiguous. "
I'm open to having my mind changed. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"In the absence of an effective opposition, someones got to step up and challenge government?
I thought you liked scrutiny and holding to account ?
Indeed. Parliament need an effective opposition to scrutinise them.
I hardly think an anti-science far right party are the ones to do that though.
anti-science?
I thought science could be interpreted many different ways... you remember the "alternative" SAGE group that had an alternative take on what we should be doing differently to what the actual SAGE were recommending?
Vaccines going well, top 4 cohorts (the most vulnerable) done by 15 February ... why are government still locking things down?
The party may portray a leaning to the right but thats not to say it can't pressure an issue that is neither left, right or centre.
If folks are uncomfortable with who is behind the party, begs the question why it takes this bunch of individuals who can adapt and reform themselves to any of the important issues of the day ... really puts shame on all the MPs from the other parties, yes?"
Not really
If you use lockdown as an example, all parties contest that it is a policy that saves lives.
The only opposition seems to be from certain sections of the conservative party and certain commentators such as toby young etc
So wouldnt it beg the question why they are so against it? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"In the absence of an effective opposition, someones got to step up and challenge government?
I thought you liked scrutiny and holding to account ?
Indeed. Parliament need an effective opposition to scrutinise them.
I hardly think an anti-science far right party are the ones to do that though.
anti-science?
I thought science could be interpreted many different ways... you remember the "alternative" SAGE group that had an alternative take on what we should be doing differently to what the actual SAGE were recommending?
Vaccines going well, top 4 cohorts (the most vulnerable) done by 15 February ... why are government still locking things down?
The party may portray a leaning to the right but thats not to say it can't pressure an issue that is neither left, right or centre.
If folks are uncomfortable with who is behind the party, begs the question why it takes this bunch of individuals who can adapt and reform themselves to any of the important issues of the day ... really puts shame on all the MPs from the other parties, yes?
Science isn't ambiguous. The way people and politicians respond to it can be "alternative".
I would suggest that a main policy of profit before human life, especially the lives of the most vulnerable people in society is as far to the right as you can get.
Yes I am uncomfortable with Farage's loose relationship with the truth, and with his history of using race hate as a political tool. So even if, for some bizarre reason, he started a party with something positive to bring to the table like a pro-environment party as an example, I would be suspicious. Someone less cynical than me would suggest that he's desperately trying to stay relevant.
I would be curious to know who's funding him this time though.
Of course science can be ambiguous. "
So lockdown has not worked? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *obka3Couple
over a year ago
bournemouth |
"In the absence of an effective opposition, someones got to step up and challenge government?
I thought you liked scrutiny and holding to account ?
Indeed. Parliament need an effective opposition to scrutinise them.
I hardly think an anti-science far right party are the ones to do that though.
anti-science?
I thought science could be interpreted many different ways... you remember the "alternative" SAGE group that had an alternative take on what we should be doing differently to what the actual SAGE were recommending?
Vaccines going well, top 4 cohorts (the most vulnerable) done by 15 February ... why are government still locking things down?
The party may portray a leaning to the right but thats not to say it can't pressure an issue that is neither left, right or centre.
If folks are uncomfortable with who is behind the party, begs the question why it takes this bunch of individuals who can adapt and reform themselves to any of the important issues of the day ... really puts shame on all the MPs from the other parties, yes?
Science isn't ambiguous. The way people and politicians respond to it can be "alternative".
I would suggest that a main policy of profit before human life, especially the lives of the most vulnerable people in society is as far to the right as you can get.
Yes I am uncomfortable with Farage's loose relationship with the truth, and with his history of using race hate as a political tool. So even if, for some bizarre reason, he started a party with something positive to bring to the table like a pro-environment party as an example, I would be suspicious. Someone less cynical than me would suggest that he's desperately trying to stay relevant.
I would be curious to know who's funding him this time though.
Of course science can be ambiguous.
So lockdown has not worked?"
Strangely science is a bit bigger than lockdown. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"In the absence of an effective opposition, someones got to step up and challenge government?
I thought you liked scrutiny and holding to account ?
Indeed. Parliament need an effective opposition to scrutinise them.
I hardly think an anti-science far right party are the ones to do that though.
anti-science?
I thought science could be interpreted many different ways... you remember the "alternative" SAGE group that had an alternative take on what we should be doing differently to what the actual SAGE were recommending?
Vaccines going well, top 4 cohorts (the most vulnerable) done by 15 February ... why are government still locking things down?
The party may portray a leaning to the right but thats not to say it can't pressure an issue that is neither left, right or centre.
If folks are uncomfortable with who is behind the party, begs the question why it takes this bunch of individuals who can adapt and reform themselves to any of the important issues of the day ... really puts shame on all the MPs from the other parties, yes?
Science isn't ambiguous. The way people and politicians respond to it can be "alternative".
I would suggest that a main policy of profit before human life, especially the lives of the most vulnerable people in society is as far to the right as you can get.
Yes I am uncomfortable with Farage's loose relationship with the truth, and with his history of using race hate as a political tool. So even if, for some bizarre reason, he started a party with something positive to bring to the table like a pro-environment party as an example, I would be suspicious. Someone less cynical than me would suggest that he's desperately trying to stay relevant.
I would be curious to know who's funding him this time though.
Of course science can be ambiguous.
So lockdown has not worked?
Strangely science is a bit bigger than lockdown."
But we are specifically discussing lockdown |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *obka3Couple
over a year ago
bournemouth |
"In the absence of an effective opposition, someones got to step up and challenge government?
I thought you liked scrutiny and holding to account ?
Indeed. Parliament need an effective opposition to scrutinise them.
I hardly think an anti-science far right party are the ones to do that though.
anti-science?
I thought science could be interpreted many different ways... you remember the "alternative" SAGE group that had an alternative take on what we should be doing differently to what the actual SAGE were recommending?
Vaccines going well, top 4 cohorts (the most vulnerable) done by 15 February ... why are government still locking things down?
The party may portray a leaning to the right but thats not to say it can't pressure an issue that is neither left, right or centre.
If folks are uncomfortable with who is behind the party, begs the question why it takes this bunch of individuals who can adapt and reform themselves to any of the important issues of the day ... really puts shame on all the MPs from the other parties, yes?
Science isn't ambiguous. The way people and politicians respond to it can be "alternative".
I would suggest that a main policy of profit before human life, especially the lives of the most vulnerable people in society is as far to the right as you can get.
Yes I am uncomfortable with Farage's loose relationship with the truth, and with his history of using race hate as a political tool. So even if, for some bizarre reason, he started a party with something positive to bring to the table like a pro-environment party as an example, I would be suspicious. Someone less cynical than me would suggest that he's desperately trying to stay relevant.
I would be curious to know who's funding him this time though.
Of course science can be ambiguous.
I'm open to having my mind changed. "
Actually that is exactly the point, it's about new evidence changing what previously was assumed fact, then there are theories, of course there are always different ones a true scientist always has an open mind |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"In the absence of an effective opposition, someones got to step up and challenge government?
I thought you liked scrutiny and holding to account ?
Indeed. Parliament need an effective opposition to scrutinise them.
I hardly think an anti-science far right party are the ones to do that though.
anti-science?
I thought science could be interpreted many different ways... you remember the "alternative" SAGE group that had an alternative take on what we should be doing differently to what the actual SAGE were recommending?
Vaccines going well, top 4 cohorts (the most vulnerable) done by 15 February ... why are government still locking things down?
The party may portray a leaning to the right but thats not to say it can't pressure an issue that is neither left, right or centre.
If folks are uncomfortable with who is behind the party, begs the question why it takes this bunch of individuals who can adapt and reform themselves to any of the important issues of the day ... really puts shame on all the MPs from the other parties, yes?
Science isn't ambiguous. The way people and politicians respond to it can be "alternative".
I would suggest that a main policy of profit before human life, especially the lives of the most vulnerable people in society is as far to the right as you can get.
Yes I am uncomfortable with Farage's loose relationship with the truth, and with his history of using race hate as a political tool. So even if, for some bizarre reason, he started a party with something positive to bring to the table like a pro-environment party as an example, I would be suspicious. Someone less cynical than me would suggest that he's desperately trying to stay relevant.
I would be curious to know who's funding him this time though.
I would disagree that the science isn't ambiguous - but thats probably for a different forum
Reform (Scotland) put their hat in the ring on a pro-union ticket
Reform (Uk) backing more scrutiny on the way government are locking down the nation..
Seems to be issues that are for a positive difference, that some clearly feel are not being promoted or challenged in a positive or timely way.
I wonder if hospitality, travel industry would back them? They would be crazy not to?
Sure. If they prioritise their profits over human life. They might back it.
Could make their businesses unpopular if their policies cause loss of life."
There is attributable loss of life either way.
Keep lockdown in place - less people die from covid but at the cost of those who don't get treated for other ailments or who see the loss of their business and can't take living life any more.
flip it round and you get the same result.
Are the government being over cautious... I thought the whole vaccine thing was going to be the life saver we needed to be able to open up society again..
I think it is right to question the policy now.
Other parties seem scared to challenge it...
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"In the absence of an effective opposition, someones got to step up and challenge government?
I thought you liked scrutiny and holding to account ?
Indeed. Parliament need an effective opposition to scrutinise them.
I hardly think an anti-science far right party are the ones to do that though.
anti-science?
I thought science could be interpreted many different ways... you remember the "alternative" SAGE group that had an alternative take on what we should be doing differently to what the actual SAGE were recommending?
Vaccines going well, top 4 cohorts (the most vulnerable) done by 15 February ... why are government still locking things down?
The party may portray a leaning to the right but thats not to say it can't pressure an issue that is neither left, right or centre.
If folks are uncomfortable with who is behind the party, begs the question why it takes this bunch of individuals who can adapt and reform themselves to any of the important issues of the day ... really puts shame on all the MPs from the other parties, yes?
Science isn't ambiguous. The way people and politicians respond to it can be "alternative".
I would suggest that a main policy of profit before human life, especially the lives of the most vulnerable people in society is as far to the right as you can get.
Yes I am uncomfortable with Farage's loose relationship with the truth, and with his history of using race hate as a political tool. So even if, for some bizarre reason, he started a party with something positive to bring to the table like a pro-environment party as an example, I would be suspicious. Someone less cynical than me would suggest that he's desperately trying to stay relevant.
I would be curious to know who's funding him this time though.
I would disagree that the science isn't ambiguous - but thats probably for a different forum
Reform (Scotland) put their hat in the ring on a pro-union ticket
Reform (Uk) backing more scrutiny on the way government are locking down the nation..
Seems to be issues that are for a positive difference, that some clearly feel are not being promoted or challenged in a positive or timely way.
I wonder if hospitality, travel industry would back them? They would be crazy not to?
Sure. If they prioritise their profits over human life. They might back it.
Could make their businesses unpopular if their policies cause loss of life.
There is attributable loss of life either way.
Keep lockdown in place - less people die from covid but at the cost of those who don't get treated for other ailments or who see the loss of their business and can't take living life any more.
flip it round and you get the same result.
Are the government being over cautious... I thought the whole vaccine thing was going to be the life saver we needed to be able to open up society again..
I think it is right to question the policy now.
Other parties seem scared to challenge it...
"
It's worth having the conversation, from a scientific point of view.
But basing your whole party on letting the weak die so the economy can crack on, seems poor form.
What will he move to after Covid? Again, cynical people would suggest that he will move to whatever his funders tell him to. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"In the absence of an effective opposition, someones got to step up and challenge government?
I thought you liked scrutiny and holding to account ?
Indeed. Parliament need an effective opposition to scrutinise them.
I hardly think an anti-science far right party are the ones to do that though.
anti-science?
I thought science could be interpreted many different ways... you remember the "alternative" SAGE group that had an alternative take on what we should be doing differently to what the actual SAGE were recommending?
Vaccines going well, top 4 cohorts (the most vulnerable) done by 15 February ... why are government still locking things down?
The party may portray a leaning to the right but thats not to say it can't pressure an issue that is neither left, right or centre.
If folks are uncomfortable with who is behind the party, begs the question why it takes this bunch of individuals who can adapt and reform themselves to any of the important issues of the day ... really puts shame on all the MPs from the other parties, yes?
Science isn't ambiguous. The way people and politicians respond to it can be "alternative".
I would suggest that a main policy of profit before human life, especially the lives of the most vulnerable people in society is as far to the right as you can get.
Yes I am uncomfortable with Farage's loose relationship with the truth, and with his history of using race hate as a political tool. So even if, for some bizarre reason, he started a party with something positive to bring to the table like a pro-environment party as an example, I would be suspicious. Someone less cynical than me would suggest that he's desperately trying to stay relevant.
I would be curious to know who's funding him this time though.
Of course science can be ambiguous.
I'm open to having my mind changed.
Actually that is exactly the point, it's about new evidence changing what previously was assumed fact, then there are theories, of course there are always different ones a true scientist always has an open mind "
Thats not ambiguous though.
That's new information that supercedes the old.
For example, water boils at 100 degrees C at sea level. We "know" this unambiguously. It stands true until someone boils water at 101 degrees. Then the science needs updating.
There is no ambiguity. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"In the absence of an effective opposition, someones got to step up and challenge government?
I thought you liked scrutiny and holding to account ?
Indeed. Parliament need an effective opposition to scrutinise them.
I hardly think an anti-science far right party are the ones to do that though.
anti-science?
I thought science could be interpreted many different ways... you remember the "alternative" SAGE group that had an alternative take on what we should be doing differently to what the actual SAGE were recommending?
Vaccines going well, top 4 cohorts (the most vulnerable) done by 15 February ... why are government still locking things down?
The party may portray a leaning to the right but thats not to say it can't pressure an issue that is neither left, right or centre.
If folks are uncomfortable with who is behind the party, begs the question why it takes this bunch of individuals who can adapt and reform themselves to any of the important issues of the day ... really puts shame on all the MPs from the other parties, yes?
Science isn't ambiguous. The way people and politicians respond to it can be "alternative".
I would suggest that a main policy of profit before human life, especially the lives of the most vulnerable people in society is as far to the right as you can get.
Yes I am uncomfortable with Farage's loose relationship with the truth, and with his history of using race hate as a political tool. So even if, for some bizarre reason, he started a party with something positive to bring to the table like a pro-environment party as an example, I would be suspicious. Someone less cynical than me would suggest that he's desperately trying to stay relevant.
I would be curious to know who's funding him this time though.
I would disagree that the science isn't ambiguous - but thats probably for a different forum
Reform (Scotland) put their hat in the ring on a pro-union ticket
Reform (Uk) backing more scrutiny on the way government are locking down the nation..
Seems to be issues that are for a positive difference, that some clearly feel are not being promoted or challenged in a positive or timely way.
I wonder if hospitality, travel industry would back them? They would be crazy not to?
Sure. If they prioritise their profits over human life. They might back it.
Could make their businesses unpopular if their policies cause loss of life.
There is attributable loss of life either way.
Keep lockdown in place - less people die from covid but at the cost of those who don't get treated for other ailments or who see the loss of their business and can't take living life any more.
flip it round and you get the same result.
Are the government being over cautious... I thought the whole vaccine thing was going to be the life saver we needed to be able to open up society again..
I think it is right to question the policy now.
Other parties seem scared to challenge it...
It's worth having the conversation, from a scientific point of view.
But basing your whole party on letting the weak die so the economy can crack on, seems poor form.
What will he move to after Covid? Again, cynical people would suggest that he will move to whatever his funders tell him to. "
Im not sure its as extreme as "let the weak die so the economy can crack on"  - thats even more controversial than "£350 million NHS etc etc" 
the next issue for them is already here... they are in Scotland - fighting for a United Kingdom 
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"In the absence of an effective opposition, someones got to step up and challenge government?
I thought you liked scrutiny and holding to account ?
Indeed. Parliament need an effective opposition to scrutinise them.
I hardly think an anti-science far right party are the ones to do that though.
anti-science?
I thought science could be interpreted many different ways... you remember the "alternative" SAGE group that had an alternative take on what we should be doing differently to what the actual SAGE were recommending?
Vaccines going well, top 4 cohorts (the most vulnerable) done by 15 February ... why are government still locking things down?
The party may portray a leaning to the right but thats not to say it can't pressure an issue that is neither left, right or centre.
If folks are uncomfortable with who is behind the party, begs the question why it takes this bunch of individuals who can adapt and reform themselves to any of the important issues of the day ... really puts shame on all the MPs from the other parties, yes?
Science isn't ambiguous. The way people and politicians respond to it can be "alternative".
I would suggest that a main policy of profit before human life, especially the lives of the most vulnerable people in society is as far to the right as you can get.
Yes I am uncomfortable with Farage's loose relationship with the truth, and with his history of using race hate as a political tool. So even if, for some bizarre reason, he started a party with something positive to bring to the table like a pro-environment party as an example, I would be suspicious. Someone less cynical than me would suggest that he's desperately trying to stay relevant.
I would be curious to know who's funding him this time though.
I would disagree that the science isn't ambiguous - but thats probably for a different forum
Reform (Scotland) put their hat in the ring on a pro-union ticket
Reform (Uk) backing more scrutiny on the way government are locking down the nation..
Seems to be issues that are for a positive difference, that some clearly feel are not being promoted or challenged in a positive or timely way.
I wonder if hospitality, travel industry would back them? They would be crazy not to?
Sure. If they prioritise their profits over human life. They might back it.
Could make their businesses unpopular if their policies cause loss of life.
There is attributable loss of life either way.
Keep lockdown in place - less people die from covid but at the cost of those who don't get treated for other ailments or who see the loss of their business and can't take living life any more.
flip it round and you get the same result.
Are the government being over cautious... I thought the whole vaccine thing was going to be the life saver we needed to be able to open up society again..
I think it is right to question the policy now.
Other parties seem scared to challenge it...
It's worth having the conversation, from a scientific point of view.
But basing your whole party on letting the weak die so the economy can crack on, seems poor form.
What will he move to after Covid? Again, cynical people would suggest that he will move to whatever his funders tell him to.
Im not sure its as extreme as "let the weak die so the economy can crack on" - thats even more controversial than "£350 million NHS etc etc"
the next issue for them is already here... they are in Scotland - fighting for a United Kingdom
"
It's not as blunt as that, but it's essentially what he's wrapping up and presenting.
I didn't know about their Scotland policy. I wonder why his funders are directing him to get involved there. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"In the absence of an effective opposition, someones got to step up and challenge government?
I thought you liked scrutiny and holding to account ?
Indeed. Parliament need an effective opposition to scrutinise them.
I hardly think an anti-science far right party are the ones to do that though.
anti-science?
I thought science could be interpreted many different ways... you remember the "alternative" SAGE group that had an alternative take on what we should be doing differently to what the actual SAGE were recommending?
Vaccines going well, top 4 cohorts (the most vulnerable) done by 15 February ... why are government still locking things down?
The party may portray a leaning to the right but thats not to say it can't pressure an issue that is neither left, right or centre.
If folks are uncomfortable with who is behind the party, begs the question why it takes this bunch of individuals who can adapt and reform themselves to any of the important issues of the day ... really puts shame on all the MPs from the other parties, yes?
Science isn't ambiguous. The way people and politicians respond to it can be "alternative".
I would suggest that a main policy of profit before human life, especially the lives of the most vulnerable people in society is as far to the right as you can get.
Yes I am uncomfortable with Farage's loose relationship with the truth, and with his history of using race hate as a political tool. So even if, for some bizarre reason, he started a party with something positive to bring to the table like a pro-environment party as an example, I would be suspicious. Someone less cynical than me would suggest that he's desperately trying to stay relevant.
I would be curious to know who's funding him this time though.
I would disagree that the science isn't ambiguous - but thats probably for a different forum
Reform (Scotland) put their hat in the ring on a pro-union ticket
Reform (Uk) backing more scrutiny on the way government are locking down the nation..
Seems to be issues that are for a positive difference, that some clearly feel are not being promoted or challenged in a positive or timely way.
I wonder if hospitality, travel industry would back them? They would be crazy not to?
Sure. If they prioritise their profits over human life. They might back it.
Could make their businesses unpopular if their policies cause loss of life.
There is attributable loss of life either way.
Keep lockdown in place - less people die from covid but at the cost of those who don't get treated for other ailments or who see the loss of their business and can't take living life any more.
flip it round and you get the same result.
Are the government being over cautious... I thought the whole vaccine thing was going to be the life saver we needed to be able to open up society again..
I think it is right to question the policy now.
Other parties seem scared to challenge it...
It's worth having the conversation, from a scientific point of view.
But basing your whole party on letting the weak die so the economy can crack on, seems poor form.
What will he move to after Covid? Again, cynical people would suggest that he will move to whatever his funders tell him to.
Im not sure its as extreme as "let the weak die so the economy can crack on" - thats even more controversial than "£350 million NHS etc etc"
the next issue for them is already here... they are in Scotland - fighting for a United Kingdom
It's not as blunt as that, but it's essentially what he's wrapping up and presenting.
I didn't know about their Scotland policy. I wonder why his funders are directing him to get involved there. "
the Scotland policy is an easy one to answer ... Scotland needs rescuing from the clutches of the rotten SNP
Labour, LibDems, Conservatives are all ineffectual in shifting the SNP. Something else is needed (its not that different in its execution to the effect the "B" party had on the politics of 2018-2020) . |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"In the absence of an effective opposition, someones got to step up and challenge government?
I thought you liked scrutiny and holding to account ?
Indeed. Parliament need an effective opposition to scrutinise them.
I hardly think an anti-science far right party are the ones to do that though.
anti-science?
I thought science could be interpreted many different ways... you remember the "alternative" SAGE group that had an alternative take on what we should be doing differently to what the actual SAGE were recommending?
Vaccines going well, top 4 cohorts (the most vulnerable) done by 15 February ... why are government still locking things down?
The party may portray a leaning to the right but thats not to say it can't pressure an issue that is neither left, right or centre.
If folks are uncomfortable with who is behind the party, begs the question why it takes this bunch of individuals who can adapt and reform themselves to any of the important issues of the day ... really puts shame on all the MPs from the other parties, yes?
Science isn't ambiguous. The way people and politicians respond to it can be "alternative".
I would suggest that a main policy of profit before human life, especially the lives of the most vulnerable people in society is as far to the right as you can get.
Yes I am uncomfortable with Farage's loose relationship with the truth, and with his history of using race hate as a political tool. So even if, for some bizarre reason, he started a party with something positive to bring to the table like a pro-environment party as an example, I would be suspicious. Someone less cynical than me would suggest that he's desperately trying to stay relevant.
I would be curious to know who's funding him this time though.
I would disagree that the science isn't ambiguous - but thats probably for a different forum
Reform (Scotland) put their hat in the ring on a pro-union ticket
Reform (Uk) backing more scrutiny on the way government are locking down the nation..
Seems to be issues that are for a positive difference, that some clearly feel are not being promoted or challenged in a positive or timely way.
I wonder if hospitality, travel industry would back them? They would be crazy not to?
Sure. If they prioritise their profits over human life. They might back it.
Could make their businesses unpopular if their policies cause loss of life.
There is attributable loss of life either way.
Keep lockdown in place - less people die from covid but at the cost of those who don't get treated for other ailments or who see the loss of their business and can't take living life any more.
flip it round and you get the same result.
Are the government being over cautious... I thought the whole vaccine thing was going to be the life saver we needed to be able to open up society again..
I think it is right to question the policy now.
Other parties seem scared to challenge it...
It's worth having the conversation, from a scientific point of view.
But basing your whole party on letting the weak die so the economy can crack on, seems poor form.
What will he move to after Covid? Again, cynical people would suggest that he will move to whatever his funders tell him to.
Im not sure its as extreme as "let the weak die so the economy can crack on" - thats even more controversial than "£350 million NHS etc etc"
the next issue for them is already here... they are in Scotland - fighting for a United Kingdom
It's not as blunt as that, but it's essentially what he's wrapping up and presenting.
I didn't know about their Scotland policy. I wonder why his funders are directing him to get involved there.
the Scotland policy is an easy one to answer ... Scotland needs rescuing from the clutches of the rotten SNP
Labour, LibDems, Conservatives are all ineffectual in shifting the SNP. Something else is needed (its not that different in its execution to the effect the "B" party had on the politics of 2018-2020) . "
How do you think it will go down with Scottish voters?
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"In the absence of an effective opposition, someones got to step up and challenge government?
I thought you liked scrutiny and holding to account ?
Indeed. Parliament need an effective opposition to scrutinise them.
I hardly think an anti-science far right party are the ones to do that though.
anti-science?
I thought science could be interpreted many different ways... you remember the "alternative" SAGE group that had an alternative take on what we should be doing differently to what the actual SAGE were recommending?
Vaccines going well, top 4 cohorts (the most vulnerable) done by 15 February ... why are government still locking things down?
The party may portray a leaning to the right but thats not to say it can't pressure an issue that is neither left, right or centre.
If folks are uncomfortable with who is behind the party, begs the question why it takes this bunch of individuals who can adapt and reform themselves to any of the important issues of the day ... really puts shame on all the MPs from the other parties, yes?
Science isn't ambiguous. The way people and politicians respond to it can be "alternative".
I would suggest that a main policy of profit before human life, especially the lives of the most vulnerable people in society is as far to the right as you can get.
Yes I am uncomfortable with Farage's loose relationship with the truth, and with his history of using race hate as a political tool. So even if, for some bizarre reason, he started a party with something positive to bring to the table like a pro-environment party as an example, I would be suspicious. Someone less cynical than me would suggest that he's desperately trying to stay relevant.
I would be curious to know who's funding him this time though.
I would disagree that the science isn't ambiguous - but thats probably for a different forum
Reform (Scotland) put their hat in the ring on a pro-union ticket
Reform (Uk) backing more scrutiny on the way government are locking down the nation..
Seems to be issues that are for a positive difference, that some clearly feel are not being promoted or challenged in a positive or timely way.
I wonder if hospitality, travel industry would back them? They would be crazy not to?
Sure. If they prioritise their profits over human life. They might back it.
Could make their businesses unpopular if their policies cause loss of life.
There is attributable loss of life either way.
Keep lockdown in place - less people die from covid but at the cost of those who don't get treated for other ailments or who see the loss of their business and can't take living life any more.
flip it round and you get the same result.
Are the government being over cautious... I thought the whole vaccine thing was going to be the life saver we needed to be able to open up society again..
I think it is right to question the policy now.
Other parties seem scared to challenge it...
It's worth having the conversation, from a scientific point of view.
But basing your whole party on letting the weak die so the economy can crack on, seems poor form.
What will he move to after Covid? Again, cynical people would suggest that he will move to whatever his funders tell him to.
Im not sure its as extreme as "let the weak die so the economy can crack on" - thats even more controversial than "£350 million NHS etc etc"
the next issue for them is already here... they are in Scotland - fighting for a United Kingdom
It's not as blunt as that, but it's essentially what he's wrapping up and presenting.
I didn't know about their Scotland policy. I wonder why his funders are directing him to get involved there.
the Scotland policy is an easy one to answer ... Scotland needs rescuing from the clutches of the rotten SNP
Labour, LibDems, Conservatives are all ineffectual in shifting the SNP. Something else is needed (its not that different in its execution to the effect the "B" party had on the politics of 2018-2020) .
How do you think it will go down with Scottish voters?
"
The problem I see with Scotland and 'shifting' the SNP is the will get half the vote just for indy. The rest of the votes are split.
I think they may lose some ground this year but still don't see anyone coming near them in terms of replacing them in Governement |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"In the absence of an effective opposition, someones got to step up and challenge government?
I thought you liked scrutiny and holding to account ?
Indeed. Parliament need an effective opposition to scrutinise them.
I hardly think an anti-science far right party are the ones to do that though.
anti-science?
I thought science could be interpreted many different ways... you remember the "alternative" SAGE group that had an alternative take on what we should be doing differently to what the actual SAGE were recommending?
Vaccines going well, top 4 cohorts (the most vulnerable) done by 15 February ... why are government still locking things down?
The party may portray a leaning to the right but thats not to say it can't pressure an issue that is neither left, right or centre.
If folks are uncomfortable with who is behind the party, begs the question why it takes this bunch of individuals who can adapt and reform themselves to any of the important issues of the day ... really puts shame on all the MPs from the other parties, yes?
Science isn't ambiguous. The way people and politicians respond to it can be "alternative".
I would suggest that a main policy of profit before human life, especially the lives of the most vulnerable people in society is as far to the right as you can get.
Yes I am uncomfortable with Farage's loose relationship with the truth, and with his history of using race hate as a political tool. So even if, for some bizarre reason, he started a party with something positive to bring to the table like a pro-environment party as an example, I would be suspicious. Someone less cynical than me would suggest that he's desperately trying to stay relevant.
I would be curious to know who's funding him this time though.
I would disagree that the science isn't ambiguous - but thats probably for a different forum
Reform (Scotland) put their hat in the ring on a pro-union ticket
Reform (Uk) backing more scrutiny on the way government are locking down the nation..
Seems to be issues that are for a positive difference, that some clearly feel are not being promoted or challenged in a positive or timely way.
I wonder if hospitality, travel industry would back them? They would be crazy not to?
Sure. If they prioritise their profits over human life. They might back it.
Could make their businesses unpopular if their policies cause loss of life.
There is attributable loss of life either way.
Keep lockdown in place - less people die from covid but at the cost of those who don't get treated for other ailments or who see the loss of their business and can't take living life any more.
flip it round and you get the same result.
Are the government being over cautious... I thought the whole vaccine thing was going to be the life saver we needed to be able to open up society again..
I think it is right to question the policy now.
Other parties seem scared to challenge it...
It's worth having the conversation, from a scientific point of view.
But basing your whole party on letting the weak die so the economy can crack on, seems poor form.
What will he move to after Covid? Again, cynical people would suggest that he will move to whatever his funders tell him to.
Im not sure its as extreme as "let the weak die so the economy can crack on" - thats even more controversial than "£350 million NHS etc etc"
the next issue for them is already here... they are in Scotland - fighting for a United Kingdom
It's not as blunt as that, but it's essentially what he's wrapping up and presenting.
I didn't know about their Scotland policy. I wonder why his funders are directing him to get involved there.
the Scotland policy is an easy one to answer ... Scotland needs rescuing from the clutches of the rotten SNP
Labour, LibDems, Conservatives are all ineffectual in shifting the SNP. Something else is needed (its not that different in its execution to the effect the "B" party had on the politics of 2018-2020) .
How do you think it will go down with Scottish voters?
"
Not very well .... but then I dont think they are necessarily there to take seats in the parliament.
It's more about the message. Love or loath him, he is a very good orator and will generate and challenge the conversation in a far more dynamic way than the insipid politicians in Scotland.
George Galloway is another "character" who will shift the dialogue away from the mainstream .. have a look at the newly formed Alliance4Unity |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"https://www.thebrexitparty.org/reformuk/
The anti lockdown party
If that's their only policy / objective its going to be a short lived party. Surely they are about more than just this ?"
That's going to be their initial policy.
They are proposing to be an anti establishment party.
Obvs |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"In the absence of an effective opposition, someones got to step up and challenge government?
I thought you liked scrutiny and holding to account ?
Indeed. Parliament need an effective opposition to scrutinise them.
I hardly think an anti-science far right party are the ones to do that though.
anti-science?
I thought science could be interpreted many different ways... you remember the "alternative" SAGE group that had an alternative take on what we should be doing differently to what the actual SAGE were recommending?
Vaccines going well, top 4 cohorts (the most vulnerable) done by 15 February ... why are government still locking things down?
The party may portray a leaning to the right but thats not to say it can't pressure an issue that is neither left, right or centre.
If folks are uncomfortable with who is behind the party, begs the question why it takes this bunch of individuals who can adapt and reform themselves to any of the important issues of the day ... really puts shame on all the MPs from the other parties, yes?
Science isn't ambiguous. The way people and politicians respond to it can be "alternative".
I would suggest that a main policy of profit before human life, especially the lives of the most vulnerable people in society is as far to the right as you can get.
Yes I am uncomfortable with Farage's loose relationship with the truth, and with his history of using race hate as a political tool. So even if, for some bizarre reason, he started a party with something positive to bring to the table like a pro-environment party as an example, I would be suspicious. Someone less cynical than me would suggest that he's desperately trying to stay relevant.
I would be curious to know who's funding him this time though.
I would disagree that the science isn't ambiguous - but thats probably for a different forum
Reform (Scotland) put their hat in the ring on a pro-union ticket
Reform (Uk) backing more scrutiny on the way government are locking down the nation..
Seems to be issues that are for a positive difference, that some clearly feel are not being promoted or challenged in a positive or timely way.
I wonder if hospitality, travel industry would back them? They would be crazy not to?
Sure. If they prioritise their profits over human life. They might back it.
Could make their businesses unpopular if their policies cause loss of life.
There is attributable loss of life either way.
Keep lockdown in place - less people die from covid but at the cost of those who don't get treated for other ailments or who see the loss of their business and can't take living life any more.
flip it round and you get the same result.
Are the government being over cautious... I thought the whole vaccine thing was going to be the life saver we needed to be able to open up society again..
I think it is right to question the policy now.
Other parties seem scared to challenge it...
It's worth having the conversation, from a scientific point of view.
But basing your whole party on letting the weak die so the economy can crack on, seems poor form.
What will he move to after Covid? Again, cynical people would suggest that he will move to whatever his funders tell him to.
Im not sure its as extreme as "let the weak die so the economy can crack on" - thats even more controversial than "£350 million NHS etc etc"
the next issue for them is already here... they are in Scotland - fighting for a United Kingdom
It's not as blunt as that, but it's essentially what he's wrapping up and presenting.
I didn't know about their Scotland policy. I wonder why his funders are directing him to get involved there.
the Scotland policy is an easy one to answer ... Scotland needs rescuing from the clutches of the rotten SNP
Labour, LibDems, Conservatives are all ineffectual in shifting the SNP. Something else is needed (its not that different in its execution to the effect the "B" party had on the politics of 2018-2020) .
How do you think it will go down with Scottish voters?
Not very well .... but then I dont think they are necessarily there to take seats in the parliament.
It's more about the message. Love or loath him, he is a very good orator and will generate and challenge the conversation in a far more dynamic way than the insipid politicians in Scotland.
George Galloway is another "character" who will shift the dialogue away from the mainstream .. have a look at the newly formed Alliance4Unity"
These guys look equally pointless.
Being a good orator is unrelated to having something interesting to add to the debate. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"In the absence of an effective opposition, someones got to step up and challenge government?
I thought you liked scrutiny and holding to account ?
Indeed. Parliament need an effective opposition to scrutinise them.
I hardly think an anti-science far right party are the ones to do that though.
anti-science?
I thought science could be interpreted many different ways... you remember the "alternative" SAGE group that had an alternative take on what we should be doing differently to what the actual SAGE were recommending?
Vaccines going well, top 4 cohorts (the most vulnerable) done by 15 February ... why are government still locking things down?
The party may portray a leaning to the right but thats not to say it can't pressure an issue that is neither left, right or centre.
If folks are uncomfortable with who is behind the party, begs the question why it takes this bunch of individuals who can adapt and reform themselves to any of the important issues of the day ... really puts shame on all the MPs from the other parties, yes?
Science isn't ambiguous. The way people and politicians respond to it can be "alternative".
I would suggest that a main policy of profit before human life, especially the lives of the most vulnerable people in society is as far to the right as you can get.
Yes I am uncomfortable with Farage's loose relationship with the truth, and with his history of using race hate as a political tool. So even if, for some bizarre reason, he started a party with something positive to bring to the table like a pro-environment party as an example, I would be suspicious. Someone less cynical than me would suggest that he's desperately trying to stay relevant.
I would be curious to know who's funding him this time though.
I would disagree that the science isn't ambiguous - but thats probably for a different forum
Reform (Scotland) put their hat in the ring on a pro-union ticket
Reform (Uk) backing more scrutiny on the way government are locking down the nation..
Seems to be issues that are for a positive difference, that some clearly feel are not being promoted or challenged in a positive or timely way.
I wonder if hospitality, travel industry would back them? They would be crazy not to?
Sure. If they prioritise their profits over human life. They might back it.
Could make their businesses unpopular if their policies cause loss of life.
There is attributable loss of life either way.
Keep lockdown in place - less people die from covid but at the cost of those who don't get treated for other ailments or who see the loss of their business and can't take living life any more.
flip it round and you get the same result.
Are the government being over cautious... I thought the whole vaccine thing was going to be the life saver we needed to be able to open up society again..
I think it is right to question the policy now.
Other parties seem scared to challenge it...
It's worth having the conversation, from a scientific point of view.
But basing your whole party on letting the weak die so the economy can crack on, seems poor form.
What will he move to after Covid? Again, cynical people would suggest that he will move to whatever his funders tell him to.
Im not sure its as extreme as "let the weak die so the economy can crack on" - thats even more controversial than "£350 million NHS etc etc"
the next issue for them is already here... they are in Scotland - fighting for a United Kingdom
It's not as blunt as that, but it's essentially what he's wrapping up and presenting.
I didn't know about their Scotland policy. I wonder why his funders are directing him to get involved there.
the Scotland policy is an easy one to answer ... Scotland needs rescuing from the clutches of the rotten SNP
Labour, LibDems, Conservatives are all ineffectual in shifting the SNP. Something else is needed (its not that different in its execution to the effect the "B" party had on the politics of 2018-2020) .
How do you think it will go down with Scottish voters?
Not very well .... but then I dont think they are necessarily there to take seats in the parliament.
It's more about the message. Love or loath him, he is a very good orator and will generate and challenge the conversation in a far more dynamic way than the insipid politicians in Scotland.
George Galloway is another "character" who will shift the dialogue away from the mainstream .. have a look at the newly formed Alliance4Unity
These guys look equally pointless.
Being a good orator is unrelated to having something interesting to add to the debate. "
I don’t even think he’s a good orator he’s to stuttering amd spluttering and that smirk boils my piss |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
" I don’t even think he’s a good orator he’s to stuttering amd spluttering and that smirk boils my piss
I agree. Some people seem to like him though."
And that’s all it takes - all they are hoping to do at the very least is to make a connection - it makes people think . George Galloway - you’re right , the party/alliance won’t come to much, but the effect they have on the canvas will perhaps produce a different picture than expected. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *obka3Couple
over a year ago
bournemouth |
"In the absence of an effective opposition, someones got to step up and challenge government?
I thought you liked scrutiny and holding to account ?
Indeed. Parliament need an effective opposition to scrutinise them.
I hardly think an anti-science far right party are the ones to do that though.
anti-science?
I thought science could be interpreted many different ways... you remember the "alternative" SAGE group that had an alternative take on what we should be doing differently to what the actual SAGE were recommending?
Vaccines going well, top 4 cohorts (the most vulnerable) done by 15 February ... why are government still locking things down?
The party may portray a leaning to the right but thats not to say it can't pressure an issue that is neither left, right or centre.
If folks are uncomfortable with who is behind the party, begs the question why it takes this bunch of individuals who can adapt and reform themselves to any of the important issues of the day ... really puts shame on all the MPs from the other parties, yes?
Science isn't ambiguous. The way people and politicians respond to it can be "alternative".
I would suggest that a main policy of profit before human life, especially the lives of the most vulnerable people in society is as far to the right as you can get.
Yes I am uncomfortable with Farage's loose relationship with the truth, and with his history of using race hate as a political tool. So even if, for some bizarre reason, he started a party with something positive to bring to the table like a pro-environment party as an example, I would be suspicious. Someone less cynical than me would suggest that he's desperately trying to stay relevant.
I would be curious to know who's funding him this time though.
Of course science can be ambiguous.
I'm open to having my mind changed.
Actually that is exactly the point, it's about new evidence changing what previously was assumed fact, then there are theories, of course there are always different ones a true scientist always has an open mind
Thats not ambiguous though.
That's new information that supercedes the old.
For example, water boils at 100 degrees C at sea level. We "know" this unambiguously. It stands true until someone boils water at 101 degrees. Then the science needs updating.
There is no ambiguity. "
Not really I said assumed fact not accepted fact, water boiling at 100 c is accepted fact, the big bang is assumed fact, there are many things we assume we know and many we think we know, the big one is climate change, we know the climate is changing, we also know it always has and always will, there is loads of ambiguity over the causes of past present and future change, figures can be found to show why the ice ages started and finished and figures can be found that argue with against those reasons. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"In the absence of an effective opposition, someones got to step up and challenge government?
I thought you liked scrutiny and holding to account ?
Indeed. Parliament need an effective opposition to scrutinise them.
I hardly think an anti-science far right party are the ones to do that though.
anti-science?
I thought science could be interpreted many different ways... you remember the "alternative" SAGE group that had an alternative take on what we should be doing differently to what the actual SAGE were recommending?
Vaccines going well, top 4 cohorts (the most vulnerable) done by 15 February ... why are government still locking things down?
The party may portray a leaning to the right but thats not to say it can't pressure an issue that is neither left, right or centre.
If folks are uncomfortable with who is behind the party, begs the question why it takes this bunch of individuals who can adapt and reform themselves to any of the important issues of the day ... really puts shame on all the MPs from the other parties, yes?
Science isn't ambiguous. The way people and politicians respond to it can be "alternative".
I would suggest that a main policy of profit before human life, especially the lives of the most vulnerable people in society is as far to the right as you can get.
Yes I am uncomfortable with Farage's loose relationship with the truth, and with his history of using race hate as a political tool. So even if, for some bizarre reason, he started a party with something positive to bring to the table like a pro-environment party as an example, I would be suspicious. Someone less cynical than me would suggest that he's desperately trying to stay relevant.
I would be curious to know who's funding him this time though.
Of course science can be ambiguous.
I'm open to having my mind changed.
Actually that is exactly the point, it's about new evidence changing what previously was assumed fact, then there are theories, of course there are always different ones a true scientist always has an open mind
Thats not ambiguous though.
That's new information that supercedes the old.
For example, water boils at 100 degrees C at sea level. We "know" this unambiguously. It stands true until someone boils water at 101 degrees. Then the science needs updating.
There is no ambiguity.
Not really I said assumed fact not accepted fact, water boiling at 100 c is accepted fact, the big bang is assumed fact, there are many things we assume we know and many we think we know, the big one is climate change, we know the climate is changing, we also know it always has and always will, there is loads of ambiguity over the causes of past present and future change, figures can be found to show why the ice ages started and finished and figures can be found that argue with against those reasons. "
Climate change is a bad example. It's as sound as water boiling at 100 degrees.
But I get your point about new science. It changes quickly. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *obka3Couple
over a year ago
bournemouth |
The science behind climate change is absolutely nothing like water boiling at 100 c.
Even the current change is argued about, there is a general consensus but the figures dont always suit this consensus, when I was at school in the 70's I well remember a science lesson that showed with certainty that we were going into a mini ice age, there were "facts" and figures provided by experts that proved it, as for what caused the ice ages and the warm periods are very varied. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The science behind climate change is absolutely nothing like water boiling at 100 c.
Even the current change is argued about, there is a general consensus but the figures dont always suit this consensus, when I was at school in the 70's I well remember a science lesson that showed with certainty that we were going into a mini ice age, there were "facts" and figures provided by experts that proved it, as for what caused the ice ages and the warm periods are very varied."
I can't speak for your school teacher. But the current understanding of man made climate change hasn't changed much since the 80s it's extremely well understood.
I guess this is a good example of why people like Farage with his anti-science agenda can be dangerous. He's been a climate change denier for years too. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
