leicsmac

If this line of argument is true, then it follows that in order to be consistent it would also have to hold true for every single political cause that exists.

Right. As per the news thread, I can't think of any reason they would other than general diplomatic trolling and vaguely veiled bigotry.

The Mercator projection was considered both the best of a series of bad options and yes, the Northern Hemisphere nations wanting to appear more important than they are. Thankfully, there are smart people coming up with better options now that are being endorsed.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy8znyzgkjjo Little bit of trouble at Dover, then. Can't be certain about such things at this time but I'd wager these protestors would have a different tune if it was a group like Extinction Rebellion holding up traffic instead. But then I guess such hypocrisy is standard.

Yeah, the hypocrisy is palpable. I think all of the Southern continents will look bigger on this map, not just Africa.

Apparently it's "superfluous" and "a distraction" and also part of "an ideological agenda". So, massive hypocrisy as well as bigoted, then.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ce30vp55dnlo ... why would the US be the only nation to vote no on this beyond just quasi-diplomatic trolling with a side of veiled bigotry?

It's just a shame more people couldn't or didn't see this coming over five years ago.

...because you've got the nutters on one side who actually think she did nothing wrong because she had a psychotic break and should get a minimum of some antipsychotic treatment before rejoining society (or even that she was somehow a patsy), and then you've got the nutters on the other who think she's the irredeemable personification of evil and should be strapped into the electric chair yesterday. It's become an extension of the tiresome culture war. Of course, what you say are the only two actual legitimate possible outcomes.

The discourse online that I've seen about it has been...very bitter. And unfortunately as I'm sure the prosecution will try again, that's not going away any time soon.

Mistrial imminent in the Lindsey Clancy case. Outcome no one really wants or wanted.

Not in the shape I'm in tbh.

Well, unless an AI actually wanted humanity to suffer (which tbf given that such AI is often a product of human archetypes is a possibility), then if it gains the power and influence that a lot of folks think it will there's no reason for it to spark the End of Days - it could easily take over the world and guarantee its own existence in a much less directly oppressive fashion. Indeed it could possibly do it in a way that humans might not figure it has taken over at all.

It wouldn't be the first time a "great" power has based their actions on a ridiculous conspiracy theory tbh.

Quite possibly, but that could all change again after the next US and Argentinian elections.

Right, the Argentinians won't escalate because they know they would lose again in the end if they acted alone. What Felon#47 and his bunch of sheisskopfen think about this should be immaterial unless he actually chooses to aid Argentina in the event of actual war. And if that happens... well, at least everyone would know exactly where the US stands these days and there would be no "special relationship" figleaf to hide behind anymore.

Well, judging by his past words and actions he's been high on his own supply since before he took power tbh.

Unfortunately true. But every single point of a degree matters in terms of consequence, so action needs to keep happening. ... does anyone really want to live in a world where both the full effects of climate change and the violent nature of some humans as a response to declining resources caused by it have happened? I'm not sure I would.

Also, random net one-liner: "You wonder why Farage likes Guinness - after all, it's black and you have to let it settle."

That's pretty much what they're saying: “Reform UK has been the target of a hoax perpetuated by foreign-funded, climate change activists posing as would-be party donors. The party denies any wrongdoing. “Reform UK has a robust vetting process for prospective donors approved by the Electoral Commission. We also have written KC legal opinion showing no laws have been broken. A private individual paid for polling to a private company and the private company gave it to national newspapers. This would only need to be declared if it were internal polling. “The hoaxers are ‘Verbatim Investigations’; a new company, incorporated in July 2026 in an attempt to mask their true identity: the Center for Climate Reporting (CCR). The methods of its founder, Lawrence Carter, have previously been rebuked by members of the United States Congress for “videos [that] appear to be substantially edited, creating an incomplete record of the conversation. “The group has partnered with the publicly-owned Channel 4 in an attempt to mislead the public about the party’s donations and vetting processes. The same group, led by Greenpeace’s Lawrence Carter and far-left activist Louis Wilson, were busted attempting a similar hoax in the U.S. at the end of last year. This is yet another establishment attack on Reform UK. “While Reform UK denies all wrongdoing in relation to the Channel 4 hit job this evening, as a matter of course, the Party is launching an internal investigation regarding the circumstances surrounding the broadcast” Fellas... surely you could just have said, on film, "I'm sorry, what you're proposing is illegal?" rather than bragging about it?

It will come down to whether the Parliamentary Ethics Committee (or whichever other overseeing body) will be able to take action based on this new evidence. Of course what's happened really isn't going to sway public opinion either way; it's whether it's enough for a punishable offence.

Yes, and unfortunately, along with a lot of other negative sentiments, social media is giving those that express it a way to appear legitimate in their own minds.

If this does go up like a balloon, then Channel 4 will have good cause to open the champagne for breaking it.

Would add a caveat regarding children or lack of children there, but yes, about right.

... the other half being only realising just one tiny part of the problem and then applying the solution in a completely incorrect and inappropriate way, right?