leicsmac

Guess they felt there was no other choice, but can't help this sacrifice on the altar of accountability and integrity actually means nothing when the people covered as the subject in this matter can lie and cheat as easily as they breathe and face no accountability themselves.

A legacy he will share with every single person willing to listen or agree with any of his ideas on the matter and contribute to them via policy.

And if the welfare budget (or indeed any budget directly linked to human health and life) is going to be managed more "carefully" (shall we say), then the person suggesting it had better be ready to either prove it won't cause harm or offer a damn good justification for the level of harm caused.

On the general topic: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cn4j8dgnj1wo US President Donald Trump has been criticised by world leaders for his stance on climate change, ahead of the global COP30 summit. President Trump, who is not attending the meeting in the Amazonian city of Belém, was called a liar by the leaders of Colombia and Chile for his rejection of climate science. UK Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer acknowledged the waning political support on climate change. He said it had been a unity issue internationally and in the UK but "today sadly that consensus is gone". Sir Keir appears to be sadly right about the fragmenting consensus. Still, it doesn't really matter what people believe except in terms of noting accountability for the record. The facts are what they are: there is either unity for civilisation on this matter, or worst case is civilisation becomes a set of islands under seige, and then shortly thereafter there isn't any. That's what resource deprivation coupled with tribal thought will do. If anyone can prove otherwise, it would be nice to hear.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cq509yj82y8o More on this.

Not a great one, that's true. Possibly why we've seen the ascendancy of populist governments who talk a good game but actually end up causing a greater deal of harm in the end in recent times. People don't like bitter news, even when it's real. Fact is, any government in charge of the UK now is going to have a difficult time. Likely, any government over the next few decades is going to have it even harder.

And as recent events have shown, three and a half years (or a little more) can be a rather long time in world events. People want tomorrow to be just like today (either for the reason of specific change or no change at all), and so they assume it will be. You'd think folks would have learned from 2020.

Bad taste pun certainly not intended there, mon ami. It does however seem that on this particular aspect of foreign policy, the current US President takes the name of his official residence very seriously indeed.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ckgzek4rl8lo Donald Trump has said the US will not attend the G20 summit in South Africa over widely discredited claims that white people are being persecuted in the country. The US president said it was a "total disgrace" that South Africa is hosting the meeting, where leaders from the world's largest economies will gather in Johannesburg later this month. South Africa's foreign ministry described the decision by the White House as "regrettable". Two observations; firstly it's darkly remarkable just how bare-faced the lies can be without seemingly much challenge at all, and secondly it is the height of hypocrisy for this US administration to lecture anyone on ethical human rights records. So...lying hypocrites, pretty much par for the course then.

It doesn't matter if this one story is fake or not IMO - what smallpox did to a lot of people is a matter of record. It is one of the greatest achievements of humanity that smallpox became the first disease we were able to actually and fully eliminate from the biosphere.

Oh, look, it's only the consequences (or beginning of) that the entire climate science corps have been warning of for years but seemingly haven't been listened to. Funny that.

Looking at the recent Tesla activity, Elon Musk becomes more like Ted Faro every day. Just a good job tech hasn't advanced to the degree in our universe that it had in the Horizon universe before Faro got hold of it.

https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/cop/scientists-run-climate-time-machine-amazon-brazil-preps-cop30-2025-10-28/ Deep in Brazil's Amazon, scientists have built a "time machine" pumping carbon dioxide into the rainforest canopy to simulate atmospheric conditions predicted for the future to gauge how the biome adapts - an open question to be discussed at the COP30 United Nations climate summit hosted by the country next month. At the AmazonFACE project near Manaus, the largest city in the Amazon, six rings of steel towers loom above the jungle canopy, each surrounding groups of 50 to 70 mature trees. After baseline testing, scientists will fumigate trees in three of the rings with carbon dioxide at levels simulating climate forecasts for coming decades, while the rest serve as control samples. Reuters with an interesting look at a project that should be getting more attention. Partly UK funded, as well.

That's true. This isn't the first time they've done this sneaky positive framing with Trump, though.

"Fascist enabler in being mad at someone showing who he really is" shocker. Additionally, there's something about the nudge-nudge-wink-wink, "oh, we don't like him that much but he has some good ideas..." subtle endorsement of Trump by the Telegraph that really is annoying. Just say, plainly, that you like what he's doing and you want to see it happen, consequences and all, guys. Can't stand the sneaky disingenuous support of horrible stuff like that. See a fair bit of it in other places, too.

And only 66 years between the first flight of the Wright Brothers and Neil Armstrong setting foot on the Moon. 66 more years from that will take us to 2035. What, exactly, have we done of note to further such things in those 66 more years? That it does indeed. And the only way I can think of that the second sentence happens is when such governments finally come round to the idea that the biggest threat to their life and health - and people in general - isn't other people. Or, more accurately, doesn't have to be other people (based on resource-based conflict), anyway. And for those governments to come round to the idea, so do their people. Unfortunately, our species is having trouble getting over that particular very animalistic blind spot. That very much depends on both the degree of conflict and the degree of discovery and advancement. Both can be very random, after all. As per above, if we could channel such feelings of conflict into a battle against something that doesn't necessitate us fighting each other, then it might render that debate moot at a stroke.

Yeah, outside of some ridiculous event that would disable all such weapons at once everywhere, the genie is out of that bottle and will remain so. The only thing we can do is use such tech development to try to guarantee the future, rather than destroy it.

And the Asian typhoon season has been devastating this year, because of the obvious reason. By the timeframe stated here, it is entirely possible both no one will be laughing and it's too late to do anything other than leave a record for those left afterwards explaining exactly who is responsible for the vastly more shitty world they have inherited.

And World War II pushed the boundaries of science and technology so far that nations went from unreliable single propeller aircraft to rockets capable of achieving sub-orbital flight within a decade. Among other leaps forward. I guess it just depends if a person thinks such development is worth the cost paid for it. And given that our weaponry has become ever more sophisticated, the cost of such conflict in this day and age might be very, very high.

Just "telling it how it is", apparently. The old joking scallywag.

Fvck knows to be honest, I just want to see our species actually make it through the next few decades with civilisation (at least mostly) intact, it's really difficult to quantify the best way to do that, but the one thing I do know is bitching among ourselves is likely fvcking it up.

Right, by those who think the "country is going to the dogs" and that social cohesion = ethnostate. So that's two completely juxtaposed reasons for and symptoms of the lack of social cohesion (theirs and yours) and both can't be true at the same time. That very same debate on the cause of such lack of cohesion is happening in a lot of places, which is itself a cause of the lack of cohesion. That's my overall point. If there is a place in a first-world country where there is less government intervention and even a degree of harmonious living going on without the horrifically poisonous debate regarding "foreigners"/'insert local term for "foreigners" here' at the present time, to say nothing of economic concerns, then I'd like to know about it.

Not the better weather part, the more cohesive society part. The former is pretty clear On that, I reckon everywhere is having issues either with that or what people would describe as government overreach to generate that cohesion. There doesn't seem to be much middle ground anywhere.

I'd be interested in hearing a specific example or two on this one.

No real disagreement there. As per above, there's not many places at all, if any, that have that opportunity now - the ones I stated were, as you say, maybes.