In todays news...

[gremlin]

Why would a gay couple want a blessing from a church that has, in previous episodes had them killed, ostracized and heaped all sorts on indignity upon them simply because of their sexuality?

For aesthetic reasons, same as most of the bride & groom couples who want to marry in a church.

Aah, Forgot about that.

Bit like some friends of ours who become devout Catholics when they were trying to get their kid in a Catholic school. Stopped going once he was in. Can't think why....

[JackyJoll]

Why would a gay couple want a blessing from a church that has, in previous episodes had them killed, ostracized and heaped all sorts on indignity upon them simply because of their sexuality?

For aesthetic reasons, same as most of the bride & groom couples who want to marry in a church.

Aah, Forgot about that.

Bit like some friends of ours who become devout Catholics when they were trying to get their kid in a Catholic school. Stopped going once he was in. Can't think why....

That’s more of a practical matter, if it’s a better school.

[Felix]

Bit like some friends of ours who become devout Catholics when they were trying to get their kid in a Catholic school. Stopped going once he was in. Can't think why....

And like my sister to get married in a certain church.

[mangocrazy]

That’s more of an ecumenical matter, if it’s a better school.

Drink!

[irie]

The major problem that no-one seems to be talking about is that there are just too fucking many of us and the population is still increasing at a frightening rate.

This ^^^

Aggregate energy demand of the increasing global population far outstrips aggregate energy savings of so-called advanced economies. Those energy savings have to be made, but they're basically pissing into the wind.

[JackyJoll]

Bit like some friends of ours who become devout Catholics when they were trying to get their kid in a Catholic school. Stopped going once he was in. Can't think why....

And like my sister to get married in a certain church.

I’m not sure your sister is the one for you, even if you do like her.

[Mussels]

BBC News - Rishi Sunak fined for not wearing seatbelt in back of car
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-64353054
Idiot.

[Lutin]

BBC News - Rishi Sunak fined for not wearing seatbelt in back of car
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-64353054
Idiot.

"Idiot" seems to be a common theme with recent British PMs.

[demographic]

while countries like China continue to pump gigantic amounts of greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere there's literally no chance of turning back the tide.

You seem to have a "Thing" about China and yes they are a pretty huge emitter of Co2.
Thing is, per capita its actually pretty small and Australian, Russian, American, Canadian, UAE, and various other countries emissions per capita absolutely dwarves each Chinese persons emissions.
Is there a specific reason your singling them out when other countries population is far worse?

This is worth a look, just for some perspective.
https://www.worldometers.info/co2-emiss ... er-capita/

Obviously theres other massive poluters and Ive just picked a few more or less at random but I'm genuinely interested at why you routinely pick China.

[Mr. Dazzle]

BBC News - Rishi Sunak fined for not wearing seatbelt in back of car
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-64353054
Idiot.

"Idiot" seems to be a common theme with recent British PMs.

I've seen a few photos if various US presidents riding in "the beast" not wearing a seatbelt. Really makes me laugh, they give 'em a multi million dollar mega armoued car, stocked with their own blood, escorted by six million people shutting all the roads as they go...but they don't make POTUS wear a seatbelt. Surely it's orders of magnitude more likely they'd cark it in a car accident than as a result of tourist bombers.

[Screwdriver]

I'm with you 100% of the way on the above, right up until the last sentence. You believe (if I understand correctly) that world leaders gather in Davos to make plans to enslave the world under a unified New World Order (or similar).

No. Davos is where the super rich go to discuss their plans for how to manipulate our society (in terms of rule making, law making, financial instruments) for their personal benefit. They do this under the auspices of the WEF, World Economic Forum and they invite political leaders (people like Richie Sunak (sic.) and Justin Trudeau) so that they can tell them what to do, err, I mean advise them on how they might personally benefit.

Farms and farming is next on the list. Tristate City is another WEF project but first they need to bankrupt a bunch of farmers (easy when you have all the money in the world) buy up all their lands etc. Naturally even that sound a bit mental but don't shoot the messenger, ask Google, they can't hide it, in fact they're not even bothering to hide it. There's nothing we can do about it.

It is all laid out in The Great Reset which I am not going to précis here because a simple accurate description would make me look like a tin foil hat nutjob. We are already seeing some of the strategy being played out...

[Screwdriver]

while countries like China continue to pump gigantic amounts of greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere there's literally no chance of turning back the tide.

You seem to have a "Thing" about China and yes they are a pretty huge emitter of Co2.
Thing is, per capita its actually pretty small and Australian, Russian, American, Canadian, UAE, and various other countries emissions per capita absolutely dwarves each Chinese persons emissions.
Is there a specific reason your singling them out when other countries population is far worse?

This is worth a look, just for some perspective.
https://www.worldometers.info/co2-emiss ... er-capita/

Obviously theres other massive poluters and Ive just picked a few more or less at random but I'm genuinely interested at why you routinely pick China.

Yes I do have a thing. It is an authoritarian communist dictatorship. Corrupt to the core and the single worst polluter in the world. They're also getting worse building yet more coal fired power stations.

It does not matter if you divide their output by the "level of population", since the average member of that population does not benefit proportionally from the extreme energy/pollution being generated "in their name". You might argue that "we do" in the developed west where our corporate masters flog CCP products and turn a blind eye to the wanton destruction of our eco system.

It only matters what volume of waste and atmospheric pollution is being pumped out into our atmosphere and the gigantic volumes of waste being dumped into the Yangtze. It's a LOT.

[wheelnut]

Church of England - still as confused as ever

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-64342940

[Cousin Jack]

You seem to have a "Thing" about China and yes they are a pretty huge emitter of Co2.
Thing is, per capita its actually pretty small and Australian, Russian, American, Canadian, UAE, and various other countries emissions per capita absolutely dwarves each Chinese persons emissions.
Is there a specific reason your singling them out when other countries population is far worse?

Chinese per capita may be small, but

• There are rather a lot of Chinese
  China's economic ambitions seems to be to to emulate the excesses of the USA but with a different political system.

[Ant]

Remember when the climate activists said the Great Barrier Reef is dying and we're all going to die in an apocalypse. I wonder if they can explain why it's now bigger than when they were crying lies about it?

[Horse]

Remember when the climate activists said the Great Barrier Reef is dying and we're all going to die in an apocalypse. I wonder if they can explain why it's now bigger than when they were crying lies about it?

The increase in coral cover was thanks to a fast-growing acropora corals that are also the most susceptible to heat stress and are favoured by coral-eating starfish.

https://amp.theguardian.com/environment ... at-remains

[Ant]

Yes, we know.....but, those crying activists?

[ZRX61]

It does seem like a losing battle sometimes, but the general populace only have themselves to blame IMO.

Milk is a good example. If everyone had said "you know what? I'm actually gonna keep buying milk in reusable glass bottles and bollox to the supermarket" there'd still be loads of milkmen wouldn't there? I can see why you wouldn't do that, Supermarkets are cheap, but that's the reality innit?

https://climatechangedispatch.com/stoss ... s-garbage/

[Screwdriver]

I recycle my own plastic. Best estimate I have seen is about 5% of plastic sent for recycling actually gets recycled.

[Count Steer]

It does seem like a losing battle sometimes, but the general populace only have themselves to blame IMO.

Milk is a good example. If everyone had said "you know what? I'm actually gonna keep buying milk in reusable glass bottles and bollox to the supermarket" there'd still be loads of milkmen wouldn't there? I can see why you wouldn't do that, Supermarkets are cheap, but that's the reality innit?

https://climatechangedispatch.com/stoss ... s-garbage/

LOL. This article was brought to you by the provisional wing of the American petrochemical industry. 'Use more plastic! Throw it away. Bury it. Burn it. Use more plastic! Kerrrching!'