Steven P

Because we can all read and some of us have read the relentless posts on here slating 'green' energy such as wind turbines, maybe it was you that said you were against wind turbines? Perhaps.

You and your legendary comprehension of the written word. Go back to what I wrote, read again, understand, make notes. Ask your kids for help with any of the big words.

There could be hundreds of years.... but the minds in the business and the oil companies are predicting 35 to 50 years so I am inclined to go with them and their ££ millions in tech that measure these things (UK is at the lower end of that scale by the way). It is something that JonsonD doesn't understand that when it does run out.. and the prediction it might be within my life... that fighting against windmills, solar plants and so on kind of says to the kids "fck you, we did OK, problem is yours now"... so at what point do we need to sit down and plan for the future, build an infrastructure that doesn't rely on gas and oil? Now? when the kids are middle aged? or when the world goes "Oh shit, it has all gone"? Might be worth noting that the majority of Africa and large parts of China and India are not on an electrical grid network... when they get connected unless someone is leading the way, saying 'go green' they will go with oil, massive increase in demand, and do we want to sleep walk into the future where there are double the people competing for the same oil... pushing up the prices... supply and demand... just as it is all running out... or back to the point I have been making over the years, we wean ourselves of oil now, off foreign control of our power? (Nigeria for example might not want to export its resources if it is needed there, Russia has a mentalist in charge, so does the US, the Iranians are not our friends (get a bit hostile there, oil prices rocket), we are at the mercy of the oil producers) Report out this week that the new round of UK wind turbines have a 'strike price' (what they are paid) of about 70% of what the oil generators are asking for. This is the part that needs the overhaul that what we pay is linked to the oil generators and not what the distributors pay and not what it costs the generators...and the difference is a nice ££ millions into the foreign shareholders back pockets... at our expense.

I was going to ask you if you think that the oil will run out, referencing my earlier comment about leaving a legacy for our children (lights on, or lights off). I think from this you believe the oil will run out? So the question is really, do you believe that the oil will start to run out in our lifetimes, our childrens or our grand childrens lives? And so at what point do we as a nation take a lead, and start building for the future where our increasing energy demands comes from Nuclear (the sun that power the 'green' stuff is a massive nuclear explosion). Leave the children with light or no lights. If we take all the oil all now - like the Norwegians appear to be doing, and run out in 35 to 50 years, anything that we cannot replace oil with is screwed. If we are pragmatic and switch to alternatives as soon as we can anything that cannot be replaced (with our current knowledge and tech) we might be able to make last 100 years or more? So at what point do we decide to make that switch as a nation to green energy if we had our time again to decide? Noting that the longer we leave the change over the more expensive it will be as every nation will then be competing for the materials to make the new infrastructure. So when should we make the switch? Now, leave it to the children or leave it to the grand children to do?

Wikikipedia, BP, World Oil forums and so on suggest otherwise though. I think Norway knows exactly how long their oil will last and even if they are extracting more and more, that does not mean they have suddenly invented an oil creation machine though...

Yeah, but why should we bother ourselves, we'll be dead by the time the world is proper fckd, or nearly dead anyway. Let the kids work it out. If China are burning coal then we, as a nation should lower ourselves to the bottom of the barrel to match them. Screw the descendants. Or... we can show ourselves to be the world leaders of our imagination, take the mix of climate changes, dwindling oil supplies and children and be the best we can be to leave them an inheritance worth living in. But where is the fun in that when we can slate the country we live in at every opportunity, grass is always greener, here is never good enough.

My first thought was some sort of loading bay but dimensions all wrong, but 'unloading' a horse from the canal makes sense.

In Tehran they are not following orders now are they? A little hypocritical I think to be lecturing us to follow orders and then get all upsety when they have the same fate for not following orders. Is there a reason for your double standards I wonder? ( I can help here.... suggest your truthful answer will refer your double standards to their religion or their skin colour)

Mark, don't suggest hypocrisy...

Wasn't going for the more obscure though I do like Jon Stewart, was thinking where he said 80 was too old to be a president. This weeks was "just because you land there in a boat 500 years ago doesn't mean you own it"... errr, European and that the US....

That's not fair now Mark, throwing out a quote by Trump that hasn't aged well, this could last a few pages if we want to go that way with all he has said and then does exactly the same 10 years later. Don't think I have time today to highlight all his hypocrisy.

Headline says "Trump announces one-year 10% cap on credit card interest rates", I wonder if Barron has been hitting the credit card hard in his first term at university? Or is he planning to put Greenland on one, pay it off with stolen oil?

As a distraction, a good news story, NASA are ending a mission to the space station early due to a "medical incident" - first time in 25 years. I reckon having 25 years without a medical issue in space is good news. (though I reckon 'medical incident' could be one of them going a bit crazy) Nasa announces timeline of astronauts’ early departure from ISS due to ‘serious’ medical issue UK.YAHOO.COM Space agency said crew of four will leave ISS next week with goal of touching down in California on 15 January

Do the batteries have temperature sensors in them that stop them working when too cold as well as too hot? Just thinking of the weather we've had this last week

Anyway, Greenland (I suspect that the shooting in the US has run it's course here now, ICE officer screwed up, woman killed, he will get told off but that will be the end of it). China taking Greenland? That is a bit of a stretch of the imagination. Russia taking it... again a bit of a stretch considering it is protected by NATO and Putin not likely to go up against us directly. There was a report that suggested Trump was willing to walk away from NATO to take Greenland - which would weaken NATO, and weirdly make the US more vulnerable to Russian attacks via Greenland. More likely that he has been listening to Sinatra, a realisation of his own mortality and wanting to do things "My Way"... leaving a legacy so his name lives on - taking Venezuela, the brief renaming of the Kennedy Centre - and so on strikes me as a vain man wanting to leave a legacy without realising just taking what you want or naming something isn't the way to do it.

This is true, I don't usually, insults and going after the person being the lowest form of internet discussions (slightly above discussing Hitler in what kills a thread). Though in this case it is not 'sides' - Mark has said before he had an issue with drink, JohnsonD is 'weaponising' that to attack him... which I don't think is acceptable - I'd do the same if he was attacking you or any others for personal issues - fair and even.

Tosser. You appear to be even more argumentative this week, more insulting to all, more rightarded that usual. Wonder if the problem is Mrs J isn't giving enough action for your liking over the Christmas period? Perhaps take yourself off for some quality 'thinking time' mighty calm you down?

I am assuming you mean the protestors killed in Tehran? I also assume that you will go off on one unless we agree with you that law enforcement killing civilians for not following orders is acceptable? Reality is it’s a shame some kids have lost their biological parents, life goes on. That’s not being callous it’s just the reality of things.

That made me laugh. "If she had followed orders"... because we all know well that everyone so directed will always follow orders. Stick out some traffic management cones to see how well they behave.... ANYONE who has to deal with law enforcement has to know that the public DO NOT follow orders, they are not trained monkeys to do as demanded. So to say "If she had followed orders" is simply demonstrating a distinct lack of knowledge of people. As far as I can make out there was no warning the he would shoot, there was less than a second between him drawing his gun and shooting - his mind was made up he was going to shoot (if you care to google driving reaction times, she wasn't given time to react to the drawn gun before she was shot). He stopped feet from the front of the car, there was no risk to others, put himself at risk - and in all training the common theme is do not put yourself at unnecessary risks. If he had walked 2 foot further he would not have been in danger. Whether that is law enforcement or tree climbing the rule is the same. She was a housewife, the car was identified with its registration plate, pick her up later. Or kill her? Noting she was not an immediate threat to anyone (till the officer stood in front of the car). So he screwed up, acted beyond what is reasonable and killed a woman. A woman who was not at all aggressive in any of the videos leading up to her death.

Noting of course that the officer who shot was the only one who thought she was threatening life - only one out of them all to be aiming at her. He of course had time, and space to choose another spot to shoot at, the SUV tyres are decent sized targets if he was determined to shoot at her. He didn't go for alternatives, he went for the lethal shot.

If you look at her actions in the car - go from a few minutes before, as much as the vidoes will allow, her crime was as serious as a traffic stop offence. She pulled out, her steering wasn't at the officer in front of her, it was to complete the turn down the road, she didn't stop. Traffic offence which I am sure does not warrant being shot.

We're fcked. (read this last night and thought it said mortality... and my response would be "we're not so fcked after all then")

A lot of video footage around (always a lot of video footage these days, no one stepping in to help, just want to record it for ticktocks). Saw one last night where a civilian doctor on the scene wanted to go and help her, but was denied till 15(?) minutes later an ambulance arrived. Didn't see many medics rushing around the car in the video trying to save her either. OK I am basing this bit on the UK, if the police here hurt someone they switch from enforcers to medics very very quickly (at least on the TV shows they do). ...victim blaming... from different angles it looks like she was simply trying to drive off from being parked... crime from the videos is a simple traffic stop... does that warrant being shot usually?

If it was me I would be telling them not to get too greedy, wanting to rule the world never ends well. Stick to Italy, southern Spain, north Africa, and do that extremely well rather than expanding too much, unable to control the monster you create and collapsing.

To bring the conversation right down, 2 pages in and it is still 'safe for work', can I borrow your movie collection next time Mrs P is away....