Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Riedquat

Members
  • Posts

    21,529
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Riedquat

  1. No, I'm afraid you're the one making a mistake here. Lumping "every murder is the same" together is a grotesque oversimplification - such black and white thinking IS a moral rot that we suffer from very badly today. Trying to pretend that a claim that they're not all equal is equivalent to legitimising is not a logical conclusion but frequently arises from extreme black and white thinking - "it's either OK or it's as reprehensible as it can be, so if you're claiming two crimes aren't equal you're saying that one of them can't belong in the 'as reprehensible as it can be' category, so you must have it in the OK one." That's flawed logic based on binary thinking.
  2. I don't think so - manslaughter I believe requires not intending to kill but behaving in a manner where they would've realised that a death was a likely outcome. IANAL.
  3. Cold-blooded pre-meditated murder for reasons of personal gain, or on the spot out of some perverted gratification I'd call pretty different to someone snapping after years of abuse (just for the sake of example) but they're both still murder.
  4. Calculus always got introduced in A levels but were PDEs ever part of it? I don't think I encountered them until university and that was 25 years ago.
  5. Considering how many are crying that we can't as easily exploit cheap labour and keep pay and conditions poor now to we've left I don't think it is. Although in this particular case driver shortages appear to be an issue everywhere, so more to do with that short-termist cheap and nasty attitude biting everywhere than anything to do with the EU or Brexit.
  6. Hope the thought processes thing was a generic "you" because I've never made such a claim.
  7. Here we are? In an issue that's nothing to do with Brexit, but has the usual response of Remainers banging on about it as if it does, like they do any time everything isn't 100% perfect.
  8. Doesn't seem to stop a few idiots if some of the reports are anything to go by, although I've not seen numpties with bootfulls of jerry cans myself.
  9. Have to say it does seem to be getting back to normal around here. Had to fill up a couple of days ago (almost empty) and didn't have to queue, and I'm not seeing queues this morning in some stations that were either completely empty or had several cars waiting before.
  10. It's always seemed to me that "why?" in this context isn't a meaningful quesiton. There is no why, there simply is.
  11. Not so sure about that to be honest. FIrstly because knowing a lot of facts isn't exactly the same as being intelligent, and secondly, because being a technical expert (assuming it's more than just knowing a lot of facts) isn't the same as knowing people and what makes them tick, what people really value in life.
  12. It's sad that so many people want to cheer on these entirely unnecessary types of developments, seemingly from a "it's high tech so it's good innit?" point of view. GM crops are very much a solution looking for a problem, and it's pretty messed up to think that we need to resort to such measures. Still, looks easier than tackling the underlying problems that are the real causes of poverty and food shortages, because you can't throw the modern technology addiction at those. But be that as it may, whilst I thoroughly disagree with GM crops whether the UK goes down that path should be a decision for the UK, so yes, a win for Brexit. That's democracy for you.
  13. But we build detectors for wavelengths we can't see, for forces we can't feel (e.g. magnets), particles that are invisible to us. Whilst obviously we have to end up with a reading in a form that we can perceive there's no way that our senses are a limiting factor in what we can detect. The only things that'll inevitably remain undetectable are those that do not have any interaction at all with any part of the universe we can perceive, even if our perception is via those detectors.
  14. More or less right, although it's not air resistance that's giving you your four times as much energy - that's just the kinetic energy change, extra for overcoming air resistance is on top of that. Four times as much would only be the case in a vacuum (overlooking the fact that the engine wouldn't run then anyway).
  15. Moving very slowly is very inefficient too (take the extreme case of the engine running and the car not moving). Somewhere between 40 mph and 60 mph seems to be the sweet spot for most petrol cars. The efficient revs band for a petrol engine is pretty narrow too, which is why cars have gears. EVs have much less low speed wastage, to the point where I doubt that stop-start traffic is particularly bad for them, at least if it's not cold enough to need to run the heater full blast.
  16. I studied physics and didn't get that impression. Oh, there's a hell of a lot out there that we can't experience directly with our senses but we've built plenty of detectors that can, and I've seen nothing to suggest that there's anything out there that fundamentally requires a god of the gaps type of argument. That's not the same as saying we know it all right now but I see no reason at all to believe that there's anything out there that isn't fundamentally answerable scientifically.
  17. Interesting. A reply that relies on faith over evidence to be correct.
  18. Just a point - the Highway Code doesn't make rules. It's fundamentally a guide to good practice. That requires often referring to the laws (roughly any time it says you must / must not do something, as opposed to should or should not), but it doesn't define them. Failure to follow it might be regarded as evidence of careless driving though. Of course the proposal is drivel though.
  19. It's pretty tragic to see people desperately clamouring for keeping wages suppressed.
  20. And at one time those developments did indeed do that, but it's a game of diminishing returns. Spending the whole day doing the washing by hand versus chucking it in the washing machine for example - you can't improve all that much because the amount of time it takes has been almost entirely eliminated, any additional time saved is negligible really. But it doesn't stop people demanding more and thus the tech pressure goes from beneficial to just plain silly - and more disturbingly, probably helps pile on the stress that makes people think they should be doing something with every waking minute.
  21. The difference being that all evidence points towards the former as being true.
  22. I think there's a danger there of assuming that the figure at 5 is the one commonly quoted in the wider world when life expectancy is discussed if it happens to be the one you come in to contact with day in, day out in the course of your job.
  23. Looking at car servicing costs as a whole though it makes more sense to consider what people are spending on servicing their Focuses and Fiestas.
  24. Ah, the irony of the post clearly flew over my head! (point 10 notwithstanding )
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.