Many over 65s are a hell of a long way from being in a nursing home. I certainly am! - then it should be up to you to follow advice and take precautions.
FFS, it ain't rocket science ...
maybe the borg was right all the time.
maybe armageddon is just an unassailable tide of boredom and november ennui (good word that).. i did a typo, nobember and nearly left it in.
or knobember.
Many over 65s are a hell of a long way from being in a nursing home. I certainly am! - then it should be up to you to follow advice and take precautions.
FFS, it ain't rocket science ...
maybe the borg was right all the time.
maybe armageddon is just an unassailable tide of boredom and november ennui (good word that).. i did a typo, nobember and nearly left it in.
or knobember.
The new lockdown is madness, utter madness.
I can accept the first lockdown because we didn't know what we were dealing with in March.
But now, we've learnt more about COVID.
The virus is lethal to elderly people, obese people, diabetic people and others with underlying health issues (e.g. HIV+ people, perhaps).
It's not lethal to the rest of us.
The COVID pandemic is a fairly nuanced situation, one that needs a nuanced solution.
A national lockdown to combat COVID is the equivalent of a surgeon performing delicate micro-surgery using a 14lb lump hammer.
Plus, the virus will still be out there, waiting for us after the lockdown.
A better way would be to shield the elderly and vulnerable groups and let the rest of us get on with life.
Boris Johnson is no latter-day Churchill. He probably won't even be remembered for 'getting brexit done' - he'll be remembered as the Prime Minister who totally wrecked the British economy. Shame on him.
who wins?
who loses?
president/ senate/ house of representatives .
I think Trump will probably win.
Most of the 'liberal' media want him to lose, with different polls saying how bad he's gonna do.
I take this to mean that Trump will get himself four more years.
There is a spike in cases because COVID has evolved to be transmitted between organisms and hijack host cells.
Anony Mous got it right - there is a spike in cases, but not in deaths.
Basically, COVID is lethal to elderly people and people with underlying health issues. It's not very lethal to everyone else.
So, only the vulnerable should be shielded or self-isolate. Everyone else should be getting on with life as normal.
Tribalistic and Racist tendencies may well be innate. Racist thought that takes root and brings forth action is taught - but surely racist thought that takes root is innate?
I think you and me have each got it half-right.
There are aspects of racism that are innate; other aspects are taught.
when i see polls suggesting trump has a 95% chance to lose the presidency, according to drudge report, which is now totally liberal, and i see the huge crowds of trump supporters as opposed to the 20 people showing up for biden rallies, i have to wonder what i should believe.
do i believe my lying eyes or am i totally messed up?.
Ok ,I took what Simon said on his post about the pollsters claiming 96% voted for Hillary Clinton .And she did get the popular vote didn`t she ? - she got more votes, but not 96% of the votes.
Racism is taught behaviour, as is religious belief, and the two go hand in hand quite often. Nobody is born Racist.
We are born not conscious of race or colour as being anything remarkable
^^^ This is debatable. If racism is taught behaviour, who taught the world's first racist?
Behaviour is a phenotype, coded for by our genes. Although behaviour has a great amount of plasticity and can be taught (some people do learn racism from their parents), behaviour also has an innate aspect - originating from the genes in people's DNA.
Humans have been 'othering' other groups of humans throughout human history. I would suggest that this behaviour is innate.
what`s wrong with american politics ?.
96% of american people who got off there arse to vote, chose hillary clinton to be president of the united states of america over donald trump.. and the electoral college overode the will of the majority of the people who bothered to vote , and gave the office of president to donald trump who was the 2nd choice, an also ran , of the will of the people.. it`s a furphy to say that some larger blue/red states can dictate to smaller red/blue states or vice versa to rig the elections ,simply because people can, and do change there preferences in any one state whether it be traditionally red or blue.. both democrats and republicans are both guilty and responsible for the gerrymander that is the electoral college.. there i`ve said it ,.
nobody else seems to be able to say it how it is ,.
96% of American people who got off there arse to vote, chose Hillary Clinton to be president of the United states of America over Donald trump - you sure about that statistic?, lol ...
when i see polls suggesting trump has a 95% chance to lose the presidency, according to drudge report, which is now totally liberal, and i see the huge crowds of trump supporters as opposed to the 20 people showing up for biden rallies, i have to wonder what i should believe.
do i believe my lying eyes or am i totally messed up?.
There's definitely a trend in the polls - both in America and Britain.
Polls on the 2016 Brexit referendum had Remain winning.
Polls on the 2016 US election had Hillary winning (lol).
Polls on the 2019 UK election had it close (it was a Tory landslide; Corbyn was routed, lol).
And now polls say that Biden is comfortably ahead.
The one thing to remember, even if you forget everything else, is that polls are designed and carried out by humans. And all humans are biased.
i haven't read his new book, but i've read bits of it that were serialised in a newspaper.. attenborough is a fascinating man and has a lot of interesting things to say.. his new book is about the environment and how to save it, basically.. he wants us to drastically cut down our meat intake and eat more fruit and veg.
this got me thinking.
how would that work?
I haven't read his new book, but I've read bits of it that were serialised in a newspaper.
Attenborough is a fascinating man and has a lot of interesting things to say.
His new book is about the environment and how to save it, basically.
He wants us to drastically cut down our meat intake and eat more fruit and veg. Nothing wrong with that, but he also wants us to stop using pesticides on crops. This got me thinking. How would that work? If more fruit and veg are to be eaten, we'd need more crops to feed the world's population. Pesticides do help put fruit and veg on our table. Without pesticides, there'd be no guarantee that people would be fed.
I think this is a problem with many who want to help the environment - they don't think of the details. Attenborough begins his book by saying that, originally, humans lived in balance with nature as hunter-gatherers. What this means is that mortality was high, starvation, killed in wars, etc. to keep the population down. This is why we've made such progress.
How we learn to keep the progress we've made and cut down our emissions is another thing.
Everyone breathing breathes out CO2. There is no solution, other than killing billions of people (which is obviously wrong).