Fuel panic!

[dutchie01]

Regarding population reduction, any targets published already?

 

 

 

 

 

 

[dutchie01]

53 minutes ago, Malc said:

sorry, my aged finger slipped and i pressed  " GO " before i finished  .....  now, the added 1p off for the Tesco points too

so does anyone have the contamination , climate change degradation figure for Chernobyl, Fukuishama and the upcoming Ukraine Nuclear power station that's going to explode and cover much of South Russia too ....... killing a few million more Ruskies I'll warrant ...........

it's these figures alone that might just outweigh any problems coming from my 4ltr V8 and other car emissions 

Can we have that figure please from someone somewhere do you think ........  it's quite important methinks 

 

Malc

Malc in the grander scale of things your beloved LS does not play a role at all.

just look at the worldwide events. China opening up coal burning power plants each day, russia having the most toxic chemical facilities in the world and just burning off gas in huge volumes each day as they cant sell it. All of Asia just throwing plastics in rivers that turn in absolute dumps, the middle east and africa where environment is not in the top 5 of important things and so on and so on.

However we have to start somewhere don't we?

 

 

[Bluemarlin]

1 hour ago, Malc said:

ah the Stockbroker Belt ...  you should be paying more ..  you, you,  ........... wealthy bankers and the like ............

E5 164.9 here at tescos and 1

 

In my defence, I was just visiting for an MOT & Service

[Bluemarlin]

3 hours ago, toffee_pie said:

The great reset in simple terms mentions 2030 - a lot, it’s when the EV revolution will kick off in earnest amongst other thing in 2030, they are saying the world will be a wonderful place what they are not saying is that the world will be a society where governments have control of people like never before - hence the phrase you will own nothing
So, what is going on? Control is what is going on

Covid, they say has been an exercise in control and where better to start this than China which knows all about it - the powers that be at the WEF who apparently have governments at fingertips have rolled the dice and seen how easy is it to get control of western society - which is what happed - see my post above - wearing masks, lockdowns, getting jabbed up with as many drugs as needed, ones that have no legal recourse without even batting an eye lid.  mRNA vaccines are only used in western society also - This is where the population reduction is done - when covid was rife all deaths were due to covid, afterwards when the vaccines have been rolled out all deaths are due to 'other diseases' not the vaccines, even the weather was blamed - and the ONS are reporting around 1k excess deaths a week as of now.

Electric cars fall into this as well - control. They are digital devices and far easier to control, the wheels themselves are controlled by brushless dc motors – driven by pwm all going back to a ECU or multiple ECUs so monitoring and controlling these signals is relatively easy so we will ultimately have a situation in 2030 where governments will have more control than whoever is driving it. 

You think they are for net zero and they have zero tail pipe emissions, sorry to bring bad news but you need to actually manufacture them and that’s where it goes downhill, fast and net zero is more trash used to brainwash people into thinking the world is ending - besides cars / automobiles account for around 10 percent of global greenhouse gases themselves so what’s the panic - go after the other 90 odd percent, isn’t that what any sane person would do and not heckle everyone in England to go green leasing out EVs they cant afford especially when combustion cars themselves in England contribute less than 1% of all greenhouse gases worldwide.

They are saying also there will be a central western currency - more control - to do this the dollar needs to crumble and this is only possible with dramatic crashes in the economy and stock markets and they are doing an excellent job on this also and have 8 years left

Millions of pensioners will see as much as 20 per cent wiped off their retirement income after a court ruling delivered a bitter blow to gold-plated company schemes. Pension scheme trustees on September 1 lost a High Court battle to protect millions of their members from a change to inflation …

No surprise it’s the government again

The government considered postponing the transition to 2025, but former chancellor Rishi Sunak agreed that there would be no change until 2030.

So, you will own nothing - not even a pension it seems

 

Whilst I'm tempted to reply to some of these points, it would be preferable/easier if you started a Great Reset, Conspiracy Theories, or similar type thread, rather than batting it back and forth on a petrol price thread.

[Malc]

12 hours ago, Bluemarlin said:

I was just visiting for an MOT & Service

hahahahahahaha  ..  no it's ok really  .....  i too was one of those impossible bankers back in the day .......  too much money to burn ( ah why say that ) and now a toxic promoter by selling airline tickets and all that benign toxicity   BUT NOT    on Wizzair ever again coz they are starting to fly to Moscow  ( YUK 😭  evil basta-ds )

Anyone in my business that sells Wizzair tickets will be summarily dismissed I assure you   ......  and they know it too

 

Malc

sorry i digress yet further 

[Boxbrownie]

1 hour ago, Malc said:

hahahahahahaha  ..  no it's ok really  .....  i too was one of those impossible bankers back in the day .......  too much money to burn ( ah why say that ) and now a toxic promoter by selling airline tickets and all that benign toxicity   BUT NOT    on Wizzair ever again coz they are starting to fly to Moscow  ( YUK 😭  evil basta-ds )

Anyone in my business that sells Wizzair tickets will be summarily dismissed I assure you   ......  and they know it too

 

Malc

sorry i digress yet further 

If you were with the Hot Sausage and Bacon Company can Mrs BB have all her pension please? 😉

[Shahpor]

Anyone else think the current price of fuel is going to be the new 'normal'?

Just like when it settled at £1.30ish previously, it seems to have stopped near £1.70 now.

[Malc]

2 hours ago, Shahpor said:

it seems to have stopped near £1.70 now.

£163.9 here at Morrisons for E10 ............  but they must be itching to jump it upwards of course 

 

4 hours ago, Boxbrownie said:

If you were with the Hot Sausage and Bacon Company can Mrs BB have all her pension please? 😉

why can't she have all her pension pot then ?  has that gone awry somehow ? Complain to the authorities whomsoever they might be ........  I'd want baked beans with it too of course 

I won't trust anyone with any of mine bar Black Rock .......... globally run with about $15 trillion I believe and quite well too ............  all these middlemen taking their cut, don't believe in it at all ............ ah ! .  is that HSBC  you mean  ?  Nope never with them at all . just those slimey dastards these days at ...........NatPest .  icide 

I had a wonderful banking career back in the Good 'Ol Days for sure when bankers were honest and credible and honourable and just nice people to deal with and to be trusted .......  long gone those halcyon days methinks sadly ..........  if i could find one I don't know I'd have the energy to throw one ........  never find an open branch to get to one ......... 

 

Malc

[ALAW]

if the ONS told me it was raining I would have to go outside and have a look.

[Phil xxkr]

On 3/25/2022 at 7:56 PM, Bluemarlin said:

I think questioning things is good Eric. However, replacing something you choose not to believe, with an equally questionable narrative, doesn't seem to achieve much in my opinion.

I'll skip going down the rabbit hole of climate change, as it would just go on forever, but will comment on your Bill Gates and vaccination points.

In a global pandemic I suspect that many people invested in bio med companies. Does that make them evil genuises, or simply savvy investors? In the abssence of evidence to the contrary, I suspect the latter.

As for whether vaccines are good, I can only go by the fact that since we have had widespread vaccinations we've seen the number of covid deaths drastically drop. Sure, people still get sick, but far fewer die. The vaccine was never touted as a total prevention, and instead something that would help minimise the effects if one was to get covid, and in that regard it appears to have worked as advertised.

Anecdotal examples of people getting very sick whilst vaccinated, or hardly feeling a thing when unvaccinated, are a long way from scientific proof of anything. There will always be exceptions and variations, and so it's the bigger picture that mattters. After all, you wouldn't do away with heart surgery because some people still die having had it, or some live on without it.

Like I said, questioning is fine, but often those who rebuke others for taking things they read at face value, do exactly that with the theories they read which happen to fit their agenda or mindset. Much like those who touted Ivermectin, without questioning it, only for it to transpire that much of the data had either been erroneously assumed or fabricated and subsequently withdrawn.

I don't believe that the powers that be always act in good faith, but from experience I've found that the claims of many conspiracy theories can be quite easily countered with a little research. Largely because many conspiracy theorists quickly latch on to something they want to believe, and then start spreading it without doing the tiniest amount of fact checking first.

Thought that you may like this Bill🤔

A new peer-reviewed study found that regular use of ivermectin reduced the risk of dying from COVID-19 by 92%.

The large study was conducted by Flávio A. Cadegiani, MD, MSc, PhD. Cadegiani is a board-certified endocrinologist with a master's degree and doctorate degree in clinical endocrinology.

The peer-reviewed study was published on Wednesday by the online medical journal Cureus. The study was conducted on a strictly controlled population of 88,012 people from the city of Itajaí in Brazil.

Cadegianl comments "An observational study with the size and level of analysis as ours is hardly achieved and infeasible to be conducted as a randomised clinical trial. Conclusions are hard to be refuted. Data is data, regardless of your beliefs."😎

[Malc]

Take another swig of a delicious single malt methinks ......  good for an awful lot of ailments too i believe 

Malc

[Bluemarlin]

5 hours ago, Phil xxkr said:

Thought that you may like this Bill🤔

A new peer-reviewed study found that regular use of ivermectin reduced the risk of dying from COVID-19 by 92%.

The large study was conducted by Flávio A. Cadegiani, MD, MSc, PhD. Cadegiani is a board-certified endocrinologist with a master's degree and doctorate degree in clinical endocrinology.

The peer-reviewed study was published on Wednesday by the online medical journal Cureus. The study was conducted on a strictly controlled population of 88,012 people from the city of Itajaí in Brazil.

Cadegianl comments "An observational study with the size and level of analysis as ours is hardly achieved and infeasible to be conducted as a randomised clinical trial. Conclusions are hard to be refuted. Data is data, regardless of your beliefs."😎

That is interesting Phil. I had seen another study, by the same doctor, which claimed good results from a prostate cancer drug, but don't know how reliable it was.

I've had a quick look at the study you refer to, and found a number of articles that state that the study was methodologically flawed, and that its results didn't match the official data. One comment referred to the fact that it was voluntary, and that the majority had stopped taking Ivermectin a third of the way into the trial.

Even the study itself stated "Being a prospective observational study that allowed subjects to self-select between treatment vs. non-treatment instead of relying on randomization, important confounders may have been differentially present, which could otherwise explain the differences observed." As well as "Also, there was no strict control on whether infected subjects used any specific drug in case of COVID-19 infection, and this allows the possibility that the differences may be explained by differences in the use of ivermectin or other medications as treatment."

So, there appear to be some interpretational gaps.

It's also worth noting that Dr Cadegiani and one other author are paid consultants for Vitamedic, an Ivermectin  manufacturer. Two others work for FLCCC, which has been opposed to vaccines and has also been promoting Ivermectin, along with other unproven treatments. Cureus, who published the article, later added a correction, stating that the authors failed to mention these conflicts of interest when they submitted the article.

That's not to say that Ivermectin isn't effective, only that the trials claiming success have to date had numerous flaws and limitations in their methodology, and the authors have often been linked to Ivermectin manufacturers, which seems to muddy the waters.

I have no idea what the reality is, and my point to Eric was that conspiracy theorist were claiming that Ivermectin was being suppressed by big pharma for financial reasons, when conversely many trials were being funded by others for financial gain from the sale of Ivermectin. Currently it's a minefield, but I believe studies are still being carried out, and that eventually we'll know whether Ivermectin is an effective treatment or not.

[toffee_pie]

There is far too much going on in recent years for it to be a coincidence. 

It's not a cost of living crisis we are having and it's not COVID 19. It's the world economic forum infiltrating western governments and having everyone sign up to ideology they want. Electric cars, net zero, covid, the energy war everything funded by third parties and everyone is buying into this propaganda because its from the government itself

Don't trust the governments they are not on your side and want you to eat bugs in 2030, have no car, no freedom,no privacy and no long haul travel which will be for the elite - hence the phrase 'you will own nothing'

The 'energy war' is used to crash the western economies, the stock markets, the energy supply chain, the food chain and further drive the climate change net zero hype that they crave.

Protests and demonstrations will occur in years to come but its wont please the BBC and the like who are the main news outlet to spread this propaganda

[toffee_pie]

On 9/2/2022 at 8:37 PM, Bluemarlin said:

Whilst I'm tempted to reply to some of these points, it would be preferable/easier if you started a Great Reset, Conspiracy Theories, or similar type thread, rather than batting it back and forth on a petrol price thread.

Sorry, got 50.4L of Shell E5 on the 1st, £1.839L which is a bit better than before but still £92.69 to fill up and that is with the fuel discount

[toffee_pie]

On 9/2/2022 at 7:28 PM, dutchie01 said:

Regarding population reduction, any targets published already?

Ask the BBC to elaborate on the data

[toffee_pie]

On 9/2/2022 at 6:44 PM, Malc said:

so does anyone have the contamination , climate change degradation figure for Chernobyl, Fukuishama and the upcoming Ukraine Nuclear power station that's going to explode and cover much of South Russia too ....... killing a few million more Ruskies I'll warrant ...........

it's these figures alone that might just outweigh any problems coming from my 4ltr V8 and other car emissions 

Can we have that figure please from someone somewhere do you think ........  it's quite important methinks 

I don’t trust any information that comes from government sources - its clouded in dirty money. The British Government have all these data and articles on electric cars and how they help meet net zero objectives but they are only telling you what they want you to know - they don’t even mention that ordinary combustion cars in the UK have little of no contribution to global greenhouse gases themselves in the first place- let alone electric cars containing 5 or 6 thousand batteries per each.

To get actual data that is useful you need to find it elsewhere.

FWIW I think V6s/V8s have longer longevity than EVs so inherently are better for the environment.👌

 

[Phil xxkr]

1 hour ago, Bluemarlin said:

That is interesting Phil. I had seen another study, by the same doctor, which claimed good results from a prostate cancer drug, but don't know how reliable it was.

I've had a quick look at the study you refer to, and found a number of articles that state that the study was methodologically flawed, and that its results didn't match the official data. One comment referred to the fact that it was voluntary, and that the majority had stopped taking Ivermectin a third of the way into the trial.

Even the study itself stated "Being a prospective observational study that allowed subjects to self-select between treatment vs. non-treatment instead of relying on randomization, important confounders may have been differentially present, which could otherwise explain the differences observed." As well as "Also, there was no strict control on whether infected subjects used any specific drug in case of COVID-19 infection, and this allows the possibility that the differences may be explained by differences in the use of ivermectin or other medications as treatment."

So, there appear to be some interpretational gaps.

It's also worth noting that Dr Cadegiani and one other author are paid consultants for Vitamedic, an Ivermectin  manufacturer. Two others work for FLCCC, which has been opposed to vaccines and has also been promoting Ivermectin, along with other unproven treatments. Cureus, who published the article, later added a correction, stating that the authors failed to mention these conflicts of interest when they submitted the article.

That's not to say that Ivermectin isn't effective, only that the trials claiming success have to date had numerous flaws and limitations in their methodology, and the authors have often been linked to Ivermectin manufacturers, which seems to muddy the waters.

I have no idea what the reality is, and my point to Eric was that conspiracy theorist were claiming that Ivermectin was being suppressed by big pharma for financial reasons, when conversely many trials were being funded by others for financial gain from the sale of Ivermectin. Currently it's a minefield, but I believe studies are still being carried out, and that eventually we'll know whether Ivermectin is an effective treatment or not.

Well that's a really welcome analysis Bill, we'll done for that additional research and yet again underlining constant vigilance is the brother of constant scepticism 😎

[LenT]

2 hours ago, toffee_pie said:

Ask the BBC to elaborate on the data

What is the source for this Table?  As it mentions ‘Adverse events’ is it extracted from the Yellow Card reports?

Data presented out of context is not very meaningful.

 

[toffee_pie]

/

[toffee_pie]

.

[toffee_pie]

27 minutes ago, LenT said:

What is the source for this Table?  As it mentions ‘Adverse events’ is it extracted from the Yellow Card reports?

Data presented out of context is not very meaningful.

 

The source is not from where you get your news from

Electric cars, net zero, covid, the energy war everything funded by third parties and everyone is buying into this propaganda because its from the government itself

[Bluemarlin]

3 hours ago, Phil xxkr said:

Well that's a really welcome analysis Bill, we'll done for that additional research and yet again underlining constant vigilance is the brother of constant scepticism 😎

15 minutes of Google search threw up enough articles to raise questions.

That said Phil, I will admit that there's "evidence" which supports claims for Ivermectin, but not conclusive enough at this time to be "proof". So, whilst I think it's wrong to say it's a cure, I also think it's just as wrong to say it definitely isn't. The jury's still out and so, at least for now, the fence is probably the most appropriate place to be sitting.

Bit like God, bigfoot and aliens really. I can't say say definitively that they don't exist, but I haven't yet seen proof that they do.

[Bluemarlin]

4 hours ago, toffee_pie said:

Ask the BBC to elaborate on the data

The BBC would probably tell you it was meaningless without knowing how many people in total took each of these things.

It would be a bit like showing how many people died driving ICE cars, compared to EV's, and then claiming that EV's were safer, purely because of a lower death toll 😉

[Bluemarlin]

5 hours ago, toffee_pie said:

There is far too much going on in recent years for it to be a coincidence. 

It's not a cost of living crisis we are having and it's not COVID 19. It's the world economic forum infiltrating western governments and having everyone sign up to ideology they want. Electric cars, net zero, covid, the energy war everything funded by third parties and everyone is buying into this propaganda because its from the government itself

Don't trust the governments they are not on your side and want you to eat bugs in 2030, have no car, no freedom,no privacy and no long haul travel which will be for the elite - hence the phrase 'you will own nothing'

The 'energy war' is used to crash the western economies, the stock markets, the energy supply chain, the food chain and further drive the climate change net zero hype that they crave.

Protests and demonstrations will occur in years to come but its wont please the BBC and the like who are the main news outlet to spread this propaganda

I assume Putin is in on the gig then, with governments and the WEF, to create the energy crisis.

Nor are the WEF promoting the goal of people owning nothing. That was a quote, taken out of context, reflecting the trend towards rental and subscriptions. Has it not accured to you that the WEF are simply looking at existing trends, and then brainstorming them to see where they might lead, and how to address them.

Rather than cherry pick out of context quotes, in order to fabricate an agenda, why not look at what they actually state as an aim, which is:

“By 2030, ensure that all men and women, in particular the poor and the vulnerable, have equal rights to economic resources, as well as access to basic services, ownership and control over land and other forms of property, inheritance, natural resources, appropriate new technology and financial services, including microfinance.”

That doesn't sound anything like what you're suggesting at all, in fact it's the opposite, and seems pretty reasonable to me.

For the record, I saw petrol at £1.69 at a Shell station in Richmond today.

Please, just start a WEF thread, or something.

Edited to add: I've started one for you, in the Lounge, I'm kind like that 🙂 and copied my above reply there

[LenT]

2 hours ago, toffee_pie said:

The source is not from where you get your news from

Electric cars, net zero, covid, the energy war everything funded by third parties and everyone is buying into this propaganda because its from the government itself

Unfortunately this link doesn’t appear to work.  But yes I suspect it may well not be what might be regarded as a prime source of independent, science-based data. 😊