moggiemoo 💜

Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter - Martin Luther King - Awake but not Woke

[Leo Kearse - see me on tour! Links in bio @LeoKearse]

Pakistani Muslim nonces a girl, gets two years.
21 year old British kid angry that police helped kill a British kid throws a traffic cone, it hits nobody, gets 3-5 years.
But remember, there's no two-tier policing.

[leilani dowding 🌸🚜 ☮️ @LeilaniDowding]

I’m at a loss for words regarding the state of our country … 😫

[Bronwyn Millar @gingerhaderach]

When I was 15 one of the boys in my class saw a tampon in my pencil case. He snatched it and they tossed it around the class, jeering at me. They even brought my business ed teacher in on the fun, told him I was bleeding and he tossed a tube of lip balm at me and told me to "plug myself up". I can't fathom what kind of numbnut thinks girls would be ok sharing restrooms with boys.

We have a right to dignity, privacy and safety and it beggars belief that we are STILL FIGHTING THESE FUCKING BATTLES IN 2026.

[Benonwine @benonwine]

Iryna Zarutska
Rhiannon Skye Whyte
Henry Nowak
Wayne Broadhurst

Taken too soon, but never forgotten.

WE REMEMBER! 🙏❤️🕊️

[Bernie @Artemisfornow]

Can the government explain to me why this UK trained British doctor can’t get a post yet are still giving visas for foreign doctors at her skill level?

It is immoral that the very best of our own educated young people can’t get NHS jobs & migrants can!

[J.K. Rowling @jk_rowling]

Yes, period huts are back. Because girls just aren’t embarrassed and awkward enough about menstruation.

But what happens when the trans-identified boy feels excluded from the period hut? What if he feels less of a girl? Perhaps it would be easier just to tell girls to stay home.

[Emily Wilding Davison🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 @Wommando]

🇬🇧 I live in a country where depraved sickos caught with 1000s of the most horrific images and videos of babies and toddlers being r-ped walk free -

And a young man who threw a traffic cone that hit no one, is jailed for 3-5 years.

[Chris Wick @ChrisWickNews]

They told you the planet is dying… and you’re the problem.

Your food.
Your habits.
Your existence.

Meanwhile, behind closed doors, something else is growing.

AI data centres in the UK alone could pump out 123 million tonnes of carbon emissions — the equivalent of millions of human lives over a decade.

But where’s the outrage?

Instead, they blame cows… tax farmers… and squeeze the people who actually feed you.

While tech giants expand quietly… signing deals… building systems that never sleep… and never get questioned.

Different rules.
Different targets.
Same script.

So let me ask you…

Why are everyday people being punished…
while the biggest emitters keep getting rewarded?
Is this really about saving the planet…
or controlling who pays the price?
Drop your thoughts below — I want to hear what you think.

And if this made you stop and think for even a second… share it.

More people need to see this.

[Matt Goodwin @GoodwinMJ]

Six years ago the House of Commons & House of Lords held a minute’s silence in memory of George Floyd, a man in America. They then debated race & policing.

As Britain watches the video of Henry it would be nice if our leaders offered him & his family the same courtesy.

[Dr Jennine Morgan @jemmm85517813]

This is a shocking indictment of Britains energy policy…Brits are being ripped off!

[J.K. Rowling @jk_rowling]

When you tell a woman she must pretend a man is a woman, you’re asserting the right to control her speech and perception of reality, while also trivialising and devaluing her female-specific experience. You’re asking her to agree that ‘woman’ is a concept men can embody at will.

[Inevitable West @Inevitablewest]

🚨BREAKING: Henry Nowak's father speaks out on the murder of his son:

"He told officers he could not breathe NINE TIMES, he said he had been stabbed FOUR TIMES, but the officer replied saying' 'I don't think you have, mate.'"

What a brave man.

[Jason Bassler @JasonBassler1]

2020: “You need to stop using plastic straws. Climate change is the greatest threat to humanity.”

2026: “Anyway, here’s a 62-square-mile AI data center"

[Alan @A1an_M]

I spent a large part of yesterday trying to explain to people who supposedly are proponents of science what a "confounding variable" is.

Rather than say the same thing again today to about 100 people in about 100 different replies, I'm going to write it all in one place, here.

When scientists do science, in the form of an experiment or study, they will ultimately write it up in a standard report format containing the same sections:

Abstract
Introduction
Method
Results
Discussion
References

One of the most important aspects of the Discussion is a critical analysis of what was done. What went well, what could have been done better, what should be done next time. In particular, the authors attempt to identify if there are any "confounders" which may have influenced the results and rendered them invalid.

Let's take the example of a medicine in a clinical trial. We might, if we are ethical scientists, want to study whether a particular medicine causes adverse effects to those taking it before letting it loose in the wild. So we might recruit some people for a trial, and divide them into two groups. The first receives the actual medicine, the second receives a placebo. We might then monitor the recruits for a few months (or, preferably, a much longer period) on a daily basis and note any illnesses suffered in both groups.

We would then do a statistical analysis on the results from the two groups. If the results of that analysis showed that there was no statistical difference in the levels and types of illness suffered in the two groups, we might then conclude that no adverse effects were caused by the medicine. If, on the other hand, there was a significant difference between the two groups, that would point towards the need for further study and might lead us to conclude that the medicine was the cause of the difference.

The key thing here with our experimental design is that we want to make sure that the two groups in the study - the experimental group who receive the medicine and the control group who do not - are, in every other way, identical. Because if they're not, those differences might have caused the effect we observed, rather than the differences we created in our experiment.

What factors might make these two groups different?

1. Age differences. If one group was older, we might expect they might suffer more illness than the younger group.
2. Gender. Dependent on the medicine, males or females might be more affected. If the groups weren't balanced for gender, this might distort the reported illness results.
3. Health differences. If one group had poorer general health than the other at the beginning of the trial, we might expect them to report more illness during the trial.

These are all examples of "confounding variables". Factors which we did not control but which might influence the outcome and render our results invalid.

So in our experimental design we would want to make sure the experimental group and the control group are closely matched for age, gender and health status.

Which brings me onto climate change.

Climate scientists contend that Carbon Dioxide created by human activity in the industrial age is causing global atmospheric temperatures to increase.

As evidence, they point to an increase in global atmospheric temperatures over the last 200 years or so.

So far so good. Temperatures have, broadly, risen during that time. There are plenty of other things to criticise about this hypothesis and about climate "science" in general but that is for another time.

Yesterday we saw, all over the media, headlines about new record May temperatures of 35 degrees at Kew and Heathrow, and below the headlines was text saying that experts were saying this was another example of evidence of how the climate is warming.

Now I don't deny that it's been hot the last couple of days - where I am it has been around 32 degrees - so I don't doubt that the May record may have been broken somewhere in the country.

But the specific problem I have is with the temperatures at Heathrow and Kew, or indeed anywhere close to London or a big urban area being used as the evidence that the May record has been broken,or that they are evidence of atmospheric warming.

Why? Because of a confounding variable.

When we say a temperature record has been broken, we need to make sure we are comparing apples with apples. So not only do we need to compare temperatures that were measured in the same site using the same type of equipment in both instances - we need to make sure that the sites themselves have not changed.

We know that modern urban areas create a "heat island" effect. The expanses of heat-retaining materials like concrete, asphalt and cement retain heat during the day and release it slowly overnight, leading to higher daytime and nighttime temperatures. Added to which are the many buildings and vehicles in urban areas generating their own heat. All of this means that temperatures in, or close to, an urban area are typically several degrees warmer than in countryside some distance away.

Given the expansion and urbanisation of London over the last century, this effect will only have grown over time.

Arup measured this effect in London and concluded that temperatures there are often 4.5 degrees hotter than in the surrounding countryside (see first comment for link).

This effect obviously varies between different parts of London, as shown on the heat map, and reduces as you move away from central London, but even at Kew, the effect is estimated to cause temperatures to be 0.9 degrees higher than would be the case if Kew was sited in the countryside.

And Heathrow clearly creates its own heat island effect given the scale of the airport and the big expanses of heat absorbing materials there.

So if we are going to use temperatures measured in, or close to, London as evidence of atmospheric warming, we have a problem. We have a significant confounding variable. The warming caused by the heat island effect is going to add to any warming in the atmosphere, and give us an exaggerated result.

You can perhaps forgive tabloid newspapers for running headlines about this, just quoting the raw temperatures measured. They want to make money and it being very hot outside is a great news story. And urban areas becoming increasingly hot in summer is an issue in its own right.

But what is unforgiveable is people who claim to be scientists using these measurements as evidence of atmospheric warming, when there's such a glaring confounding variable influencing the data.

How would a proper scientist deal with this confounder?

Well, they might say "from now on, we will only use temperatures from rural weather stations which are not subject to urban heat island effects, and we will only declare records on the basis of those measurements"

And they might say "we will not use temperature measurements from areas subject to urban heat island effects as evidence of atmospheric warming".

But the Met Office and the climate science people aren't saying that. They're going with the artificially inflated temperatures. Because they have an agenda to push, a vast Net Zero industry to sustain, research grants to chase, and any evidence, however shonky, which backs up the global warming narrative is welcome.

This isn't science!

[Kevin Bass @kevinnbass]

Rapists are now called victims.

Soon rape victims will be called criminals.

Which is exactly how it works under Sharia law.

[Neil Oliver @thecoastguy]

I'll make it simple: the climate crisis was a hoax that made them richer. Now they need oil and gas for the data centres that are the digital cage. This should be easy by now.

[Graham Linehan @Glinner]

Interesting way of writing "his penis"

[Bernie @Artemisfornow]

Australia lets the cat out of the bag!

In order to ban under 16s from social media, EVERYONE will have to have digital ID or they won’t be able to get on the internet

Starmer says Digital ID won’t be mandatory er Unless you never need the internet 🔥