mild blur

Most likely f**ked, trending to, we're really f**ked.

[Jason | 🇬🇧 🇿🇦 🇮🇱🇺🇲 @Ajaon_of_All]

Let me categorically Debunk this utter rot. @sainsburys.

I am a poultry Breeder. The hens that lay white eggs (Amberline/White Star) DO NOT have a lower carbon footprint.

Yes they eat a bit less and produce roughly the same amount of eggs as the Brown egg layers (Bovan/Lowman/ISA Brown) but they live shorter lives, are prone to dying suddenly when startled, a flighty and nervous and because they live shorter productive lives (12 -18mnths) vs brown 18/24mnths (both commercial farmed), you have to incubate more which is increased (Electricity/gas costs) and their eggs are not the same quality.

I breed and keep 20+ different breeds, including: ISA Brown hens and White Stars. All my hens are 100% free range, Not a single barn kept bird, I have ISA browns that are 5yrs old and still laying beautiful Brown eggs, I have not seen a White star live beyond 3yrs and certainly none have laid eggs past 18-24mnths.
White stars Lay themselves to death. They are slender birds and because they dont eat a lot, it drains their personal vitality to keep up laying the eggs you want to sell because of the nonsensical lie that they are "More Carbon Neutral"

You want to know about eggs, come talk to someone like me, Don't rely on some hairbrained imagination of a buyer who's trying to squeeze the profit margin for a few extra pennies at our expense and to the poor hens detriment.

[mild blur @mildblur]

@ukJ0N @ThatAlexWoman @TalkTV Nadhim Zahawi .............

[mild blur @mildblur]

@Sir_Trade_ALott @NorthstarCharts @lembitopik This record from New York shows long-term seal level rises. (290mm per 100 years). The question is whether the just discernible increase in the past few years is significant or not.

[mild blur @mildblur]

@NorthstarCharts @KathyConWom https://t.co/wiI6HrmRh3

[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!

[mild blur @mildblur]

Regardless of which one is correct on the technical details, the lead times are measured in years. There will be limitations throughout the supply chain, right back to the raw material supply and through to the specialised equipment and skills required to transport and lift very large pieces of equipment.

The demands of the emergency repair work will draw on a finite supply of technical specialists and equipment suppliers. The industry has a finite capacity to execute work and now the demand has increased dramatically.

Technically it's called a fuck-up.

[mild blur @mildblur]

@AcademicAgent_X Many years ago he was on the Delingpod

The James Delingpole Podcast | Brian of London https://t.co/DLdR6WGG5Z

[J Stewart @triffic_stuff_]

🚨BOMBSHELL EXPOSÉ: TREVOR PHILLIPS RIPS LID OFF LABOUR'S GROOMING GANGS COVER-UP 💣

Keir Starmer and the Labour Party Sabotaging National Inquiry to Hide Racial Targeting of White Girls and Decades of Failure in Their Own Councils

In a devastating intervention, Sir Trevor Phillips has blown the whistle on what he calls a deliberate political cover-up at the heart of Britain's grooming gangs scandal.

The former Equality and Human Rights Commission chair accuses Labour of sabotaging the national inquiry because of its explosive racial implications — and because so much of the abuse took place under Labour-controlled councils that did nothing to stop it.

“The government clearly never wanted these two things to be put together,” Phillips declared. He points to Labour's efforts to downplay “the intersection of race and sexual predation,” insisting the perpetrators deliberately targeted victims because they were white and outside the groomers' community.

“These children are chosen because of their race. They are chosen because they are white and because they’re outside the community of the groomers.”

Phillips highlights the chilling uniqueness of these crimes: unlike typical child abuse kept hidden, grooming gangs operate in plain sight — with perpetrators knowing they are shielded.

“The other thing is these people know that they are protected. They’re protected politically, they’re protected by social workers, they’re protected by local police. That is the scandal here.”

He pulls no punches on why a full reckoning has been avoided: “Much of this took place in local Labour councils and the authorities who were supposed to be watching over this, stopping it, monitoring it and all the rest of it were controlled by those councils and they did nothing.”

This is not just institutional failure — it's a politically motivated shield thrown over horrific, racially aggravated sexual exploitation that went on for years under Labour's watch.

Right now, they deserve justice — and Britain deserves the full, fearless national inquiry that has been denied for far too long.

[mild blur @mildblur]

@AcademicAgent_X Good to see Cornwall punching above its weight.

[Raja Miah @recusant_raja]

Look at this photograph carefully.
Standing next to Prime Minister Keir Starmer and Angeliki Stogia, Labour’s candidate in the Gorton and Denton by-election, is Amanda Chadderton. Former leader of Oldham Council.

Chadderton was the third Labour leader in succession that our campaign removed from power at the ballot box.

This is what impunity looks like. A photo opportunity with the Prime Minister.

Chadderton was removed as part of our long campaign to expose the cover-up of the Pakistani rape gangs in Oldham.

When it became clear we were going to defeat her, Andy Burnham’s police force, the same force with a proven record of protecting rape gang perpetrators, unlawfully arrested me and attempted to have me imprisoned on remand to prevent me from lawfully campaigning. They failed.

Chadderton was destroyed at the ballot box.

Within weeks of her defeat, she was hired by Yvette Cooper. The same Yvette Cooper who fought to prevent the national inquiry that Labour have since been forced to hold. The same Yvette Cooper who went on to become Home Secretary.

This is not coincidence. This is the Labour Party protecting itself.

The pattern has been consistent from the beginning. Defeat one of them and they resurface in a government job. Expose the cover-up and the state tries to imprison you. Push for an inquiry and they spend years blocking it, then rig it when they can no longer refuse.

So when Keir Starmer stands next to Amanda Chadderton for a campaign photograph, he is telling you everything you need to know. The people who covered this up are not on the outside looking in. They are on the inside, rewarded, protected, and standing shoulder to shoulder with the Prime Minister.

That is why we do not view the upcoming national inquiry as justice. We view it as the next battleground. And if the last seven years have proven anything, it is that they cannot stop us from telling the truth.

Now who is going to stand with me?
_________

If you can afford it, please support my work for 75p a week (£3/month or £30/year). Not for perks. Not for access. But because numbers with backing become power.
👉 https://t.co/56iWix5yC4

A few supporters can be ignored. Thousands cannot.This is how this campaign survive. This is how we see this through. This is how voices like ours stops being managed and starts being feared.

Prefer a one-off contribution?
👉 https://t.co/kvFfhHNJ03
👉 https://t.co/8Og0hDKfjy

No sponsors. No parties. No institutions to lean on. Just numbers. Growing fast enough that shutting this down becomes impossible.

We don’t need everyone. We need enough. We need you.

Raja 🙏

[Rupert Lowe MP @RupertLowe10]

A statement from the Rape Gang Inquiry.

[Rupert Lowe MP @RupertLowe10]

A few reflections on our first week of inquiry hearings.

Firstly, and I’ll be entirely honest, it’s harder than I thought it would be.

I cannot adequately describe the evil that these girls have gone through. Rape doesn’t do it justice.

It’s torture, it’s abduction, it’s war.

What strikes me is the consistency of the testimonies. It’s the same playbook, almost every time. We suspect there is FAR more coordination than is currently understood. Far more. The same names come up, with the same tactics, in the same towns. They are organised. More organised than we know. It’s almost like a well-drilled army. And it continues today, make no mistake about that.

What’s so difficult is that the men use both physical and psychological torture to beat these girls into submission. They accept it. They believe it’s the right thing for them. That’s what makes it so wicked for families. Some have been fortunate, escaping or being extracted. But how many haven’t? How many remain trapped, today? Some even overseas. How many girls have been abducted to Pakistan?

Where honestly, the thought of their life there is too much to even start to comprehend.

One woman we spoke to was raped by 600 - 700 men in England. What would be happening to them there?

The systemic failures across the police, NHS, social care, local politics, councils - specific and brutal examples of how these officials just did not care. Even worse, actively enabled the rape.

Of course the girls hold such deep hatred for their rapists, but actually for many the true anger is aimed at the state. I understand that. These were the people tasked to defend them, and they failed in the most brutal way.

As I have said, we are identifying targets for private prosecutions and other legal action - this will cover the rapists, accomplices and public officials who deliberately turned the other way, or worse.

One message is clear - the Muslim community needs to do far more to root these people out. I don’t believe the reaction is anywhere near strong enough. We had one testimony this week of the imam being fully aware of what was happening, but did nothing. This comes up again and again. Nobody wants to say it, but it’s true. I want to see these so-called ‘community leaders’ very vocally act.

The vast scale of the rape is impossible to comprehend.

It was everywhere. It is everywhere.

These are just my thoughts, but everything will be put into a comprehensive report by our legal team.

It’s been a challenging week for the team, and I want to say thank you to all involved - particularly our safeguarding team who are working all hours to ensure the survivors have the support they need. Everything we are releasing has the full permission of the individuals involved, and we are taking absolutely zero risks with any release. The safety and wellbeing of the participants is our only priority.

Thank you to all of our donors who made this possible, and those who continue to give. It is appreciated. It will be well spent, I promise you that.

And to the survivors who have put themselves forward to stop the same fate happening to others - you’re doing more good than you will ever know.

[Rupert Lowe MP @RupertLowe10]

I note the BBC is reporting on its main page the third title of the new Gruffalo book, whether olive oil is good for gut health and an actor's attempt to learn a northern accent in the bath.

Not a single word on our rape gang inquiry. Nothing.

They jumped into action to discredit our inquiry last year and failed, being forced to issue an apology.

Now the hearings have begun, and brave survivors are telling their stories for the first ever time?

Total silence.

You can't hate the BBC enough.

[Rupert Lowe MP @RupertLowe10]

I want to see senior police officers in prison.

With the evidence we are collecting, there is simply no way hundreds of men and women right at the top of their forces were not aware of the rapes. Hundreds, if not more.

Politicians, police, council officials, NHS, social care - all of them.

If they knew, and did nothing.

They shouldn’t just be sacked, they should be prosecuted.

A lot of people need to go to prison.

[mild blur @mildblur]

@stevedowd92798 @AcademicAgent_X We're playing a rigged game in a rigged system. Why play by the rules?

[Rupert Lowe MP @RupertLowe10]

I often think about what happened during lockdown, thanks to men like Zahawi. All seemingly forgotten, like it never happened. Our darkest period of recent history.

The pressure that people came under to take that vaccine was appalling. State-endorsed blackmail from Zahawi and others.

People lost their jobs, their livelihoods. For some, even their lives. And that isn't 'anti-vax' or whatever else. It's the truth.

The sheer volume of messages I have received over the last few days from those affected has been heartbreaking.

I see Reform are dropping in the polls since their warm welcome for him, and I entirely understand why.

The man stated that children could overrule their parents to take that vaccine.

Just think about that. It is evil. I'm sorry, there is no other word for it - for so many different reasons.

To see that man back in frontline politics with Reform makes me feel sick. I have no doubt we'll soon see him running for Parliament. I will campaign against him, and I hope you all join me.

I made my opposition abundantly clear to his vaccine mandate filth at the time, and my position has not changed one inch since.

[mild blur @mildblur]

@modesthominid @Jordmcl1 @doctor_rahmeh Did she praise Israel?

[mild blur @mildblur]

@firasmodad This exchanges confirms everything about Reform. It's just Tories 2.0. Letting this scum into the party is a very bad idea.

[Jim Ferguson @JimFergusonUK]

BREAKING:🚨 REFORM’S VACCINE FRAUD IS NOW ON FULL DISPLAY

What just happened with Nadhim Zahawi exposed something very ugly inside Reform UK.

A journalist asked about the mRNA rollout — and instead of answering, Zahawi and Farage attacked the question itself.

Why?

Because the truth is politically radioactive.

Let’s be clear about who these people are:

Nadhim Zahawi

He was the Conservative minister who ran the UK’s Covid vaccine deployment — one of the most aggressive mRNA campaigns in British history.

Mandates.
Coercion.
Travel restrictions.
Social pressure.

All of it happened on his watch.

Now he’s being welcomed into Reform as if nothing happened.

Dr David Bull
Reform’s chairman.

He has repeatedly praised mass vaccination campaigns and defended the Covid programme.

He aligned himself with establishment medicine, not critics of it.

Now he is supposed to be the voice of “free speech” on health?

Richard Tice

Reform’s former leader.

He openly supported the government’s vaccine programme.

He supported vaccine passports.

He backed the idea that people who refused the jab should lose freedoms like flying.

That is not resistance.
That is compliance.

So when a journalist dares to ask whether Reform actually questions the mRNA rollout, Zahawi explodes and calls it “a stupid question”.

Of course he does.

Because Reform is trying to pretend it represents vaccine sceptics while filling its leadership with the very people who enforced the system.

This isn’t unity.
It’s deception.

You cannot claim to oppose authoritarian health policy while recruiting the architects of it.

And you cannot build a freedom movement by importing ex-Cabinet ministers who still defend the biggest medical experiment in modern British history.

Reform UK is not a clean break from the system.

It is the system, rebranded.

[Peter McCormack 🏴‍☠️🇬🇧🇮🇪 @PeterMcCormack]

Imagine if the Labour Party had taken rape gangs as serious as bikini photos on X.

Probably going to jail for saying this.