julietOscarEcho

OP shits on fossil fuels elsewhere. My money's on useful idiots. I'm just butthurt that the nuclear community is bigger than most of the things I actually care about getting content on.

I'm broadly pro-nuclear if that was what you're going for but seriously, you're going with "land use"? Wind farms can collocate with agriculture easily, and solar can happily go on rooftops. Try looking out of the car/train window next time you travel, you'll learn a lot. Offshore literally doesn't use land. So the only leg you have to stand on is hydro (excluding tidal or microhydro).

The argument's already lost for goodness sake, there are plenty of places near enough 100% renewables already.

Randall Munroe would be embarrassed to see his cartoon so misused BTW.

You're throwing out unevidenced, and frankly not very relevant, generalizations again.

Can you honestly not see that a man why literally describes women as inherently chaotic, and men as inherently ordered, who advocates openly for "forced monogamy", is hateful. If so I guess we have nothing more to say to each other. Just because he dresses it up in flowery language doesn't make it less repulsive.

I guess concessions are better than nothing. But I have a similar feeling about alienation from Starmer labour. I was, at least in principal, in favour of moderation of policy to get more electoral success. I'm getting a "not like that" illustration of why I was wrong in real time.

Exactly. Your example about onshore wind (bird conservation as a convenient figleaf) shows precisely that NIMBYs are not environmentalists at all, hence not in "group1" by definition.

Do they? Do you have any evidence of that.

I'm going to be generous and assume you haven't read his work, at least not critically. You should go listen to the episodes of the "behind the bastards" podcast about him or read more or less anything written about him:

https://blog.apaonline.org/2018/02/20/why-are-so-many-young-men-drawn-to-jordan-petersons-intellectual-misogyny/

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/18/style/jordan-peterson-12-rules-for-life.html

Edit with non paywalled link

http://archive.today/8bBl4

He's being "made fun of" because he's a misogynist, a sophist, and a hypocrite. The crying is incidental. Less obviously heinous people overwhelmingly receive sympathy in their vulnerability. If I'm getting your argument right you're saying: "people are mean to men who cry so indeed men shouldn't cry". The takeaway is surely, "be less of a dickhead" rather than "cry less".

I don't know why you'd think that given that the language is used specifically in rejection of miliband's green agenda which includes extensive investment in green energy.

You seem to have both set up a weird "group 1" strawman (that if it really exists is entirely marginalised from the actual debate) and an idealised version of starmer that doesn't correspond with his expressed views.

It's funny when - a man who spent his career reinforcing the bullshit societal biases that make it harder for men to share emotions - cries and shares his emotions.

Fixed that for you. Decidedly not sacasm.

I am sorry that he had to suffer such trauma, but hopefully it helps people realise how full of shit he was.

Is there a particular mechanism are you worried about in that regard? Off the top of my head there's the Overton window type stuff and just the elimination of the leftist voice that has historically come from labour. I'm more scared of the tories figuring their shit out and realising that all they have to do is not say the quiet part out loud to be electable again, which is kind of independent of starmer.

Around 2010 a friend of mine made noises about getting into politics. They said they'd join the tory party not because they sided with them on policy or liked their ethos, but because they'd be "winning for a long time so that was the only way to have any impact". At the time it put me off my friend, but really I should have taken this as a lesson about where politicians come from and their motivation. Starmer just seems like a prime example of someone who sees the game as more important than the people of this country. Is that definitionally true of "centrists"? I can't believe a principled person can look at the state of the nation and think. Yes, we need to very urgently make no major changes.

JV is spending guys to make it hard earlier in the climbs. If they didn't have kuss rip everyone's legs off pacing he could stay with them later probably same with other top tier climbing domestiques (and if they only cared about tour they would definitely have had roglic here). I thought today it was a mistake pacing so hard because they could have forced pogi to attack Jonas while he still had domestiques. It's super interesting because they're so finely matched it's not clear what the best strategy is and it probably changes day to day.