Nicely done :-)Quote:
Originally Posted by IUFG
No fan of The Who, no?
Arguably London's finest band (that should flush out the Iron Maiden fans....)
Printable View
Nicely done :-)Quote:
Originally Posted by IUFG
No fan of The Who, no?
Arguably London's finest band (that should flush out the Iron Maiden fans....)
The Clash?Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter
:hehe: :clap:Quote:
Originally Posted by IUFG
Now Pedro, there's taking the piss and then there's that :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter
Following I's retort is like going onstage after the Stones, but I'll try it anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter
War, famine and genocide will inevitably have a certain rhythm to them, unlike The Who.
I like The Clash, but no!Quote:
Originally Posted by PSRB
Has to be said, London have never been awash with world class bands.......
Funny you should say that. You know in the early part of their career The Who had a clause in their contract that nobody ever went on after them. By the end of the 60s they dropped that clause, as nobody was willing to go on after them.....Quote:
Originally Posted by WES
Speaking of which, do we class The Stones as a London band? If so, obviously I retract my earlier claim......
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter
Well, the greatest album of all time was from a London based outfit, of course
https://www.leftfieldmusic.com/wp-co...sm-300x300.jpg
The Who? They had their moments, I suppose.
Indeed. Well played :-\Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter
Yes, of course. Nice retraction, Pedro, it has made my respect for your musical views increase, ever so slightly. :-)Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter
Mick and Keith are from Dartford, Brian Jones from Gloucestershire. Bill and Charlie are the only Londoners. It is debatable......Quote:
Originally Posted by WES
The Who are proper Londoners, across the board.
Obviously, The Stones are comfortably the superior band. Not even close.
I don't want to dislike Maiden, I really don't. I just can't help it.... :-(Quote:
Originally Posted by redgunamo
Agreed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter
In reverse order, the only solution would be intl agreement and we won't get it. It will be every nation state for itself. {cf Egypt doing gas deals on the side of the last COP.} Anyone who thinks any oil exporting country will leave a drop in the ground is deluded. We're ****ed. And as Lovelock said around 15-20 years ago, we might as well all give up and razz Ferraris cos it's over. It's too late. The planet's dead. And this is the real life Q, not some manky hippy I've met 'round the fire at a free festy.
But re: the hopelessness. We don't have kids, we believe the Hindu idea that we're living in the age of Kali Yug, and am therefore more accepting of the idea that it's all over. All life if just part of the Divine. There is still 1bn years before the sun expands. The dinosaurs went 65mya. There's more than enough time for intelligent life to re-evolve and learn from our mistakes.
I have no problem with your cynicism, your fear for your kid's descendents, your hatred of humanity's selfishness in the wake of this issue.
But please don't question the science when you haven't studied it cos it makes you sound like a flat-earther and you're better than that.
Lovelock said razz Ferraris. I say take drugs and dance. You might as well just enough yourself and if you can take tiny actions to relieve the suffering of others along the way - give a quid to a beggar, bung a bag of sugar in the foodbank bit at the supermarket - then do it.
I prefer The Who to the Stones.Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter
To be fair, I didn't question the science. I questioned my ability to question it. As the great man said, I don't criticise what I can't understand.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ganpati's Goonerz--AFC's Aboriginal Fertility Cult
I know a couple of flat earthers. They are a great night out :hehe::hehe:
Oh, come on......... :-(Quote:
Originally Posted by Ganpati's Goonerz--AFC's Aboriginal Fertility Cult
:yikes: :yikes: :yikes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Ganpati's Goonerz--AFC's Aboriginal Fertility Cult
SAY IT AIN'T SO GG!!!
Keith Richards is a genius, and I don't use that term lightly. He isn't a beautiful guitar player, but what he plays is beautiful.Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter
I sometimes listen to the videos on youtube of someone playing his guitar lines from Stones songs. I think I like them better than the songs themselves.
Tumbling Dice being my favourite. Honky Tonk Women and Midnight Rambler slightly behind. Genius.
Fairy Nuff. I just wish more people wouldn't criticise what they can't understand. That's why, ceteris paribus, I tend to go with the academic consensus.Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter
With The Stones it is the groove, for me, particularly Tumbling Dice. They were at their best when Mick Taylor was in the band. That is him playing slide on Tumbling Dice.Quote:
Originally Posted by WES
The writers and critics who prophesize with their pen? They should keep their eyes wide, the chance wont come again.... :-)Quote:
Originally Posted by Ganpati's Goonerz--AFC's Aboriginal Fertility Cult
'Fraid so, WES. Never really got into the Stones. I reckon it was having 2 Scousers in my posse at uni. They got me into Dylan and Floyd, but because of The Beatles, I think they refused to believe there was another band at the same time.Quote:
Originally Posted by WES
Btw, LSE in '89 had loads of Scousers there. You'd see them in the common room and all they'd say was "The Beatles, la. Bill Shankly, la." I didn't know what this meant so I got a Lonely Planet Scouse-English phrasebook. Apparently it translates as "We have the greatest rock band and the greatest football team in history. Bow down before your new Scouse overlords."
{Though tbf, it was the fact that they were so gracious about Anfield '89 that meant I really got on with them. And living with 2 in my second year when we won the league 1990-91, beating them home and away, again they were gracious in defeat and respected us for deserving the title.}
But I prefer Daltrey's voice. I prefer Pete Townsend's guitar. I prefer the Mod vibe. And the rhythm section blows the Stones away. Basically, Keef Moon's an inspiration to us all.
Chapeau, P.Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter
Some people find The Stones a bit dull. **** knows why, but there you go....Quote:
Originally Posted by WES
Townshend hated Keith Moon's drumming. He felt it ruined the songs and forced everyone else to do his job and keep time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ganpati's Goonerz--AFC's Aboriginal Fertility Cult
Daltrey has a great voice but Mick is basically the Jesus of rock n roll frontmen. It all comes from him.
Beggars Banquet/ Sticky Fingers/ Let it Bleed/ Exile on Main Street/ Goats Head Soup. Greatest run of rock albums ever made and you don't need the rest of it. You can find the roots of virtually every rock band since in those albums.
Any band you can't find in there, you'll find in The Who. :-)
Good call on GHS there, Peter, very underrated. Angie, Heartbreaker, Silver Train and Star Star, there's four very good songs just there.Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter
Winter is a great songQuote:
Originally Posted by WES
I used to work in forensic healthcare, g.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ganpati's Goonerz--AFC's Aboriginal Fertility Cult
20 clinicians in a room.
20 different diagnoses made.
20 people in the room believe theirs is correct and the other 19 are wrong.
Science, eh?
Quite, the whole point of science is to question it. Climate change seems the exceptionQuote:
Originally Posted by IUFG
oh, it is changing alright.Quote:
Originally Posted by PSRB
it is what it does, apparently.
I think GGs point is that is quite normal. So on the rare times when all 20 actually agree......Quote:
Originally Posted by IUFG
There is huge funding available to those wishing to question/ challenge/ disrupt the orthodoxy of climate change. You have to ask why nobody has conducted anything even approaching legitimacy.Quote:
Originally Posted by PSRB
Apparently it has. There was a map doing the rounds awhile ago, showing the all of the London boroughs and the prominent bands each had spawned. Mostly highly-questionable stuff but with the caveat that since the industry was traditionally centred in London, almost all of them could vaguely claim to hail from the capital.Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter
The only real funding is from the oil industry for this.Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter
And any outcome will be shot down because it is funded by the oil industry.
:nod: plenty of disputers who've had funding cut.Quote:
Originally Posted by IUFG
Michael Mann hockey stick still being used, even though it's been disproved and plenty of climatards pushing for prison sentences for people disputing it.
I hate the fact that "Michael Mann" shares a name with Michael Mann :-\Quote:
Originally Posted by PSRB
Any dissenting voice will be shut down. You need the funding to make it public. There are a LOT of people out there who want to hear this.Quote:
Originally Posted by IUFG
Fortunately Big Oil funds both sides; it's just business.Quote:
Originally Posted by IUFG
I recall a paper that said if the entire atmosphere was the Height of the Elizabeth Tower (Big Ben), CO2 would be 1.5 inches of its entire height.Quote:
Originally Posted by PSRB
of that 1.5 inches, man(or woman. thank you, sister)-made CO2 is 2mm of it.
and it is that 2mm that obviously controls the climate.
Make you think. Innit.
Yup. Exactly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter
The other difference is that in academia, everyone has to show their workings in detail and everyone then has a lot of time to look into their workings and debate them amongst the whole community.
In the climate case, that would be very complex multiple regressions with people showing their workings for the weighting given to each variable. The community can then see how predictions have worked out over time and discuss how the weighting should change accordingly or if there are other variables that need to be considered and added to the regression.
And over the last 35 years, we've seen the models being refined as the whole community debates the incoming evidence against the model predictions and they're getting more and more accurate with greater consensus.
As you say, if after 3 decades of debating it {and all of them ringing up all their mates and getting their input} the 20 clinicians all agree then it suggests they may be right. {Just a pity that the patient's basically died in the meantime.}