malumbu

The Horniman museum feels like a creche at times, parents chatting or looking at their phones allowing the kids to run around. I went to the Eden Project a few years ago and there were signs not to bother the species of birds that inhabit the ground in tropical areas, they are probably flightless. I saw a three or four your old chasing them, and foolishly told him to stop rather than tell the parents. I got a how dare you tell our child what to do. How dare you let your child run amok when there are signs telling you not to do this. etc etc Oh dear I have turned into my father.

Because it obviously was not a scam, and the subject quickly changed to the matter in hand, ie a leak. I've contributed positively to the discussion but I am finding the title misleading, It was put up in good faith, and perhaps time to change it. Sensible suggestion? If you didn't like what I said would have been easier to ignore it rather than get into a pointless argument.

Don't really understand why you, or other passengers, did not press the crew button and ask them to ask the parent/s to look after the child. It was dangerous. Including to the child. Confused.

In deed, nutter is the appropriate term. You appear to have identified as one. So a few facts, medical experts, epidemiologists (people who look at statistics on illness and death) and other experts have determined that Nitrogen dioxide and soot particles are toxic. In amounts seen in ambient air, that is the stuff that we breath in, they lead to lung and heart issues, and other illnesses. The main source is from motor vehicles. A coroners' court in Lewisham found that air pollution was the cause of death of a teenager. 'Reduce the number of older more polluting vehicles with newer cleaner vehicles will reduce this pollution. Until maybe 15 years ago education and knowledge was seen to be a good thing, something we should aspire to, and something that would improve society. And then along came the populist politicians, most from rather entitled backgrounds, money, private education and the like, spreading the message that it is good to look down on expertise and education, and that we can all find information that supports some extreme counter-argument, particularly on line. And people fall for this. Generally this nonsense is shared on FB, Nextdoor.com and LinkedIn. Not often here You ask what the multiple factors are that determine levels of pollution, these include: Weather, atmospheric turbulence, wind direction, determines how pollution is dispersed Topography (hills etc) Urban environment, buildings can stop pollution dispersing, trees and greenery can trap pollution Vehicle speed and density Vehicle type, trucks, buses, cars, motorbikes, diesel/petrol, electric, exhaust treatment and the condition of this, engine tuning, engine condition, condition of air filters, temperature of the exhaust. How vehicles are driven, smoother driving = less emissions Can you tell me all about these? So this is not an easy thing to assess going forward (you cannot measure things that have not happened). Forecasting the weather is a similar matter, and the development of super computers in the 60s and 70s, ultimately leading to the digital age we now live in. But there are downsides too, including the amount of nonsense made up that is on line. Going back to the start of my conversation above https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supercomputer I'm not sure if you are for real or some hoax trying to stir things up (and if you are, well you've caught me out, but on the positive allowed me to post some truths).

Perhaps the OP could change the title of this thread as clearly nobody is being scammed. Or Admin.

Oh dear Hen, get one and enjoy the benefits, Although I am afraid it is unlikely that you will be breaking the speed limit.

This was a fascinating meta study carried out under the Tories when there was general support for 20mph. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5bf2bab940f0b6078acc6f4d/20mph-headline-report.pdf It's a bit difficult to wade through but shows that around half of drivers exceed 20mph in residential areas, and 16 % when 20mph were adopted on roads that run freely ie where there is more congestion drivers adapt better to 20mph as they are used to doing lower speeds. There are threads discussing 20mph and I have posted it before, but with the interest on this thread in somehow enforcing a 20mph limit for cyclists when very few do this speed I thought it worth reminding you. Shame that more wasn't done after the publication of this report. 20mph zones have been with us for a number of years and new drivers will have learned on these roads.

Barmy conspiracy theorist, the flu jab causes cancer and Covid was a hoax to control us by the international Freemasons/wokerati! Climate change is real, just think about the last 25 years. C40 is aspirational and I doubt whether cities have many powers but eating less meat (I'll let David Attenborough explain that to you) and reducing air flights is something we all should be doing.

Do you cycle? Unless (a) you are a competitive racer (b) going down hill with no traffic (c) on an illegal bike few cyclists do this speed. Rather than daft suggestions like this start of with getting motorists sticking to 20mph And, has been said too many times not practicable to have speedometers on bikes.

Not particularly interested in the application, unsure on what the planning officers views are, maybe that it is rejected or recommended for rejection in any case, although ultimately developers appeal and often get decisions overturned so better if the planning officers work with the developer to get something more suitable. With so many objections I expect that there will be some action. My only point is the many comments on student accommodation. I am sure that some of you were students once, and that does not always mean you can rent within walking distance of the college. Particularly so in London. If you feel developers are cashing in too much on the easy option then please do write to Ellie to try to influence the government's agenda. Whoever lives there then they deserve suitable space, light, windows, common areas etc. If it is students I would expect that not many will be bringing cars. A development closer to me was paused as council wanted more family accommodation rather than one and two bedroom apartments. Developers got this decision overturned. and that was it, after the building had been left as a concrete skeleton for quite some time. View is that all the apartments were sold off plan, to overseas investors, buy to rent. Again an issue for government, particularly where investors are money laundering. There is much empty new build in London I understand owned by overseas investors. https://www.standard.co.uk/homesandproperty/property-news/why-so-many-empty-homes-in-london-b1077385.html

Ah the CPT, yes I time travel back to the time when it was very different. Quizzes were splendid.

So there are 3 threads complaining about cyclists, three complaining about LTNs, four if you include pedestrianisation/Dulwich square, two complaining about enforcement/driving penalties, one complaining about a possible CPZ and if you go back a little further complaints about the ULEZ extension. And this one where there is a complaint against an X feed about dangerous road users. Many of these are interchangable such as this thread now complaining about cycling. An alien from another planet may surmise that the citizens of SE London are very car centric. Fortunately there are many of us who consider the measures above that encourage less driving and more active travel, with all the benefits that this brings, are a good thing.

This thread is about an X feed that highlights dangerous behaviour of road users. There are other threads for people who specifically dislike cyclists.

To put the boot on the other foot it amused me in the 90s into the 00s when the Dulwich Woodhouse very much welcomed families in the day, particularly at weekends, when the garden was open, but not when the garden was shut. Happy to take the money when the sun shined. I remember one cold but sunny day being told that kids were unwelcome, but then made them open the door to the garden. Still a much better pub in those days, as was the Clock and all of the Young's estate, irrespective of the old couple who managed it for years. I met them in the Morpeth near the Tate when they had moved to there's about 15 years ago, and they complained about running the Woodhouse There is a sensible balance in letting families in it can go wrong in both ways.

So?

Good luck! A feature of the new millennium is pubs pretending to be restaurants, but just serving generic food, with much of it, if not all of it, preprepared. And at near restaurant prices. Sad that when I eat in pubs my expectations are low ... But.... Sometimes it's a nice surprise and hope Cherry Tree delivers. Bit late but the Waverley in Nunhead is good in my experience.

Bit of a daft thread, or a fun one until people started to be serious

Good please boycott. I'll enjoy my evening drink with adults. I've done the pub/kids stuff, but not entitled!

Wheels for Wellbeing do a wonderful job, thanks for raising. Do visit them at Herne Hill Velodrome https://wheelsforwellbeing.org.uk/our-campaigns/campaigning/guide/

Babur but maybe sold out

Upper Dulwich bottom Describes locations just off Dulwich, that pretend they are. And a private joke from another community site on a distant planet.

The comments in the BBC article are telling, sentiment along the lines that why did it take the UK so long, and a no brainer

When I moved to London many moons ago I was shocked that people bought sandwiches. Surely, I thought, everybody makes their own. Still haven't got my head around it. I'd be disappointed if M&S threw sandwiches away. Pret for example is known to donate unsold ones to charity. https://foodservicefootprint.com/pret-a-manger-fighting-food-waste/ Maybe I should write to Ellie asking her to speak to the Food minister.

South Dulwich, the new front line

Yes, and there is a great discussion about this on the South Dulwich Forum, apparently some people from Sydenham Hill are a bit grumpy about the name change.