numbers

unlurked Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The only permanence is change. It's a cafe. Get > over it. twat.

and the Giant Peach.

that's so cool re the telephone layouts, never thought how ingrained they've become or how different they could have been. can't see the difference between IV-A and VI-A. am so glad 'they' didn't opt for II-B or V-B. confusing or what!

Jeremy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Oh yeah, you're right. I've not darkened that > particular doorstep in a few years! I only wish I could say the same! Needless to say by that stage, no-one cares about the layout or ambience of the place just the late opening hours :))

The ritzy used to be my local back in the 90s,my flatmate used to work there so we got discount. Give me Peckhamplex anyday, love that cinema. Used to go there every week when I lived nearby, sadly missed, you jammy gits have it on your doorstep :(

2degreesfrommadness Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > You got: Overground! > You?ve recently undergone a period of significant > personal growth - you?re almost unrecognizable > from the old you. You stay cool where others would > get hot and bothered. i got Overground too. No idea why. Have hardly travelled on that line. Thought I'd get eastbound central line for some reason. anyway, Louisa, do tell... what did you get?

the road. the butcher boy.

cool story bro'

can't decide upon a 0/10 or whether to say that the old french wine chain (nicolas) used to sell it in jars on the counter. (I think any animal would waddle up to its 'feeder', sadly even if it were suffering) :(

dunno about TLS as before my time but who on here genuinely likes 'piling in' using 'for safety in numbers' as a reason for that? I'd like to think people don't need to do that. don't get what you mean by 'post not poster'. calling forumites a 'don't know any better' or 'nasty piece of work' etc and talking down to them didn't endear them to many, absolutely no co-operation involved in individuals' response to that. (that's the ones that were 'brave' enough to respond, others may have been put off, more's the pity).

you get nimbys no matter what energy source you choose. onshore is worse than offshore as there's even less capacity. no matter where you are in the UK you will never have enough to provide your energy need; if you're lucky you'll get 20%. as for wind power being akin to 1990s mobile technology - its not a coal seam you can go out and mine; its variable and there's not that much energy for what you want or need to do. try smelting steel or aluminium using only wind power, it won't work.

???? Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Personally, I thought "people" did gang up on UDT > and felt it was cliquey...genuinely seriously quids? fair enough if that's your impression but... look back at the poster in question: the prevailing attitude was one of 'superiority' towards the majority of posters on this forum (whether they be regulars, 'cliquers', infrequent posters, one-offs or not). It was quite often, disingenuous and dishonest too. First time I plucked up the courage to post on here, I was taken to task by one of the moderators who didn't happen to share my view. But you know, you move on, you don't call 'clique' and....you might find you can respect people's differing viewpoints, even those that *shock horror* may be diametrically opposed to yours. Something, I'm afraid, certain posters could not.

Hickory, sorry to hear of your terrible experience. Glad to hear you're okay and that people stepped in to help. That stretch of road is scary, about well over a year ago I was followed by a bloke on a bike although he didn't make any verbal threats just intimidated and unnerved me as he cycled alongside, then went ahead, stopped, seemed to be waiting on me. It was around a similar time in the evening and I was relieved when other people appeared ahead. I hope the police are able to follow your case up given the verbal threats you received.

StraferJack Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Coal finite, deep or no > > Wind, not so much > > Surely? Depending on how you work it, lets say at least 100+ years of coal. Wind doesn't blow all the time and when it doesn't you use coal of gas as other renewables don't produce enough back up. A lot of coal we use now to provide back up for eg wind is imported.

You're all clearly operating in a pack here.you know who you are.

StraferJack Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Decent article MM but largely defensive about > arguments in America Er...that's Robert Mair who chaired the committee of which report I linked to earlier in thread. That cut and paste is essentially a rehash of the reports key findings. > > Main concern I have encountered in uk is one of > scale. Can the pros outweigh the cons in a vastly > smaller geographical space. Forget cons.. Can > fracking generate anything like the positives seen > in us? Energy bills going way down for example... > Can anyone see that happening here? Strafer, you've raised an excellent point about reductions in energy bills. There's nowhere near the volume of suitable shale in the UK. However it will produce some gas, not enough to make a huge difference but I don't think it will be the bonanza that government are hoping for. However it will give us more energy security the more we can produce the less we rely on imports which in itself is 'greener'. Onshore coal bed methane has produced negligible amounts to date and uses similar techniques. If we subsidised british deep mine coal the same way we have subsidised wind would provide guaranteed generation capacity whenever we needed it and do a log more to reduce our energy bills.

oh tempting isn't it (but no, I won't).

(subsequently edited) duplicate posts edit: wtf

it was just sussing things out AM, that's all. No harm done. cats just want to check if you are: a) a complete sucker b) a complete sucker and c) a complete sucker once they've established that you check not one, but all three boxes, they will then blatantly move in and insidiously begin Operation Overthrow Your Household. Mission completed. The End.

LondonMix Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Yes though I think earlier in the post others were > referring to U... that was my thinking too LondonMix! anyway, on the subject of the venerable H, I had my fair share of run-ins with him. He could be breathtakingly rude at times but I feel the place lacking without his intelligent and humorous contributions (am i really typing this?). Just goes to show if you can see past the sometimes arsey posts, there were helpful contributions too. A bully though? Never.

haha good one, take it this is in response to that other thread?

I daren't look. I can barely complete the (algebra) homework belonging to my friend's 7yo.

you receive a certificate in the post, signed by the Administrator* with a special wax seal and everything. (or a kindly moderator) PS what Otta said! pls don't disappear again, the forum was rubbish without you.

Hooch, used twenties you say? How about you nominate me and we split the proceeds. Just in case your mother is double-booked y'see. Email: numbers@hasasenseofhumouraccesstogroundfloorletsnotdiscussage.co.uk

marmora man, "The UK Government?s Chief Scientific Adviser, Sir John Beddington FRS, asked the Royal Society and the Royal Academy of Engineering to review the scientific and engineering evidence and consider whether the risks associated with hydraulic fracturing (often termed ?fracking?) as a means to extract shale gas could be managed effectively in the UK." key findings and link to report here - http://royalsociety.org/policy/projects/shale-gas-extraction/report/