Roundtable Discussion; The Future of Mineral Sands. Watch the video here.
London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
Slug of course I didn't say that.
Why would anyone say that BHP would want 70% of Solgolds 85% share of ENSA.
Like madhatter post the link.
I think I know what you are on about, but going to let you make an even bigger fool of yourself as I didn't say what you said I said.
Carry on post the date and time I said that and we can look at it.
Be quick as you will be gone soon.
More lies from Slug.
Just show me a post where I said BHP only wanted 59.5% of ENSA.
I have never said that.
As I have often said the most unintelligent poster on here, however kat2008 is challenging him for the title recently.
Does Quady being wrong about something make your temperature gaffs less embarrassing? Because I don't care about what Quady has said. I want to taste the sweet victory of seeing you admit the depth of your stupidity
He won't be able to post a link,a quady. It really is this easy to out them. If it were a sport, they'd have to introduce some new rules to make it more challenging, because we're in 'fish in a barrel' territory here.
Slug says he doesn't hate women, but then goes to prove he does,
Madpunter please just post the link and let me investigate.
Don't change the subject.
Everyone knew smoking was harmful, so why didn't governments just ban it? Too much revenue from tax, which is also the reason why alcohol doesn't get banned. The elite want to still smoke their cigars and drink fabulous wines and the occasional beer, cider or spirits. It's all about controlling the masses. Everything that's projected today by governments equates to the opposite. Freedom of movement = 15 minute cities and no movement; freedom of speech = cancel culture if just one word offends; and equality = inequality.
You can't do it, can you? You can't admit you were wrong about something as simply as the temperature is Sicily. It's baffling how hard you're digging in over something that everyone here can just google. Or is Google part of the illuminati too? 🤣
The phrase of the day today is :
Peer Review.
That's
Peer Review.
A new phrase of the day will be available tomorrow.
Madpunter I have looked at 14 is the new 15 and can only see articles about teenage girls.
Could you post a link please, so I can take a look.
Slug, is 46.7 closer to 48 or 35?
Come on, you can do it. You can admit you were wrong and try to wipe just a tiny corner of your slate clean.
OK Madpunter you live up to your name.
You are mad.
If you are just looking at google and cannot produce a peer review study, then what you are looking at is false.
Reasoning: If the story you looked at was correct then in order to change the modelling many peer reviewed studies would have been required to explain why the modelling was changed.
I only asked for one.
This should have been your first point of call to check the story.
Sure other checks need to be undertaken but peer review remains the best way to scrutinize the science.
The smoking argument is null and void.
It was the Tobacco companies that said smoking was good for you.
It was independent scientists peer review process that exposed them.
Quady - Just look at early IPCC statements or Google 14 is the new 15. Lots of references to the change in the average temperature.
Peer reviewed means nothing. For decades peer reviewed research showed that smoking wasn't harmful. Research Council's are made up of company directors with vested interests. When stopping smoking became a tool to close pubs, the funding came for research on passive smoking. ASH funded a 30 year study, but pulled the plug with 28 months to go, as it proved it wasn't harmful (I don't smoke), and the two scientists, who were very anti-smoking had to go cap in hand to the tabaco industry to get funding to publish their work.
If you were rational thinkers who could read and make decisions for yourself, you'd see all the evidence pointing to the scientists being right and you being wrong. Much as I'm not trying to stop you crying into a steal, please don't feel the need to try and 'wake us up' from this self-imposed obsession we have with empirical observations and rational conclusions - I think we're doing just fine without you 🤣
Madpunter you are missing the point you hear a story that supports your world view and you latch onto it and ignore all the evidence.
I am not familiar with the story.
You may be right as science remodels all the time on facts.
Please post the link to the story and just one peer reviewed study that said the models were wrong, and I will look into it.
Haha! Madpunter has personally lifted the lid on an international cover up, and slug is now suggesting one must 'believe' in measurable climate change 🤦 Where do they breed these ones?!
Quady- If the science is right, how come it was wrong by 1°C for decades and had to totally change the methodology based on over 50 computer models. What's the odds for all these models being wrong and all wrong in the same direction?
Explain how the World was much warmer during Mediaeval times and why the levels of CO2 were multiples today's levels during the last few ice ages.
It's simple, there's no correlation between temperature and CO2. It's only linked to enable taxes and control.
I've met many prominent scientists and media personalities and argued my points. Most have eventually asked to see my phone and having made me turn it off and emptied my pockets, they have then admitted that they don't believe in MMGW, but are scared of losing their jobs.
Oh dear that well known fool Slug becomes even more foolish by the minute.
He has been proven totally wrong on Covid, but doesn't even understand it.
Before we had the vaccine, thousands were dying everyday in the UK.
This was replicated around the world.
It was the scientists that saved us, and we owe them a debt which can never be repaid.
You are vile in every way.
Man posting voluntarily on internet forum for stock he doesn't understand claims unknown body of nefarious illuminati types are trying to 'digitally imprison' him. This is too freaking delicious for words. 🤌
i think your tin hat is on a bit tight, slug. let some oxygen up there occasionally. and i'm sure your cars are lovely. did you see greta's reply to that tool tate when he got all hot under the collar about his ***** extensions? she burnt him alive, poor chap 🤣
Madpunter you are making the same arguments the fools that are climate deniers make.
None of the points raised by you address the man made element.
Try reading the science.
Why not start with NOAA.
The worlds leading authority.
Scientists agree because the evidence matches the theory. If it ever doesn't, the theory gets changed, and gets tested again. Unlike conspiracy theories, where the theory often changes to get further from the truth. As for these conspiracy theories being easy to disprove, they really are: See the article I posted the other day 👍
And you do you, sluggy my love. Laws, new and existing, will guide you but you're able to break any you like, so long as you know the risks.
You have a real chip on your shoulder about those of us with nice cars- did you grow up poor and life hasn't panned out as you hoped? Hope your bit of steak makes it up to you 😊
As for solg: SC has been trying to work the media lately, it would seem, but there's been no break out into the wider investment press. I think solg are the company that cried wolf, so we'll have to plough on for another few years to get any wider traction. Good job we don't all need a quick payday!
This is why Slug is the most unintelligent poster on here. And a complete fool.
This is what he posted a few minutes ago.
This is simply about money. Immiserate and impoverish the naive fools so they can't get enjoy the life the rich have.
I have been totally taken in by David Attenborough according to Slug.
According to Slug David Attenborough doesn't care about the planet, he is here to scare the poor people so the rich can continue with their lifestyles.
Just beyond unintelligent.
GOODBYE SLUG.
Try debunking the fact that the IPCC and all 50+ computer models, were wrong about the drop in temperature from 15°C to 14.62°C, and that they manipulated the figures decades later to give the results that they wanted. This was what made me leave Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth etc. and why the co-founder of Greenpeace left ( someone who put his life on the line for the environment, when driving a RIB in the way of the French Navy's guns, when they tried to sink the Rainbow Warrior).
Scientists are scared of losing their jobs, as anyone who speaks out gets cancelled, often with a gagging order.
Try reading Dark Winter by Casey, an ex- NASA scientist, who explains how the temperature increases and decreases on other planets in our solar system, at the same time as on the Earth. Therefore, when there's more solar radiation all the planets get warmer and when there's less they all get cooler.
When you put it like that, madpunter, and with the evidence from your car's thermometer obviously beyond reproach, I think I'll ignore NASA, the royal meteorological society, the IPCC, every major educational institution and the world's scientists and just conclude everything is absolutely fine, and anthropological carbon dioxide emissions aren't having a significant and unsustainable impact on Earth's climate. Phew, that's easier than fixing the problem 😉