Sapan Gai, CCO at Sovereign Metals, discusses their superior graphite test results. 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.
Quady, that's the problem IMHO both sides are pushing the honest argument envelope.
When a protagonist resorts to name calling, gaslighting, etc it's normally because they aren't happy with the strength of their own side of the discussion either.
Jezzoo asking for proof is necessary so it can be examined and held up to scrutiny, otherwise anyone can make up anything.
It applies to both sides of the argument.
In general if you don't agree you are excluded from the inclusivity and cancelled.
They all come across as level headed people with a metered temper and a condescending manner.
If you contradict them however, they turn into the human verson of a Rottweiler who has just sat on a hornets nest.
Https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2012/11/fourteen_is_the_new_fifteen.html
Plenty of links to where 15 was used in the past in this article.
https://davidturver.substack.com/p/pillars-supporting-net-zero-crumbling
The worlds gone woke mad
they’ve even come for freshers week!!
Other universities are attempting to move away from freshers’ stereotypes such as back-to-back drunken nights out and daring initiation ceremonies, to instead offer far more sensible activities.
At the University of Stirling’s first welcome week in September, undergraduates are being invited to take part in pizza and board game nights, rock and roll bingo, gardening sessions and a sober ceilidh.
The student union has also organised a trip to Ikea, a Sunday roast, a vintage fair and a plant sale, while students will get the chance to meet alpacas on campus.
A spokesman said: “Our activity is being presented as welcome week as we feel the title more adequately reflects what students are looking for during their first few days and weeks. Inclusivity is a large part of what we hope to provide with activities aimed at getting students together in relaxed social settings.”
Meanwhile, Edinburgh Napier University is offering puppy yoga and painting picnics
I have noticed the climate change believing side of this argument constantly ask for proof of this and proof of that and seem to want to use their parameters only.
Surely to have a balanced argument, simply dismissing the other side's comments and expecting that to be proof is a flawed model isn't it ? I watched Earth on BBC 2 last night and Packhorse said it was the plants fault in the Devonian period because they stored too much CO2 and caused a near death spiral ice age whereas the earth would have been one big dead snowball. Lucky for us America was formed and there oil based society saved the world. Something like that anyway.
Jezzoo.
I see you are admitting to your character traits Slug.
Let me help you, you left off vile and disgusting.
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.