Posts by OldUKNerd

    that spelling is the word in the Oxford English Dictionary, and the way I was taught to spell it at school. IF you wish to suck m0sl3m cock and ban it, carry on. but i wont be posting here any more. I decline to let m0sl3ms tell me how to spell in my native tongue. It just more m0sl3m bullying.


    Do we try and tell them how to spell in Arabic? And since when was the Washington Post the definitive source of english? Fucking moronic idea.

    https://www.express.co.uk/news…-3eTmxuTGjmjXnEHNEjC52kMk


    "Hundreds of papers from the secretive trade talks between the US and EU have been released online.


    They appear to confirm fears that the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership talks between Brussels and Washington will, when ratified, lead to the health service being privatised or dismantled.


    The documents, obtained by Greenpeace Netherlands, include a US proposal to have a committee with representatives from Washington and Brussels to meet each year “to review state-owned enterprises and monopolies” which would include the NHS.

    "

    The Sieve of Eratosthenes, as it is known, lets you find all prime numbers less than a certain number by sequentially sieving out multiples of primes.


    For example, for the numbers 1 to 100, you would begin by removing all multiples of 2, the first prime number – so 4, 6, 8 and so on. You would then start again from the next smallest number, removing multiples of 3. Each number you begin the process on – a number that hasn’t already been removed – is prime.


    The sieve works well for finding small primes, but becomes unworkable for very large ones because of the time and computer memory required.

    In the 1960s, when computers had far less memory than they do now, mathematicians optimised the sieve so that they could find all prime numbers up to a certain number, N, while using only √N units of storage space. For example, to find all the prime numbers up to 100, an algorithm could store and process numbers in rows of 10.


    But that isn’t practical for much larger values of N. You can’t do that for a billion numbers using only 10 units of space at a time, because the algorithm becomes very inefficient,” Harald Helfgott has refined the method, he uses Diophantine approximation, where real numbers – essentially any point on the number line, including decimals – can be approximated by rational numbers – those that can be expressed as a fraction of two whole numbers. Pi, for example, is a real number that can be approximated by the fraction 355/113.


    This lets Helfgott sieve across a range of numbers at the same time, making the process more efficient. To find all primes less than a number N, the algorithm requires less computer memory – about N1/3(log N)2/3 units of storage space. It would let you sieve a billion numbers with around 7500 units of memory compared with about 32,000 for the existing method. This qualifies him as official a Clever Bastard.



    (Mathematics of Computation, doi.org/c5ch).

    I agree with what you say, but I am going to be devil's advocate. We could buy back all the train companies at a cost of billions and billions of pounds. We could then invest the money necessary to make the railways efficient, but again at the cost of billions and billions of pounds. I accept the fact we don't just have a crap train service at a high price, we also pay tax for it, but on the other hand, the cost of nationalising them again is out of reach.

    The train companies operate as franchises. So we wait till each franchise runs out then buy the remains of the company.


    We can even pay them in instalments. The government can do whatever it wants.


    And like I said, we can start taking profits to recoup the cost, and then slowly let the profit inflate away until they are runnign at break even, and a net zero or small cost to the taxpayer.


    We have already invested the money, weve paid for the tracks and stations, and continue to do so. All the train companies have had to buy are thier own trains. And even then, as with HS2, they went and bought them overseas, instead of giving thr business to say Bombadier and creating jobs.


    The cost of maintining roads in the UK is about £50,000 per lane mile, according to the Govt, theres about 320,000 lane miles of roads, so thats about £16B

    https://www.gov.uk/government/…oad-network-per-lane-mile


    The total cost of operating the rail network for train operators franchised by Department for Transport (DfT) in the financial year ending 2015 was £10.5 billion, which is £0.2 billion higher than last year. This consisted of £7.4 billion of train operator operating costs, and £3.1 billion of Network Grant paid to Network Rail. Note that the cost of running the whole rail network will have been higher than this as it would include the costs of train operators not franchised by DfT.

    https://www.gov.uk/government/…-running-the-rail-network


    The train companies made about £3.5B profit last year.


    Theres definite savings to be made here by moving people and frieght onto rail. The advocates of privatisation tend to rely on 4 myths:



    Myth 1 – UK rail privatisation has created passenger growth

    • Growth in rail passenger journeys is driven by three key factors that have nothing to do with train operating companies: longterm growth in GDP, changing commuting patterns as employment has concentrated in major urban areas, particularly in London and the South East, and increase in motoring costs.
    • The 59 per cent increase in passenger growth on the UK railways has also been stimulated by the 300 per cent increase in public subsidy since privatisation.


    Myth 2 – UK rail privatisation has resulted in new investment and innovation

    • Over 90 per cent of new investment in the railways in recent years has been financed by public sector body Network Rail, and comes mainly from taxpayer funding or government-underwritten borrowing.
    • Genuine at-risk private investment in the railway in 2010–11 lay somewhere in the range of £100m–£380m, with the figure most probably lying at the lower end. In the same year, other sources of income for the railway – public money and the fare box – contributed £10.6bn.


    Myth 3 – UK rail privatisation
    has resulted in cheaper and better services for passengers

    • Since rail privatisation in 1995 up to 2015, all tickets (regulated and unregulated) have increased by an average of 117 per cent, or by 24 per cent in real terms.
    • UK railways are slower and more overcrowded than predominantly publicly owned
      rail services in Germany, France, Italy and Spain.


    Myth 4 – UK rail privatisation is a better deal for the taxpayer

    • The cost of running the railway has more than doubled in real terms since privatisation from £2.4bn per year (1990–91 to 1994–95) to approximately £5.4bn per year (2005–06 to 2009–10).
    • Official figures show that all but one of the private train operators in the UK receive more in subsidies than they return in the form of franchise payments to the government. In 2013–14, the government contributed £3.8bn to the UK rail industry.
    • The top five recipients of public subsidy alone received almost £3bn in taxpayer support between 2007 and 2011. This allowed them to make operating profits of £504m – over 90 per cent (£466m) of which was paid to shareholders.

    Its clear rail privatisation is a bad deal. The government’s own McNulty report into the cost of UK railways agreed that fragmentation of the railway prevents industry innovation as companies seek to operate in their own short-term interests


    http://actionforrail.wpengine.…sation_Report_2015_LR.pdf


    The railways are a national asset that should be operated to the benefit of the people and the country. Not as a cash cow to be milked for private shareholders.

    I agree with what you have said, but am with Horizon on this. Bad decisions were made, and as a result our transport infrastructure has suffered. Nationalising the railways was a good short term move, but long term madness. Regrettably the government can not afford to get the railways back, and they certainly can't afford to invest the money necessary in order it becomes the system we need

    Nationalising it in 1946 was a good idea, it created a nationwide standardised system and centralised control of safety. The UK railways became the safest in the world when they were state owned, and enabled all sorts of social mobility. The problem was coal became expensive, and the entire network needed shifting to electric.


    Also, its clear that you cannot run any rail at a profit. Even now they are privatised, we still subsidise the tracks. So whats the point in that? We pay to maintain the tracks, so the private trains make a profit for the shareholders? Thats fucked up. We want to recoup the cost of paying for the tracks, therefore we need all and any profit the tran companies are making. Therefore we need to own the rest of the network. That or the tran companies need to start paying a massive levey each year to maintain the tracks. They current setup means the taxpayer is simply lining the pockets of private shareholders, which is not acceptable.

    Not sure why hounds and bulldogs decided not to breed with other dogs without human intervention. I would also suggest we had something to do with the diversification from wolves to dogs. Anyway, I love dogs, and haven't been without one for many many years. That said, we have done some pretty awful things, albeit with good intention

    well not just hounds and bulldogs, all sorts of specialisations took place, creating a basic of 'breeds' by naturalk selection. The dogs now bred as Terriers, small compact muscular dogs, evolved to hunt underground mammaals liek rabbits and ferrets. Then we came along and messed them up.

    Was a bit cloudy over the sea last night, big thunderheads about 100 miles away over the Med (you can see them further away here because they are at higher altitude, see diagram above) , made it a bit humid overneight. Now clear blue sky, light breeze, 22 degrees.

    The simplest solution for those peopel you describe - and you see them on every council estate - is withdrawal of support.


    After say 5 years on the dole, your do0le money stops for 10 years, and you are given a job in a government run place of work. Not private run, government run. We've see the corrupt way the private run providers operate - companies like A4E ( i worked for them for 3 months as a 'tutor', i left when i saw what a dishonest sham it was). if you dont turn up for work, you dont get paid. Simples. After two years, if you have a good work record, you get a bonus and a good reference.


    The trickier one is people who cant work cos they really are ill. Weve gone from paying anyone who turns up with a splint in thier finger to cutting off people who genuinely used to be able to work but now cant. There has to be a middle ground between those who really want to go back to work but cant atm due to illness, and those idle good for nothings out to milk or defraud the system.


    Then you get the Tenants from Hell (and I include private tenants). Anyone that has to be evicted out of a rented house (private or council) because of antisocial behaviour, is automatically disqualified from council assistance. If they have kids and they are thus homeless, then the kids need taking off them to protect them.


    Far too many 'rights' have been given to scum, like Travellars, who can flout the law and be a nightmare to decent people - like pitching up on a village green or sports ground and leaving thousands of pounds worth of damage. People need the right to have them thrown off the land in hours, and then have assetts siezed from them (such as vehicles and caravans) to recoup costs.


    And while we are on the subject, you should have, as in the USA, the absolute right to take whatever measures you deem necessary to deal with an unlawful intruder in your house, including lethal force. Take the case of Tony Martin, the farmer jailed for killing a travellar burglar. His first mistake was to not chase the other burglar and kill hi m as well, which is what I woudl have done. Then next morning ,dig a big hole with the JCB (remember thius was a farm) in the bottom field, chuck the bodies in, cover them up and forget about it. Its not like you are going to get some Traveller woman knocking on yoiur door 6 weeks later saying "Excuse me, have you seen my Brendon, have you? He came to burgle you 6 weeks ago and we havent seen him since"........and then his seconf mistake was to phone the police and admit what really happened, thinking the police were going to be sympathetic. OFC they wernt, all they are intersted in is convictions, they turn up at a scene and the first thing they think is "Right who can we nick and for what crimes", and right or justice doesnt enter into it.

    Despite Trump being a bit of a plonker, I can't help liking him. Unlike our government, Trump's first concern is his own country, and is not interested in appeasing other nations so the in house liberals are satisfied. The remainers make me laugh though. They will line the streets and shout abuse at the one man who can help us the most when we leave the EU. Thick as planks, the lot of em !

    I concur. Trump isnt a crooked politician, hes an astute, patriotic American Businesman. And thats why the Republicans hate him, because unlike the Bushes, he hasnt sold out to the Oil Industry or any other Industry, and isnt a stooge of the Global Elite, and they have no control over him. Hes a maverick in the same way Churchill was. Hes precisely what this country needs.


    And the Remainers hate him for the same reason, he isnt a marxist or a NWO stooge. He sees 'multiculturalism' and 'diversity' for precisely what they are, and will defend free speech and democracy, unlike them. He stands for everything that wil get in the way of the nefarious EU superstate plot.

    It was a very short sighted move, that. But we are where we are and technology is moving on now.

    Oh it wasnt short sighted. Wilson knew Beeching was a road builder. Its was a deliberate act of sabotage. Beeching was specifically picked because it was known he would do a hatchet job on the railways. He wanted to eliminate the competition so he got a slice of the contracts to build more roads.And Wilson wanted an excuse to get rid of as much of the financial burden the railways represented to the government as possible

    https://cityx.co.uk/2019/05/li…nity-comes-on-the-market/

    This is what moslems do to a respectable area

    This is Boultham Park, Lincoln. It was one of the nicer middle class areas of Lincoln. When I was a lad, ther was 11 pubs, and the Northern Dairies Bottling Plant.


    Then the moslems flooded in.


    The bottling plant was closed, pulled down and is now a Mosque. The news report is about the Closing and sale of the Victory Pub. It was the last surviving pub in the area. Moslems dont go to pubs, they are the first victims of the forming moslem ghettos. The chip shop is still their, but it had to switch over to frying in vegetable oil. Non Halal beef fat was right out. Its the only shop that isn run by moslems now.


    The place is slowing turning into a shite hole, street by street. Thers a Catholic School in the middle, wait till it gets surrounded.

    Yes, but there is now. Our entire transport system suffers for one reason, one reason only. You may be expecting me to tell you it's a lack of investment, but it's not. When a countries population rises to quickly the infrastructure will always suffer. The additional tax revenue from a larger population will always lag well behind the infrastructure required to support the population. Unfortunately successive governments have failed to see his. In brief, there are far to many people in the country !

    The problem was that the Rail System was driven into the ground by WW2, it was run 24/7/365 for close on 7 years, and by the time we had got to 1946, it wa sliterally held together with sellotape and string. The following three post war government did not want to spen the billions needed to revamp it, and were persuaded that road transport was the future. Then the last nail in the coffin was Beeching, who was a self made millionaire, and had a large interest in road building and construction, so setting him on the review the rai lsyatem was putting the foxes in charge of the hen house.


    Thus the runnign down of the railways was perfomed at a point wher the population was at a low, due to the millions who had died in WW2, discounting your theory it was intially down to population. The branch lines were well gone by the time the population began to rise significantly in the 90's. Those branch lines will never be replaced, its far to expensive, as weve seen with the absurd Rich Banker Play Rail, HS2, which is an utter waste of money. There will be no frieght going down this line. The tickets will be far too expensive for us plebs. Its a Rich Bankers Railway so they can buy cheap houses in Pembtokeshire and still get to work in the City at 9 AM.


    The whole point of privatising was to get rid of the cost to the taxpayer of running the rail. This turned out to be a completely false premise. After all, if the government couldnt afford to run the railways, the idea a private company had the money to was absurd. We ended up bailing out Railtrack twice, and we still subsidise them, so we might as well own it and not provide a backdoor dividend to their shareholders.


    The fact is there is no national railway anywhere in the world that runs as a profit making service. And the ones that try to, end up sacrificing safety to make shareholder dividends. The Paddington Train Crash , caused by lack of private investment in safety and maintenenace, would never have happened under British Rail. If BR was nothing else, it was run as one of the safest rail networks in the world.


    You will never run the rail as a profit making business, and maintain a good safe, punctual service. Im no socialist, but I think its essential for national security that the essential infrastructure of this country - and im talking roads, rails, ports, airports, power, gas, water, rivers, comms (phones. internet), schools universities, hospitals, and soem others - shoudl be owned by the goverment and run as break even services for the benefit of the people. No one shoudl be making a prifit, these are all essential for the benefit of the country.


    It cant be argued in any way that having the french goverment owning the UK electricity supply, and most of the UKs Frieght Ports is a good idea.

    Don't now what has to do with Liberals, but agree with you about dogs. I am a big dog lover, but believe they should all be mongrels as intended

    See the thread entitled 'horses'.


    Dogs diversified from wolves, about 140,000 years ago, but also then slowly diversified into natural 'breeds' - you can find paintings of what are hounds and bulldogs made in the 17th century, long before breeding took place, they look a lot different to todays hounds and bulldogs. It was human intervention that caused chaos and damage.

    Yeh, order your box of nails on eBay Monday morning, and get them the day after Christmas

    only ther wasnt ebay back then.....how come they could get seafood to billigsgate market same day via train. it was in fact very efficient, which is why the UK postal service wa sone of the best in the world unti lthey privatised it.


    Here in Spain the postal service is dreadful. And it all travels on lorries. They even refuse to deliver single letters, you have to wait unti theres a handful then they will amble on down and drop them in your letter box.

    Strangely enough the people who defend Islam the most, are likely to be those who also claim to have animal welfare at heart. Liberals, hypocrites, the lot of em

    interestingly I also just had a huge row with Fidget, who claims to be a dog 'lover' (ie a supporter of the vandalism and destruction of dog genes and genetic diversity for purely human greed and vanity). I challenged him of how introducing crippling and debilitating and entirely unecessary genetic mutations into dogs 'improved' them, as he claimed. He got very arsey, threw his toys out the pram and I never got a straight answer .

    The problem is we now keep alive babies with all sorts of ilnesses, diseases and genetic problems that 100 years ago would have died shortly after birth. This is how natural selection works. It eliminates the weakest, least strongest sets of genes and the best, most adapated sets survive. By keeping alive these defective genotypes and then allowing them to breed we are intefering with Natural Selection to our detriment.


    And its not like we NEED to do this because we have a population shortage, quite the opposite, we are endangering the survival of the fittest by burdening them with the artificial survival of the unfittest at a point when we are at bursting point populationwise


    Ive posted on this before about moslem inbreeding. Its now the biggest single source of genetic disesases in humans on the planet. It needs to be stopped.

    That trump blimp was quite funny in certain respects. :D

    well it may or may not have been, my objection was he then refused a similar blimp about himself to be flown, showing how one sided and bigoted he is. One rule for his lefty mates, onother rule for those he doesnt like. Typical moslem hypocrisy. Fortunately he was eventually forced to back down.

    More supporting evidence, Pravda says:

    " The latest report said the Superjet 100 suffered electric failure and loss of comms due to a lightning strike soon after takeoff. The main landing gear collapsed on the third touchdown after two initial bounces off the runway. When the engines touched the runway fire broke out and passengers were seen fleeing from the stricken Sukhoi Superjet."


    Although thats not what the video shows, it shows the tail breaking on 2nd touchdown impact and a fireball from the back first

    China knows how to treat moslems

    MOSLEMS in China going about their day to day life are being spied on by the authorities in an unprecedented way - but Beijing says the Big Brother steps are vital to root out terrorism. The levels of covert surveillance mean millions of Moslems can barely leave the house without coming up on the Chinese secret police radar Those who fall foul of Beijing-specified social norms can be sent to detention camps, and m ore than 1 MILLION residents are already in detention centres. Internet use, spending, phone habits and even petrol consumption are routinely monitored by the authorities.


    The chinese use monitoring softwar that tracks electricity and internet use and can even raise the alarm when someone other than the registered keeper fills up a car at a petrol station - all cars in China have mandatory GPS trackers,. The Government in Beijing says the moves are necessary to combat Islamic terrorism in the Muslim majority province which is home to 13 million Islamist Uighurs. Senior China researcher Human Rights Watch Maya Wang said: “Our research shows for the first time that Xinjiang police are using illegally-gathered information about people’s completely lawful behaviour and using it against them “The Chinese government is monitoring every aspect of people’s lives in Xinjiang, picking out those it mistrusts and subjecting them to extra scrutiny.”


    The Japanese take similar (but not so extreme) measure against Moslems. These people have got the measure of Islam.

    Well the message the voters sent to them was somthing like "You fucked with democracy by not carrying out Brexit so we are going to fuck with you", which the various parties chose to interpret in different ways the Lib/Dems for instance saw it as people supporting them because they were against Brexit and wanted to remain in the EU. :rolleyes:

    hehe they certainly would see it like that, no one does self delusion like the loser LimpDumbs, but having watched english politics for 50 years, it was almost certainly a case that the Libdems were the first option protest vote, because no one cares about local elections, but people were pisse doff enough to protest vote. And the protest was against Tories and Lab, so the LibDems mopped it up.


    In a GE it wouldnt have happened because Brexit party would have run, and like UKIP in 2015, , people would have vote Brexit party or not voted at all. No one would want a Lib Dems govt in charge of Brexet, because they are all rabid Remainer EU stooges .


    The Libdems are doing a fine job of splitting the Remain vote at the moment with the Labour splitters and Lab. Whereas Farage will mop up the Brexit vote. like he did in 2015.

    This deal if as predicted will all but destroy the Tory party , what the hell are they playing at ??

    May is a closet Remainer and an EU Stooge. She cares not for the Tory party and will sacrifice it to cripple and undermine Brexit. A cushy job or pension from the Eu is in the offering (like Blair and Mandelson and Kinnock)

    It wasn't on fire before the final massive impact , it obviously had control issues but unlike the BA Boeing 777 crash landing where the impact smashed the landing gear through the wings , this little Sukhoi was laden with fuel , hence the massive fireball.

    We'll the point is it might have had an internal fire in the tail, i already put this up in my intial posts if you read them. Plus, the intial fireball cam from the tail, there are no fuel tanks at the rear. Look at the video of the landing. The tail ruptured and a fireball ensued , and it was half a second before the undercarriage then collapsed rupturing the fual tanks. The Clues as to the tail fire are the ones you keep ignoring



    1. lightning strike penetrates composite tail, lights fire. Captian radios strike

    2. warning lights in cockpit would show fire, plane squawks 7700 and turns back

    3. tail fire destroy elevator avionics

    4. lack of elevator causes excessive approach speed

    5. tail impact breaks tail, fire in tail flashover

    6, tanks rupture and ignite.


    Heres the entire sequence, starting at 26 seconds into this video

    Notice the tail erupts first after hitting the ground, but there are no fuel tanks at the rear, and the wings only catch light when the undercarriage collapse about half a second later. This shows there was already a fire in the tail, and as i already pointed out, this is a flashover fireball, like if you open the door in a house fire and let the air in. The sudden influx of oxygen makes it boom. whats more the wing tanks do not rupture on first contact,. before the tail hits the ground, but only on second impact when the undercasrriage collapse, by which time the tail fire is exposed and burning..#


    Heres the tail section cutaway:



    Nothing in there that would cause a fireball, but an oxygen starved fire would when the tail broke.


    So thats my theory, based on the visual and other evidence. Bet you a ham sandwich im not far off right :P

    I wonder if it will be a computer trying to fly into the ground like Boeing and Airbus.:/

    No the russian planes arent that smart. The key to this is what happened just before and just after they squawked 7700 and went round.


    Also its only Airbus that do it. On such planes they have whats called Lore Precedence, ie whos set of rules take precedence. The aircraft has several sets of Lore. On an Airbus, the computer has the last say, ie it can override the human. but on Boeings the human can flick a switch and take over from the Computer.