Spinny

Beelbeebub - have you even read the Daily Sceptic counter article I provided a link to above ? Do you know what the point is ?

What you are doing there is criticising the language, but you seem to have nothing much to say about the numbers discussed. The author is angry because there has been a very clear effort made to mislead the public. To claim thousands of deaths from the heat based on an estimating approach which is clearly wrong is misleading. One might ask why the people claiming and getting press coverage of their 'estimate' are doing so ? Might it possibly be that they are themselves motivated to create public fear because they want the public to clamour for net zero. ? Here is the Met Office statement... https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/about-us/news-and-media/media-centre/weather-and-climate-news/2026/more-than-2700-excess-deaths-estimated-in-england-and-wales-during-may-and-june-heatwaves It is a lie. Truly the Met Office is lying to the public, publishing false statements, writing news stories which are propaganda lies. These then get picked up and circulated. What is the end result - that many people glancing at the news get told once again to be very afraid because surely soon by implication their own loved ones will be fried to death. Why is the Met Office which is a government agency with funding from our taxes putting out lies and propaganda aimed at influencing us ? They should be confining themselves to making well evidenced scientific statements of fact. Not issuing false political propaganda. It is precisely these behaviours that cause more and more people to doubt and turn away from the narrative that there is an anthropogenic climate emergency. As someone once said... If you have to be persuaded, reminded, pressured, lied to, incentivised, coerced, bullied, socially shamed, guit-tripped, threatened, punished and criminalised. If all of this is considered necessary to gain your compliance - you can be absolutely certain that what is being promoted is not in your best interest. If those organisations were interested in publishing information in a balanced way, they would of course put any numbers they give in context. Joe public hasn't got a clue how many people die each day. Is 2700 (itself a lie) a lot or a few ? But it is propaganda and giving context would reduce its impact by being honest - so that is omitted. The exact same tricks were used during covid when the BBC started publishing daily covid death figures with no context - '40 people died with covid today'. Sounds bad doesn't it - don't tell the public that 1800 people die every day. Sorry but we cannot have these organisations lying to us. I don't want my kids living in 1984 - and right now that's a bigger risk than climate variation. Can I look forward to your critique of the Met Office statement ?

All journalists, podcasters, influencers, politicians, PR people, salesmen etc use language, communication, and 'spin' techniques to appeal to and to persuade or influence an audience. Most of what we read has been angled one way or another for an audience, and newspapers typically align left or right and edit and distort their content accordingly. So what are you trying to say exactly ? That I am a child and don't understand this ? That every article in Daily Skeptic is without merit or any underlying truth because they use journalistic techniques to appeal to an audience, whereas your own (unknown and uncited) sources are never subject to the same ? That all that is necessary is to listen to 'officialdom', 'authority', and 'government' departments that always speak absolute truth whatever the consequences and never use such dirty tricks ? The underlying question is always is it true, or is it false ? So I look forward to your takedown of the facts about UK claimed heat deaths raised in that Daily Skeptic article ? Discussing your counter argument might be illuminating.

I don't doubt that there are grifters on both sides. Do you think all academics and scientists are paragons of virtue. They would never ever think of seeking grant funding from public and privately funded groups dedicated to climate emergency investigations as a nice trendy and extremely well funded source of money ? That when paid say £300k to do a study they would happily report back to their sponsor that there was no hard proof of anthropogenic CO2 driven warming, only correlated data sets that may or may not signify actual causation. They are not going to bite the hand that feeds them. You do know there are immensely wealthy individuals actively funding climate emergency advocacy groups with many £millions. In some cases funding training courses to teach journalists how to write climate propaganda pieces and get them published.

Just to reinforce the fact that people are being deliberately lied to with climate propaganda... https://dailysceptic.org/2026/07/16/no-there-werent-2700-heatwave-deaths-due-to-climate-change/ Much of the public still foolishly believe what the BBC tells them. Justin Rowlatt was out last night on the BBC with the political activist organisation called the Met Office proclaiming hottest evah again, and that we are all doomed because the AMOC/gulf stream could stop at any moment. The Met Office has been shown to be a scientifically corrupt and incompetent organisation that can't even maintain an accurate set of weather stations and publishes fraudulent data as though it were real. As for the AMOC https://dailysceptic.org/2026/07/09/fears-of-gulf-stream-collapse-fade-as-hard-data-reveal-major-role-of-natural-variation/ But there are good careers to be had in lying to the public and writing fear propaganda.

Well I am sorry for that. I don't really know anyone that thinks the UK has had competent government in the last 10-15 years. So I didn't think that one was a controversial statement. Half the country are so fed up they would probably vote for BinFace now. On the research side, there are clearly a large group of people with serious questions and concerns about the energy transition. Rejecting every concern as invalid with a wave of the hand is not very credible. If there is going to be a debate then it involves recognising when there are valid points on the other side of things. How significant they are can be discussed, but they do exist. Even some of the ''global elite'' as they get termed like Bill Gates and Tony Blair are now urging some caution. I never really care too much about the idea of winning, only about the idea of finding the right answers and the truth. I am as much of an idiot as the next man. I just wanted to inject a few things that people may not be aware of given there is a good deal of censorship that goes on. Even search engines like google have been deliberately 'fixed' to downgrade anything other than chosen political narrative. When I see a subject where free speech, and some pretty distinguished people, are being silenced and censored it sets my 'someone is hiding the truth' bells ringing. Renewables is fine, but my plea is just to recognise some of the very real issues and costs at the National scale. To go forward in a balanced way nationally rather then just seeing demons and angels. The best of our friends don't always nod along, they sometimes say are you sure your sure about that one. People here are trying to build energy efficient homes, and there is never anything wrong with that.

Very unclear what you are trying to say there. Are you claiming gas and oil consumption will halve in a decade, or are you claiming UK oil and gas reserves will halve in a decade, or are you claiming global oil and gas reserves will halve in a decade ? We do of course have lots of coal in this country. Ever heard of SMR's. And if the idiots that govern us were even remotely competent we would already have more nuclear capacity. You might also note that France has 56 reactors that provide 70% of its electricity. I believe it is not unusual for the UK, given it is run by total idiots, to have to call on energy through international connectors - energy generated by nuclear plants in France that is always available whatever the weather. Some solar panels are never going to solve that national security issue. Sorry, we can't fight a war today because the sun has gone in. Gas and Oil has always been traded and we have managed very successfully to have gas and oil supplies and it has done a brilliant job of keeping us warm and fuelling our vehicles for many decades. The global market generally keeps prices down for what is a fungible good. We are not going to see all our vehicles replaced with electric in the next 10 years, we are not going to see millions of gas boilers replaced within 10 years. For 50 years no serious politician has ever proposed banning ICE vehicles on national security grounds regarding the supply of fuel. Many countries/organisations hold national strategic stocks of oil and gas. The UK is of course far too stupid to do this effectively with repeated failures to pay for the level of such strategic storage that it should have. If we really are concerned about National Security then we do an odd job of it as we have been closing down manufacturing industry and steel making and the like because our energy prices are completely uneconomic. Really ? So that is why government has to offer huge subsidies/price guarantees to get companies to build solar farms. Of course it costs nothing to put in pylons and cables to connect them to the grid, and the fact they can't produce anything during the hours of darkness, and little when cloudy, and can't cope if temperatures go too high can all be completely ignored when assessing their actual efficiency and true costs. The fact they are made in China is not a national security concern at all. Incredibly few people die from heat in the UK. Overwhelmingly old people with existing medical problems that might die a few months or a year or two earlier than they otherwise would. Meanwhile thousands die from the cold and we definitely need heating in the winter months, But wait, no, I guess you heat a draughty 1930's house every winter using a couple of solar panels - what am I thinking ? Look, overall I think you are trying to simplify a lot of complex considerations and tradeoffs into a hugely over simplified set of assertions. It really, really, really, is not some obvious nirvana to make an energy transition in a decade. It is pie in the sky dreamland. If you don't think about it too much, or research it too much, I guess you can maintain your fantasies. I can assure you it will be a 50 year journey and enormously expensive. Get REAL. PS Come on England ⚽

We have 110mm pipe runs to the soakaway. Will be installing one of these just before the soakaway to catch any silt which can then be periodically removed. https://www.drainagepipe.co.uk/soakaway-silt-trap-c-w-catchpit-filter-with-lid-600mm-deep-x-300mm-diameter-p-SS300160LID/?keyword=&matchtype=&device=c&campaign=GS_|_Silt_Traps&gad_source=1&gad_campaignid=23172749930&gbraid=0AAAAADvEWfqWwSJceLuvN2RR_Gg15xZus&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIicj8z9rUlQMVRZFQBh3hHxguEAQYASABEgLB9_D_BwE Unfortunately ours not complete yet. Yes we will feed most of our groundwater from patio drainage etc into the soakaway. Still fitting gullies at the base of the downpipes though. So how do you get the water out of an underground harvesting tank to water the garden then ?

Where things are at... https://youtu.be/nl__O_QGIR4?si=G_CGnPuO8etvYzmV

I just looked at that website and I think your chosen interpretation is a bit pessimistic.

It is not that I don't like alternative forms of energy generation. It is moderation, balance and diversity that we need, not religious fervour. Energy efficient houses great, the more the better. But spending vast sums on subsidising one energy source and demonising another is foolish. It assumes we know all the answers with certainty, and we are absolutely right and certain about what we are doing. I say beware the certain evangelical man because quite likely they are a bit stupid to lack doubt and uncertainty. Yes in the long run fossil fuels will run low. But there has to be a balance. Making an energy transition is a 50-100 year journey. During that journey technology will advance in astonishing ways. Explore and advance all options. Nuclear fission is here and fusion will eventually come. That is your belief, not a known proven or unchallenged scientific fact. I am glad you care about our descendants, but there is no ''climate emergency''. Don't mistake fear and propaganda for what is really known. The IPCC have just burned the scenario all the climate emergency peddlars use as unrealistic - it aint happening - it aint necessarily so. There are many threats to humanity, a new ice age, asteroids, global warfare, planetary pollution, pocster, etc

We should strive to be rational about radiation and nuclear power... https://www.amazon.co.uk/Radiation-Reason-Impact-Science-Culture/dp/0956275613/?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_w=bg1jN&content-id=amzn1.sym.5e81eabe-938d-4936-a067-ca199f0f9913&pf_rd_p=5e81eabe-938d-4936-a067-ca199f0f9913&pf_rd_r=262-7534544-0018501&pd_rd_wg=xTSmn&pd_rd_r=7fc92425-cede-45b3-9dab-8d1f26ca4128 You may enjoy listening to him... https://podcasts.ox.ac.uk/radiation-and-reason Some think we should fear cow farts, some viruses, some asteroids, some free speech. Choose your poison carefully but always be afraid.

Good to see some recognition of the cons of wind power which include: Visual and noise impacts Interference with radar and defence operations The culling of birds The need for pylons everywhere blighting the scenery That oil jobs will go shrinking the economy as there are far fewer jobs in wind (The UK doesn't make turbines, or solar panels). Fire and collapses do occur. Low effective efficiency given curtailment and the inability to match supply to demand Like illegal refugee camps, it is easy to say someone has to take them, until they build one next to you, devalue your house, and spoil your life. We need balance, not extremism.

If only that were the problem. Unfortunately it is my experience with the plumbers I have had that: 1) they do not always seem able to work out good pipe arrangements. I posted about my understairs piping which everyone laughed at as a botch job. Well to get that fixed I had to work collaboratively with my current plumber (and his dad who happened to come, who was better TBH). They started out wanting to put new pipework in the middle of the cupboard floor and had I just left them to it that is exactly what they would have done. One mess would have been replaced by another. By keeping a weather eye out and talking to them a proper arrangement has been achieved - some ideas from me, some ideas from them. I always ask all the trades I have what they are going to do and try to follow their advice. But as customer I have objectives and the work has to meet them. I am quite prepared to pay for the extra hour or four it might take - the building owner will be using it for 20 years. 2) they look for the quickest easiest option I do get it. Time is money so they want to be in/out/job done/get paid. Most of the public will have no idea what they want or what they have got - as long as it works. So that is how they work. If they haven't got one thing in the van they will use another. 3) they essentially never sketch out anything they are going to do and thereby agree it first I do get it. They are doers, advance planning on paper, then execution is an alien concept. I am a planner type, from their point of view they can have it piped while I am still sketching. Why waste time looking at the details first ? But the flip side of that is sometimes you leave something that turns out not to really work very well, but is going to sit there for 20 years with someone cursing why there is a pipe down the wall, the cupboard won't close flush, or the flow is a bit crap. I think I mentioned before I had a guy come to move my gas meter a couple of years ago now. Got chatting as he had a cuppa. He said he used to be a plumber. He said he didn't make much doing it because he always wanted to give the customer what they wanted. He would be down the merchants listening to others boasting about their new SUV and how they just charged a customer £350 for changing a tap washer. I am not decrying all tradespeople. People have different personalities, different objectives, you have to ask and question. Obviously I have naff all experience, so it can make it tough - sometimes trades spin you a line - you do have to stand some ground sometimes. Clearly I should have drawn it all out myself first (despite having no plumbing experience) and then said that's what I want, just do it. But TBH it is exhausting and I do resent having to do it.

Yes the worktop will run into the window frame to function as window cill also. Not templated yet. Units/dividers were fitted and now removed (don't ask me why 🙄) and were positioned to provide a worktop 665mm deep, and 640mm deep from the wall. 665 at sink position and at washer position, and then 640 behind the dryer where the wall insulation is. Swapping the washer and dryer around does not work. It would move the washer from a 665 deep under worktop recess to a 640 deep recess. We have also bought both machines with doors opening in opposite directions for easy use. Yes I could increase the depth of the worktop further, but it is a small room and I don't really want to do that. It also increases the reach across to open and close the window. I just need a plumbing layout for behind the washer that doesnt require having a 45mm waste pipe with a 25mm water feed pipe running over it producing a need for 70mm plus the 630mm deep machine. I also need to have it possible to pull the machine out for maintenance, therefore some length (1m+ ish) of slack water feed pipe, and slack washer output hose looped behind the machine. I now already have the two appliance power sockets wired into fused switches on the wall under where the sink unit will go. So power can be cut under the sink. If the water feed hose to the machine were to split I believe the valve built into the end of it should automatically detect the leak and turn off the water, as it would do if the machine itself started leaking. Never-the-less it would be good to be able to turn the water supply to the washer off under the sink. At present there are in line valves on the hot and cold feeds, both at floor level (inaccessible when the sink unit is fitted), and below the temporary taps. See the photo of the sink area. Unfortunately this is the work of 3 different plumbers - builders dodgy plumber, another guy I had to bin, and current plumber that does turn up albeit seems to lack detailed pipe layout planning skills. As they say, a camel is a horse designed by committee. Nobody ever wants to remove anything and start again, just join something onto what is already there and bugger off saying tis all good now sir.