kwilco

I'm referring to ALL training received at Universities - and the corruption involved As for you sealioning that kind of shows the paucity of your approach to this issue. "

It seemed to me over the past 20 years teaching in universities that it was quite common for people to be employed by a university as a lecturer on the basis they were writing a PhD. This was usually just a compilation of plagiarised material and Google. I've proof read - or tried to - a few theses and most seemed to fall way short of what I'd consider to be PhD material. The problem is so ingrained in Thai academic life it leaves me wondering how it could ever be resolved. As a foot note, I think it's worth mentioning that it isn't just those producing the PhDs that are at fault, it is those who are accepting or accrediting them. The damage may not be apparent initially, but when you consider that these oeople may become medical practitioners , scientists or architects etc etc there is a potential danger to human life through this apparent lack of any real meticulous academic integrity.

THailand has 338 officers per 100 k and the USA has 242. Both police forces are paramilitary and neither has much interest in road safety, but Thailand simply doesn't have a trained up and equiped highway patrol. However, enforcement is only one factor in bringing about safer roads in Thailand. In fact the police aren't even all of that - to enforce you need coursts and legal system that works ans=d roads that are properly demarcated and defined. Then there are all the other equally important factors in road safety.

there is no argument for climate denial - whether they vote or not is a different matter - you are entitled to vote that the world is flat - but it isn't. THere may be a discussion of how to change the mind of a denier but that too is impossible - like Brexiteers, they aren't interested in evidence or reasoning. As such there is no [point in discussing that. THey are beyond any form of =discussion. The title of the topic is "Climate records tumble, leaving Earth in uncharted territory - scientists" - nothing to do with is there or isn't there climate change - deniers need tp be removed from the thread as they are off topic.

nobody is that uninformed - we all have known that since the 1980s

so why bother posting it.... it's a bit like discussing transport and posting a picture of a bus

you do realise what a huge faux-pas it is to say that? THe problem with this thread is like that comment it is unbelievably low-brow.

We all the basic evidence and theory behind climate change. So really the that is a moot point - deniers now can be justifiably dismissed out of hand. The title is "in unchartered territory" So why isn't that being discussed here? Going over the previous evidence is a waste of time even childish.

So what? We all know about global warming, what does that bring to the discussion without a comment?

I get the impression you a banger short of a barbie? or have I missed something?

So why post them - we all know that. - if you had something to say it would be different - but you don't

Only someone with no argument of their own resorts to posting a graph without a comment.

I'd love to see your explanation of the logic in that comment PS - what's a "little" misogyny?

THere's one! ...and a misogynist too!

THat's exactly the silly things I'm talking about - so you are saying we should stay with ICEs because of that?

The "luddites" who criticize evs are SOOOOOO predictable. "They are not green" - well they are greener than ICEs so that's one reason to get rid of ICEs. The infrastructure isn't there - well when it g=comes to installing infrastructure compare what is needed to install a "Plug" compare to a massive fuel tnak in the ground with pumps on top and trucks continuously driving round to fill them up. THe batteries explode - so does gasoline. THey still use carbon fuels. Yes - in the form of CENTRAL power stations which are now increasingly turning to non-fossil fuels. THey don't have range - actuall=y they are about the same as a thirsty pickup on a tank of diesel - but in reality most people don't drive that dar on a daily or weekly basis.

If you think you can explain inflation by one factor alone, I suggest you go back to the drawing board. You might even question what it actually is and if it is always a bad thang

Climate deniers are people keen to look intellectually challenged in public.... but how would they know?? They use cliche'd excuses and conspiracy theories which just show they own inability to make sound judgements. THey love to blame the media ye fail to say where they get they "information" THey always refer to recurring ice ages - but fail to understand that these are studied as far back ad 800 million years and we know the causes of them - including the current causes of climate change Then the absolute clincher that they are unhinged is they say that money is behind it and scientists, by generating this theory, are making money out of the poor unsuspecting oil companies - they also ignore the fact that Exxon scientists accurately predicted MMCC in the 1970s. The final idiocy. is to suggest we can't afford it to combat it - when the truth is we can't afford not to

Ukraine is Putin's folly.

probably why he didn't give it a Russian name

you appear to be one of those people who think a joke is funny until you've explained it?

In cooler climes they are called "After Eights"

It's quite common to find people who think because they drive a car, they are experts on road safety, because they've been to hopital they are an expert on healthcare and because they work in dangerous occupations they re experts in health and safety - yet they demonstrate by their comments they just dont have a clue - they regard the health and safety officers as a nuisance and health and safety as a load of unnecessary regulations that stop them from doing their job - which of course they don't fully understand the dangers of.....

so you think only drunks fall from balconies - why would that be?