StringJunky

Not directly, I'd have to find the AP article, but the sense I got off Biden's tone was that Nordstream wasn't going to happen.

You'd rather let the bullies win, to keep the peace.

For evolution, the mutation occurs in the egg. If a mutation occurs in the roaming chicken, it's got a tumour. The difference is global vs local

The words of a 'giant vagina': "I need ammunition, not a ride".

Threat of sanctions on associated upstream suppliers seems to be the US MO when they don't like something, it seems to me. Yes, his administrations actions come across as quite measured. He's obviously a team player, unlike Trump.

If the Ukrainian can get bedded into the brickwork, most of Russia's war toys will useless overkill. They'll have a 1970's Northern Ireland street war on their hands, witrh their adversary remotely assisted by well-funded and miltarized sources. This seems to be turning out as a proxy war for NATO against Russia. I wonder how Russia likes that, now the shoe is on the other foot? I sense it is going to be the greyest of grey wars.

It's a tough one, It's shame to see two countries people so closely related coming to this.

All the world's a stage...

I don't disagree that there is some degree of bias, but appears the system 'smooths' it out to the point it doesn't raise hackles. It does help, I think, that UK Judges can't be seen to be biased, whereas in the US, it's par for the course.

The fact there isn't a fracas every time ia judge is chosen does say something positive for the UK system. It feels like many US people look at the rules and see how they can game them to their advantage... this is not cricket, old chap.

I ask myself " Has there ever been such navel gazing and conflict every time the UK picks a judge? Is 'nuanced' a polite way of saying "It's a mess"?

The effect Trump will have will depend a fair bit on how much his Truth Social site is responded to and what in-roads he can make into the mainstream social media from there.

If you go where sharks go...

Yes, it is not as it appears. It's clear what Biden is doing, although the Russians are trying to make it look like hysteria on NATO's part, by giving a very public running commentary based on satellite information. Satellite surveillance is really coming of age. It's more like watching a chess game when we can see the hardware move about. I imagine both sides survellance resolution is much better than we the public can see.

Would it appear so insane if the real reason is rhat Putin is having serious problems domestically that we aren't seeing? Does he see the writing on the wall?

I did say I was trying not to be anthropomorphic. I was sort of taking a dispassionate god's eye view. I was attempting to distil it down to life as a biochemical process. As long as there is life, of whatever form, the universe has examples of systemic autonomy. Without those processes, it's dead.... it's just a bunch of chemicals.

Perhaps life as a process is more important than any particular species. When the last living process ceases, life as we know it ends. Everything alive has equal value. I'm trying to avoid anthromorphism.

Aye. A lot of people against the jabs are looking at things in a vacuum, just like a lot of people who post their ideas here construct them in a vacuum.

It does seem though that the courts are dragged in an awful lot by parties. It seems to be an an accepted tactic to stall legislative progress. The last time there was any major judicial input in the UK was Brexit, I think. I suppose this is an issue of having states with more autonomy than our county councils.

Is that not a proper separation of powers?

It doesn't matter that covid finished them off... it's not covid's fault? You really are licking the bottom of the barrel.

We see what we want to see and ignore the rest. What our 'mind's eye' perceives usually matters more than just the optical representation.

I might be wrong, but there probably isn't the ecological niches available now on Earth to develop without competition from the existing organisms, or to avoid interacting with them in a parallel evolutionary path.

Snipped it for you.

What has 'women being misrepresented in senior roles got to do with pay equality?' Pro rata is what matters. If they are the same, the pay is the same. Same position, same pay =/= 'equivalent' job, same pay. The latter sems to be what feminists are arguing for... which is a different tree to bark up entirely. This may or may not be true, but lets not confuse different arguments. My observation seems to be that even though they are pro rata remunerated the same, they are still not happy. This is not about same job, same pay, this is something else that's not being elucidated correctly.