Slarti

Only two?

Only if VAR stands for Vehicles At Roundabouts.

So you're all still on the fence then?

Junction changes scrapped - thank f**k. https://www.the-gazette.co.uk/news/24191954.controversial-plans-make-changes-two-key-junctions-scrapped/

Not working for me either.

You may have a point.

Would a bot do an edit?

And "favor" instead of "favour".

Very prophetic.

Aye, ye know better. Any more of that nonsense and it's the big bad fire for you.

"A" pattern still continues, just not the same one. You just drop the cup bit and now it's "Win and keep a clean sheet against teams not from Glasgow." If we win against Livi but don't keep a clean sheet then the pattern becomes "Win against teams not from Glasgow. If we draw it becomes "Only lose against teams from Glasgow." Etc. The whole point was to show Elvis' pattern stuff up for the nonsense it is. You can find "a pattern" in almost any set of results.

Hey, enough, I'm right here you know.

Or maybe they mean something - the pattern continues.

The Uefa Nations League draw takes place on Thursday February 8th 2024 in Paris, starting at 5pm UK time. Who would you like to face? Pot 1: Spain, Croatia, Italy, Netherlands Pot 2: Denmark, Portugal, Belgium, Hungary Pot 3: Switzerland, Germany, Poland, France Pot 4: Israel, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbia, Scotland No easy games but, for me, Croatia, Hungary and Poland. Only because they are the ones I know least about, so I could be totally wrong. [emoji1787]

Yeah, I see a pattern, we score and keep clean sheets in cup games and league games against teams that aren't from Glasgow. If it continues we will win the Scottish Cup and only lose another 3 league games by the end of the season. See what I did there? "Patterns" mean nothing.

But the other shulls go regularly. [emoji16]

Hmmm

No, it would be "that toenail might be infected, best take this medication just in case, even though it might not be." Or, put this sun protection on, it might prevent you getting skin cancer. You might not get skin cancer if you don't put it on, but if you do it's too late to try and prevent it. You might still get skin cancer even if you do put it on, but at least you tried to prevent it.

If I could choose just one of them to lose it would be - the agent.

The Maunder Minimum - being the lack of sun spots (and having a minimal contribution to the mini ice age) - ended in 1715. More sun spots (as we've had since then), in combination with a depleted ozone layer (caused by CFCs etc), would allow more UV through and potentially cause more warming. Everything's linked, no effect (positive or negative) stands alone. If man made climate change is not real it still does no harm to the planet to act as if it is. If it is real and we act as if it isn't, then we have potentially f**ked up the planet (at least short-term (geologicaly)), f**ked ourselves and also many other living organisms. Why look after your house if you're not going to look after your street, your neighbourhood, your town, etc? It's all linked, no man is an island, blah, blah blah. How would you feel if a smoker blew smoke in your face and, when you complained, they said "I don't believe all that science stuff that says it's bad"? Anyway, enough of this.

A link would have been helpful in that case. You originally never mentioned the (missing) headline, just mentioned "warmest January" as if it was your opinion on what you had posted (i.e. the screenshot).

Absolutely. If he'd actually posted the headline, I might have known what he was referring to, though.

Not at all. You posted a screenshot without the headline then made a comment that referred to the missing headline and, seemingly, expected people to know that you were referring to information that wasn't presented. Then, instead of just saying "oops" and posting that screenshot of the headline, you double down on your error by trying to accuse someone else of not reading properly and missing the "first line" - you know, the first line that you never supplied.

You never posted the headline.

Nowhere in the article you posted does it say it's the warmest January on record, it doesn't even hint at that. There is absolutely nothing wrong with what they said.