Carl Sagan
-
Posts
9,637 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Carl Sagan
-
-
-
It's a good question. I think people (including scientists) should have an open mind. An argument for that is how the current scientific orthodoxy believes in dark matter and dark energy (I don't). But if you think these things exist, then you accept (this isn't controversial at all) that 96% of the Universe is made up of stuff we know nothing about and cannot see. All our laws of physics (and other scientific theories) only apply to 4% of everything.
If we accept we know so little, we've got to believe there's plenty out there we don't understand.
-
1 hour ago, Stive Pesley said:
You're proving my point though - our heroics in helping the people of Ukraine merely throw light on the question of why we don't treat all refugees the same way? We threw money and hospitality (quite rightly) at those Ukrainians who were displaced by the war. No one was talking about sending them home, or flying them to Rwanda or bleating about the number of safe countries they passed through on their way to the UK.
If it makes me some kind of bad person to think we should treat all those people displaced from their homes as equal - then so be it. I'd rather that than try and excuse the racist policies of my government
I was responding to you writing "The fact remains though that the UKs response to the Ukrainian crisis has been one of the most openly racist policies of my lifetime". So you're saying the UK's response to the Ukrainian crisis is racist because it's so good? If so, that's a somewhat bizarre take.
If you don't think there's a problem with illegal immigration into the UK you haven't been paying attention. Just this year, 1% of the entirety of the Albanian population has arrived in the UK claiming asylum, more than 90% of them young men. These aren't people fleeing oppression; Albania is close to joining the EU. It's all about organized crime, with people-trafficking to the UK making criminals billions of pounds.
What we probably both want is people genuinely freeing oppression and persecution to be given a new home here, but that won't happen properly/successfully until you stop the flood of illegal immigrants and the vast wealth this is bringing to very bad people, instead clearing the way for the genuine cases.
-
-
3 hours ago, IslandExile said:
Just to clarify...I am not criticizing David Clowes for anything, including communication. I will forever be grateful for what he's done.
Nor am I expecting a direct response from him to those questions.
The reason for my original post was, and it's clear to anyone reading this forum, there is a lack of agreement or even understanding on the managerial appointment.
Surely, it would be nice for everyone to have a better idea of the club's overall strategy and direction. I do not think that's too much to ask. And asking it does not diminish my gratitude to DC for saving the club.
1 hour ago, David said:Is this not just football? I mean we’re not out here employing the likes of Klopp and Guardiola, there will always be debates on every appointment with some not understanding why we went there.
We don’t have the best track record ourselves, look at the Pearson appointment, by far the most popular at the time. Couple of months later everyone is questioning why we went there.
For what it’s worth, I think it’s kinda obvious why we went for a manager with a great track record in getting teams promoted from League 1. It’s a dogfight down here, was never going to be attractive football.
We’re not here to establish ourselves as a League 1 side, nor are we building a team for the future with loans and free transfers. We risk losing some of our young talent in the summer if we don’t go up.
Clowes clearly thought Warne gives us a better chance of promotion than Rosenior, we can all sit here and agree or disagree yet it’s only one opinion that really matters, Clowes. His money, his decisions.
I think David's response covers everything, except to add it would clearly have been impossible practically to appoint Warne in the summer while also bringing all the players in and recontracting all the others. So Clowes simply had to be pragmatic. I don't see what he could have done differently.
-
This is being discussed in the other (very long) administration thread. According to self-proclaimed "football finance expert" MacGuire, Clowes paid £40 million all in (£18 million for the club and £22 million for the stadium) and Morris wrote off £125 million in debts.
Over £6 million was paid in tax to HMRC (25%) and football creditors were paid in full to the tune of £8.9 million. Administrator fees were paid at £1.65 million. I'm not certain how it works but I presume that all came out of the £18 million Clowes spent on the club?
-
13 hours ago, Srg said:
Better than Stearman who can’t move, Forsyth who can’t take a man on and… well Sibley can play second striker fine. To be honest, with what we have right now we shouldn’t play this formation but we know he will.
Yes Sibley can play second striker OK, but it's not his best position. The problem with putting him there is we lose all our ball-carrying ability and movement in midfield. Our ability to transition from defence into attack. Especially with Knight out injured. We have seen time and again that a midfield without either player simply doesn't work as it's way, way too static. If that's what we pick, you can pretty much guarantee "Derby nil" as we had on Tuesday.
-
43 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said:
For those suggesting Stearman... he will not play RCB in a back 3 for Derby. He'll either be the RCB in a back 4 or the CB in a back 3. If it's a back 4 he won't be starting, but may in a back 3 with Cashin RCB.
I can't see it being anything other than Smith, Cashin, Forsyth, Roberts today.
Surely Stearman has played the RCB role in a back 3 before? I don't see why it would be any different today. Plus I would say Forsyth is more of a left back and Roberts more of a centre back, , so if we're going to a back 4 I'd consider swapping those 2 round.
-
On 25/10/2022 at 08:42, Stive Pesley said:
Agreed. And no one is accusing you of having an issue with an immigrants colour.
The fact remains though that the UKs response to the Ukrainian crisis has been one of the most openly racist policies of my lifetime
I have good friends in Leicester whose kids have recently left home so they applied to house a Ukrainian refugee.
They were not only paid by the government to do this, but they also saw that the lady they took in was fast tracked for job interviews, offered free training for jobs that she had no skills in, and then once she got a job was offered subsidised housing
She was fleeing a warzone. The UK wasn't the "first safe country she passed through". No different to many refugees from Africa or Asia.
There is no other explanation for the disparity in treatment.
Steve - you've surpassed yourself! The UK response to the Ukrainian crisis makes us utter heroes in that country. Without the UK, Kiev and Ukraine would have fallen in a couple of days. It was us alone circumventing the EU blockade of weapons (led by Germany) that allowed Ukraine to defend itself and not be overrun. And in the weeks/months after. It is why Boris was always the most-welcomed leader in Kiev and why Ukraine made that speech at Eurovision talking a little about the songs but then saying what matters most is loyalty and friendship and "that's why we're giving 12 points to the UK". Hardly any Ukrainians want to come here - they want to be close to their home country to be able to go back. It shouldn't be for us to take them far away from their homes when we are offering them the most support they receive in other ways, for which they are massively grateful.
-
11 hours ago, BaaLocks said:
Just amazing to hear Julia Hartley Brewer in full fast lane climate change denier mode on Question Time last night. Look, I get the point that weather is not climate and one hot summer is not the end of days but, really, to be so utterly dumb as to suggest it just isn't happening is, well, good for the clicks I guess.
She doesn't say it's not happening. She simply says it's not the end of the world. In my growing up the end of the world was meant to come from nuclear war, and then from AIDS, and then mad cow disease, and now it's from climate change. You need a filter to avoid the constant catastrophizing. Most young people and some on here haven't developed that filter yet.
-
3 hours ago, Srg said:
I’d probably go Forsyth at the back for Stearman, Dobbin wide, Sibley behind Collins and bring in Thompson. Think we need to snapping at heels Thompson can bring. Dobbin the only chance we have at having offensive balance on both flanks.
You'd be playing Forsyth out of position as a centre half, Dobbin out of position as a LWB and Sibley out of position as the second striker!
The point of Fozzy at LWB is we can be more defensive on one side allowing NML to be more attacking on the other.
-
Wildsmith
Stearman Cashin Roberts
Mendez-Laing Sibley Smith Bird Forsyth
Dobbin
Collins
Subs: Loach, Oduroh, Rooney, Hourihane, Thompson, Osula, McGoldrick
-
I'm with @Srghere. We're talking professional sport, of which football is the pinnacle. At their age, Davies and Chester are pushing their bodies above and beyond to compete at this level and will always be risking injury. Knight was injured going in for a tackle. Barks is supposedly renowned for his pace, but he's not young either and so will always be risking hamstrings.
Injuries are part and parcel of football. I want us to play with intensity.
-
It took Rosenior too long to realize that a midfield of Smith, Bird and Hourihane simply doesn't work. I hope we don't have to wait any longer for Warne to come to the same conclusion. As soon as I saw the teamsheet I thought it had 0-0 written all over it.
-
5 hours ago, angieram said:
There's so many opportunities for it all to go wrong!
I'm baffled. Is the Derby priority period purely to get a code? But given no money will be taken at that point, won't loads of people get a code just in case they want to buy a ticket from Torquay later? Meaning in the end, hardly anyone will end up going?
-
5 pens against us in 3 games.
Now Radio Derby are bamboozled. Stonewall penalty and a red, Osula taken out by their keeper. Absolutely flattened.
But there's no agenda against us, yeah...
-
Now Sibley is off for Dobbin? Are we going to play 4-3-3?
Or even 4-2-4?
-
1 minute ago, JuanFloEvraTheCocu'sNesta said:
Sibley at wing back on a booking has got red card slapped all over it
I'm only listening on the RamsTV Radio Derby commentary, but that's crazy management if so. When we have Fozzy and Roberts on the pitch.
-
McGoldrick should have started, but now comes on for Chester. Possible back 4.
Radio Derby change their mind and now say 3-4-1-2 but I'm not sure who is where.
-
Bird, Smith and Hourihane sounds a horribly immobile midfield. Needed Sibley in there to link defence and attack and then McGoldrick playing as the support striker. That way we also have an extra forward-thinking player on the pitch. This selection smacks of a lack of goals. Hope I'm proved horribly wrong and we get a hatful, but I struggle to see where they're coming from.
-
Watching the full 90 on Rams TV I thought it was a good contest that could have gone either way, both teams having periods in the ascendency. An uncharacteristic mistake cost us when Ipswich were largely nullified. I maintain we need to become more streetwise, having faced yet another team who were pretty dirty and worked hard on the officials to con them and avoid obvious cards of both colours.
We need to tweak our selection. Don't play two novice forwards together. Without Collins, Warne has to start McGoldrick to get what he can out of him, before bringing on a sub. And he has to use one of Fozzy/Roberts on the left and one of NML/Barks on the right. Plus we need more self-belief on the ball. Just those changes and we'll be far better balanced as a team throughout the duration of the game.
- Rich84, Crewton, Andrew3000 and 2 others
-
5
-
A bizarre thing in this thread is the talk about Louie's temperament and "silly and reckless fouls". Sibley hasn't been booked in the league or league cup this season. He is fouled time and time again, but let's his football do the talking. Also, I was shocked when I first saw him live this season (Charlton) as he had really developed physically and was one of our strongest players, able to ride many of the desperate challenges made to try to stop him when running with the ball (with decent pace).
Build the team around him in midfield this season and we will get promoted. I think his application and forward running and thinking makes him more or a Warne player than Rosenior or Rooney, who would rather we pass the ball back from the opposition penalty area to our own keeper than take a risk to score a goal. Sibley is prepared to take risks in and around the opposition box and this is what will be required if we are to go up. The overall team formula still needs tweaking, but I feel we're making progress and he'll prove integral to it.
-
7 hours ago, sage said:
We don't tend to develop players with pace. Not real pace. Add a yard of pace onto anyone from that side and suddenly it's different player.
That's interesting. Someone like Timi Elsnik really seemed extraordinarily gifted with the ball but was maybe even slower that the rest. I felt we should have kept him and he'd have been out Matt Le Tissier, scoring from 35 yards week after week, but for some reason we let go and I was surprised no one else picked him up. He's now playing for Slovenia, for instance in their recent draw away at Sweden, so can't be terrible. But wasn't quick.
-
2 hours ago, Crewton said:
I'm pretty sure Smith didn't touch the ball in the build-up to the goal. Cashin stretched for it, but I think it was 'toed' towards Davies by the scorer, Burns. It was Curtis' back-pass that left Wildsmith in no-man's land.
It was clearly Curtis's tired, careless backpass that set up the goal. But I thought in the buildup it was a Smith intervention that led to the ball ending up with Curtis. But I'll try to look again.
Gotta love Extinction Rebellion
in The Jim Smith Room
Posted · Edited by Carl Sagan
An interesting graph in the Museum of London showing the temperature rising and falling over hundreds of thousands of years. Some would claim the periodicity is due to the Milankovitch cycles (though the degree of the effect is hard to explain despite it being a pleasing theory). The key questions is whether the temperature is nearing a similar peak to previous cycles or if it's going to continue to rise...
Officially we're in an interglacial period in the middle of an ice age, which is why there is just so much uncertainty https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interglacial. Earth's climate is just a hugely complex system.