Prof Taylor is an enthusiast for his liquid diet, which is rather bland but works, but when I have seen him speak has been quite open that any diet that delivers the weight loss works. He is quite sceptical about exercise as he thinks this inhibits weight loss because of raised metabolism and hunger.
A kg of fat is about 9000 Calories, so to lose 10kg* means consuming 1500 fewer Calories per day for 60 days. Abdominal fat is the bit that matters for diabetes, and waist at belly button level should be less than half of height is a simple metric.
*Initial weight loss is stored glycogen and water, so quicker.
I'd really say to do more exercise if you can. 1 mile (20 minutes walking) is 70-100 calories depending on build, terrain and weight carried. Contrary to what you say above, I also find that exercise reduces my appetite. Just five or six miles a day can make a difference.
Exercise also really helps mental wellbeing: at least in my case.
Personally, I too am an exercise advocate. Much obesity is from snacking due to boredom, and exercise is a great treatment for boredom. Being outdoors too for mental health.
The problem is that humans, like other animals, are instinctively lazy! I would advocate taking up the exercise later, as it becomes easier after the weight loss, and is a good means of keeping it off.
That the Tory party in 2016 didn’t just give the job to Boris with instructions to dole out £350m a week to the NHS has got to be one of the biggest rickets in party political history
And then what?
Boris' time as MoL does not bode well.
The person who tipped the balance in the campaign would have had the chance to take responsibility instead of the neither here or there nonsense we’ve had since
Again, I refer you to Boris' track record ...
Who has a good comparable record? At least he’s won a couple of mayoralties and the referendum.
As I say I can take him or leave him, but at least he has energy and ideas. And the 350m a week promise was a no brainer
Lets be fair, you used to argue with me that UKIP should get rid of Farage if they wanted to prosper... hardly a great track record of predictions
Boris has energy? One of the complaints against him as MoL is exactly the opposite: he was lazy.
I think your last paragraph is incorrect: I doubt that was me.
It was you, but don’t worry about it I’m watching the football now.
I'd like to see a direct quote, because I think I would have said something rather different wrt Farage.
That fire isn't going out anytime soon, no matter how many times Dermot Murnaghan says it looks like the French fireys have got it under control. It'll be burning for hours if not days under the rubble of the roof, the rubble acting like a huge charcoal oven consuming any wooden structures or furniture that currently remain. No easy way to fight it, you can't commit crews inside due to risk of further collapse, and it's not easy getting big water onto it. The Pompiers will be earning their pay tonight.
Reports at the moment that the wooden structure is destroyed. Horrifying.
I seem to recall that the reason they put stone vaulted roofs in the gothic cathedrals in the middle ages was to save them in the event of a fire. Have there been any reports that the vaulting has collapsed?
The prefect said they were waiting to see if the vaulting would protect it.
But it's one thing protecting the interior from a fire in the wooden roof, and quite another to expect it to withstand the spire collapsing on it.
Not to diminsh it but it was a wooden spire, not stone. Quite a lot of lead on there too but I guess that will melt and run off the vaulting.
If several tons of flaming wood fell on me, I assure you I would collapse.
The reports are that the interior has caught fire. Although hey also say that salvage is underway. Whether either or both are correct I don't know and I suspect we won't know before tomorrow.
I haven't been posting much recently as I am concentrating on getting my diabetes under control with weight loss and exercise. I was diagnosed with diabetes in 2009 and to date have not required medication but as is so often the case, I took liberties with bread, biscuits, chocolates, cakes and fizzy drinks and need to regain control. Have lost 1 stone in last three weeks so doing ok so far.
As for politics I have decided to let it all flow over me for a while, and while I do lurk from time to time, I am not posting as frequently but rest assured it is not because I am upset or out of sorts with anyone, it is just maybe time for a little rest
I have not gone away folks
Have a look at low carb/keto diets. People have put T2D into remission with a low carb diet, and lost shedloads of weight. It works.
Yes thank you. I am following a strict diet and am determined to recover the control I have had for the last 10 years
10 kg weight loss is the key to getting remission according to Prof Taylor of the DiRECT trial:
There are other useful positives for blood pressure, and arthritis too in such weight loss.
Keeping it off is the tough bit.
Thanks Dr Foxy. I have lost 7 kg so far and will achieve 10 kg and I appreciate the benefit on blood pressure and my osteoarthritis. It is a no brainer really
Best of luck Big G. Don’t stay away too long. You’ll be missed.
That the Tory party in 2016 didn’t just give the job to Boris with instructions to dole out £350m a week to the NHS has got to be one of the biggest rickets in party political history
And then what?
Boris' time as MoL does not bode well.
The person who tipped the balance in the campaign would have had the chance to take responsibility instead of the neither here or there nonsense we’ve had since
Again, I refer you to Boris' track record ...
Who has a good comparable record? At least he’s won a couple of mayoralties and the referendum.
As I say I can take him or leave him, but at least he has energy and ideas. And the 350m a week promise was a no brainer
Lets be fair, you used to argue with me that UKIP should get rid of Farage if they wanted to prosper... hardly a great track record of predictions
Boris has energy? One of the complaints against him as MoL is exactly the opposite: he was lazy.
I think your last paragraph is incorrect: I doubt that was me.
It was you, but don’t worry about it I’m watching the football now.
Oh dear! What a beginning for Watford. Should keep Leicester in seventh despite our poor performance on Friday.
Prof Taylor is an enthusiast for his liquid diet, which is rather bland but works, but when I have seen him speak has been quite open that any diet that delivers the weight loss works. He is quite sceptical about exercise as he thinks this inhibits weight loss because of raised metabolism and hunger.
A kg of fat is about 9000 Calories, so to lose 10kg* means consuming 1500 fewer Calories per day for 60 days. Abdominal fat is the bit that matters for diabetes, and waist at belly button level should be less than half of height is a simple metric.
*Initial weight loss is stored glycogen and water, so quicker.
I'd really say to do more exercise if you can. 1 mile (20 minutes walking) is 70-100 calories depending on build, terrain and weight carried. Contrary to what you say above, I also find that exercise reduces my appetite. Just five or six miles a day can make a difference.
Exercise also really helps mental wellbeing: at least in my case.
Personally, I too am an exercise advocate. Much obesity is from snacking due to boredom, and exercise is a great treatment for boredom. Being outdoors too for mental health.
The problem is that humans, like other animals, are instinctively lazy! I would advocate taking up the exercise later, as it becomes easier after the weight loss, and is a good means of keeping it off.
I lost quite a lot of weight last year, 3+ stone. I found exercise a bit daunting to attempt much at first and I hate doing it, so just walked a lot and ate very little. It was only for the last stone that I needed to do actual strenuous exercise of any kind. Its incredible how much you can lose very quickly from no snacks and walking, so exercise can wait! A relative of mine cannot exercise hard due to leg back and lung problems but has still lost 4 stone .
It's only a building. We should be concerned about the destruction of the natural environment due to human action rather than that of a monument to our misguided belief in the supernatural.
I haven't been posting much recently as I am concentrating on getting my diabetes under control with weight loss and exercise. I was diagnosed with diabetes in 2009 and to date have not required medication but as is so often the case, I took liberties with bread, biscuits, chocolates, cakes and fizzy drinks and need to regain control. Have lost 1 stone in last three weeks so doing ok so far.
As for politics I have decided to let it all flow over me for a while, and while I do lurk from time to time, I am not posting as frequently but rest assured it is not because I am upset or out of sorts with anyone, it is just maybe time for a little rest
I have not gone away folks
Have a look at low carb/keto diets. People have put T2D into remission with a low carb diet, and lost shedloads of weight. It works.
Yes thank you. I am following a strict diet and am determined to recover the control I have had for the last 10 years
10 kg weight loss is the key to getting remission according to Prof Taylor of the DiRECT trial:
There are other useful positives for blood pressure, and arthritis too in such weight loss.
Keeping it off is the tough bit.
Thanks Dr Foxy. I have lost 7 kg so far and will achieve 10 kg and I appreciate the benefit on blood pressure and my osteoarthritis. It is a no brainer really
Best of luck Big G. Don’t stay away too long. You’ll be missed.
Thank you Cyclefree. I will contribute from time to time
Prof Taylor is an enthusiast for his liquid diet, which is rather bland but works, but when I have seen him speak has been quite open that any diet that delivers the weight loss works. He is quite sceptical about exercise as he thinks this inhibits weight loss because of raised metabolism and hunger.
A kg of fat is about 9000 Calories, so to lose 10kg* means consuming 1500 fewer Calories per day for 60 days. Abdominal fat is the bit that matters for diabetes, and waist at belly button level should be less than half of height is a simple metric.
*Initial weight loss is stored glycogen and water, so quicker.
I'd really say to do more exercise if you can. 1 mile (20 minutes walking) is 70-100 calories depending on build, terrain and weight carried. Contrary to what you say above, I also find that exercise reduces my appetite. Just five or six miles a day can make a difference.
Exercise also really helps mental wellbeing: at least in my case.
Personally, I too am an exercise advocate. Much obesity is from snacking due to boredom, and exercise is a great treatment for boredom. Being outdoors too for mental health.
The problem is that humans, like other animals, are instinctively lazy! I would advocate taking up the exercise later, as it becomes easier after the weight loss, and is a good means of keeping it off.
I found intermittent fasting the best way to combat the snacking / boredom eating, especially when working late. Once you get into a routine of only eating in an 8hr window, all the hunger goes away outside of that period.
I am a rather puritanical Christian, so prefer a far simpler architectural and litergical style, but am very saddened to see such loss of artistic and cultural heritage. It is part of all our history, not just the French.
I love medieval architecture, and especially Gothic. What I can't stand is the gilding and paint of Catholic churches - Pugin's interior's make me feel sick. It's almost as though they distract from the beauty of the medieval stoneworkers' and carvers' craft.
Having said that, many small churches were ruined by Victorian improvements.
Prof Taylor is an enthusiast for his liquid diet, which is rather bland but works, but when I have seen him speak has been quite open that any diet that delivers the weight loss works. He is quite sceptical about exercise as he thinks this inhibits weight loss because of raised metabolism and hunger.
A kg of fat is about 9000 Calories, so to lose 10kg* means consuming 1500 fewer Calories per day for 60 days. Abdominal fat is the bit that matters for diabetes, and waist at belly button level should be less than half of height is a simple metric.
*Initial weight loss is stored glycogen and water, so quicker.
I'd really say to do more exercise if you can. 1 mile (20 minutes walking) is 70-100 calories depending on build, terrain and weight carried. Contrary to what you say above, I also find that exercise reduces my appetite. Just five or six miles a day can make a difference.
Exercise also really helps mental wellbeing: at least in my case.
You get fitter a damned sight quicker than you get thinner with exercise I find, so if you need to drop weight quickly then diet will be the best route for an overwhelming majority of the population particularly if you have any sort of mobility issues or suchlike. But exercise is good for you over and above the straight calorific deficit it creates.
It's only a building. We should be concerned about the destruction of the natural environment due to human action rather than that of a monument to our misguided belief in the supernatural.
I have room in my heart to mourn both, though clearly only one can survive without the other.
It's only a building. We should be concerned about the destruction of the natural environment due to human action rather than that of a monument to our misguided belief in the supernatural.
Therein is explained the Cultural Revolution, the League of Militant Godless, and Pol Pot.
And what did they achieve? Very little. Massive damage to gratify their personal inadequacies, that left everyone and especially their own people much the poorer.
You could almost say applied more widely that would be an epitaph for Communism.
Prof Taylor is an enthusiast for his liquid diet, which is rather bland but works, but when I have seen him speak has been quite open that any diet that delivers the weight loss works. He is quite sceptical about exercise as he thinks this inhibits weight loss because of raised metabolism and hunger.
A kg of fat is about 9000 Calories, so to lose 10kg* means consuming 1500 fewer Calories per day for 60 days. Abdominal fat is the bit that matters for diabetes, and waist at belly button level should be less than half of height is a simple metric.
*Initial weight loss is stored glycogen and water, so quicker.
I'd really say to do more exercise if you can. 1 mile (20 minutes walking) is 70-100 calories depending on build, terrain and weight carried. Contrary to what you say above, I also find that exercise reduces my appetite. Just five or six miles a day can make a difference.
Exercise also really helps mental wellbeing: at least in my case.
Personally, I too am an exercise advocate. Much obesity is from snacking due to boredom, and exercise is a great treatment for boredom. Being outdoors too for mental health.
The problem is that humans, like other animals, are instinctively lazy! I would advocate taking up the exercise later, as it becomes easier after the weight loss, and is a good means of keeping it off.
There's an old runners' saying "you can't outrun a bad diet". Before I went low-carb I was quite capable of putting on weight while running 30 miles a week.
It's only a building. We should be concerned about the destruction of the natural environment due to human action rather than that of a monument to our misguided belief in the supernatural.
I fear you're going to be fairly lonely in that viewpoint.
True, it's only a building, and thankfully it sounds as though no-one has been injured. But buildings - especially ones like this - tell us so much of where we have come from, and who we are.
I challenge you to stand in King's College Chapel, Cambridge, or Westminster Hall, look at their ceilings and woodwork and hold that view.
Prof Taylor is an enthusiast for his liquid diet, which is rather bland but works, but when I have seen him speak has been quite open that any diet that delivers the weight loss works. He is quite sceptical about exercise as he thinks this inhibits weight loss because of raised metabolism and hunger.
A kg of fat is about 9000 Calories, so to lose 10kg* means consuming 1500 fewer Calories per day for 60 days. Abdominal fat is the bit that matters for diabetes, and waist at belly button level should be less than half of height is a simple metric.
*Initial weight loss is stored glycogen and water, so quicker.
I'd really say to do more exercise if you can. 1 mile (20 minutes walking) is 70-100 calories depending on build, terrain and weight carried. Contrary to what you say above, I also find that exercise reduces my appetite. Just five or six miles a day can make a difference.
Exercise also really helps mental wellbeing: at least in my case.
Personally, I too am an exercise advocate. Much obesity is from snacking due to boredom, and exercise is a great treatment for boredom. Being outdoors too for mental health.
The problem is that humans, like other animals, are instinctively lazy! I would advocate taking up the exercise later, as it becomes easier after the weight loss, and is a good means of keeping it off.
I lost quite a lot of weight last year, 3+ stone. I found exercise a bit daunting to attempt much at first and I hate doing it, so just walked a lot and ate very little. It was only for the last stone that I needed to do actual strenuous exercise of any kind. Its incredible how much you can lose very quickly from no snacks and walking, so exercise can wait! A relative of mine cannot exercise hard due to leg back and lung problems but has still lost 4 stone .
Walking is very good for mental health, as well as physical health.
I have found that having something to do with my hands while sitting down (knitting) makes it easier to keep away from the snacks at those times.
It's only a building. We should be concerned about the destruction of the natural environment due to human action rather than that of a monument to our misguided belief in the supernatural.
I fear you're going to be fairly lonely in that viewpoint.
True, it's only a building, and thankfully it sounds as though no-one has been injured. But buildings - especially ones like this - tell us so much of where we have come from, and who we are.
I challenge you to stand in King's College Chapel, Cambridge, or Westminster Hall, look at their ceilings and woodwork and hold that view.
It's only a building. We should be concerned about the destruction of the natural environment due to human action rather than that of a monument to our misguided belief in the supernatural.
Don’t be a nitwit.
It was built with love and passion. It contains sublime treasures and art and craftsmanship. It honours the work of all those unknown people who created it. It is part of Europe's history, our history. It is irreplaceable.
You may not care for religion. For those who do, to lose such a building and in this week of all weeks (look it up if you don’t know what I’m referring to) is an added level of pain.
But anyone who values history, culture, beauty should feel sad at what we are seeing.
It's only a building. We should be concerned about the destruction of the natural environment due to human action rather than that of a monument to our misguided belief in the supernatural.
I fear you're going to be fairly lonely in that viewpoint.
True, it's only a building, and thankfully it sounds as though no-one has been injured. But buildings - especially ones like this - tell us so much of where we have come from, and who we are.
I challenge you to stand in King's College Chapel, Cambridge, or Westminster Hall, look at their ceilings and woodwork and hold that view.
It's only a building. We should be concerned about the destruction of the natural environment due to human action rather than that of a monument to our misguided belief in the supernatural.
Therein is explained the Cultural Revolution, the League of Militant Godless, and Pol Pot.
And what did they achieve? Very little. Massive damage to gratify their personal inadequacies, that left everyone and especially their own people much the poorer.
You could almost say applied more widely that would be an epitaph for Communism.
I could be wrong, but I don't recall Pol Pot being a member of WWF or Friends of the Earth.
It's only a building. We should be concerned about the destruction of the natural environment due to human action rather than that of a monument to our misguided belief in the supernatural.
Why don’t you crawl back under your rock with the other misanthropes?
I am a rather puritanical Christian, so prefer a far simpler architectural and litergical style, but am very saddened to see such loss of artistic and cultural heritage. It is part of all our history, not just the French.
I love medieval architecture, and especially Gothic. What I can't stand is the gilding and paint of Catholic churches - Pugin's interior's make me feel sick. It's almost as though they distract from the beauty of the medieval stoneworkers' and carvers' craft.
Having said that, many small churches were ruined by Victorian improvements.
I think that British churches were also very gilded and painted until the Puritans whitewashed over them and removed the idolatrous statuary.
That the Tory party in 2016 didn’t just give the job to Boris with instructions to dole out £350m a week to the NHS has got to be one of the biggest rickets in party political history
And then what?
Boris' time as MoL does not bode well.
The person who tipped the balance in the campaign would have had the chance to take responsibility instead of the neither here or there nonsense we’ve had since
Again, I refer you to Boris' track record ...
Who has a good comparable record? At least he’s won a couple of mayoralties and the referendum.
As I say I can take him or leave him, but at least he has energy and ideas. And the 350m a week promise was a no brainer
Lets be fair, you used to argue with me that UKIP should get rid of Farage if they wanted to prosper... hardly a great track record of predictions
Boris has energy? One of the complaints against him as MoL is exactly the opposite: he was lazy.
It's only a building. We should be concerned about the destruction of the natural environment due to human action rather than that of a monument to our misguided belief in the supernatural.
Therein is explained the Cultural Revolution, the League of Militant Godless, and Pol Pot.
And what did they achieve? Very little. Massive damage to gratify their personal inadequacies, that left everyone and especially their own people much the poorer.
You could almost say applied more widely that would be an epitaph for Communism.
I could be wrong, but I don't recall Pol Pot being a member of WWF or Friends of the Earth.
Or for that matter Stalin or Mao, given the incredible amount of environmental damage they caused. (Just ask a Kazakh.)
It's only a building. We should be concerned about the destruction of the natural environment due to human action rather than that of a monument to our misguided belief in the supernatural.
I fear you're going to be fairly lonely in that viewpoint.
True, it's only a building, and thankfully it sounds as though no-one has been injured. But buildings - especially ones like this - tell us so much of where we have come from, and who we are.
I challenge you to stand in King's College Chapel, Cambridge, or Westminster Hall, look at their ceilings and woodwork and hold that view.
One snow leopard is worth a thousand cathedrals.
I share your concern about the loss of natural habitats. That is why I plant trees, a damn sight more useful than simply protesting. But a snow leopard can reproduce. So can plants. This cathedral cannot.
I am a rather puritanical Christian, so prefer a far simpler architectural and litergical style, but am very saddened to see such loss of artistic and cultural heritage. It is part of all our history, not just the French.
I love medieval architecture, and especially Gothic. What I can't stand is the gilding and paint of Catholic churches - Pugin's interior's make me feel sick. It's almost as though they distract from the beauty of the medieval stoneworkers' and carvers' craft.
Having said that, many small churches were ruined by Victorian improvements.
I think that British churches were also very gilded and painted until the Puritans whitewashed over them and removed the idolatrous statuary.
Some are still left. There are fifteenth century wall paintings at a church near Cardiff Airport, whose name I have embarrassingly forgotten, at Llangelynin north of Tywyn in Gwynedd, and at Kempley in Gloucestershire.
If you want a feel for what a Medieval English church probably looked like, Thomas Parry's church at Highnam just outside Gloucester gives a good idea, although it's a romantic reconstruction.
It's only a building. We should be concerned about the destruction of the natural environment due to human action rather than that of a monument to our misguided belief in the supernatural.
I fear you're going to be fairly lonely in that viewpoint.
True, it's only a building, and thankfully it sounds as though no-one has been injured. But buildings - especially ones like this - tell us so much of where we have come from, and who we are.
I challenge you to stand in King's College Chapel, Cambridge, or Westminster Hall, look at their ceilings and woodwork and hold that view.
One snow leopard is worth a thousand cathedrals.
In what sense is there a choice between the two?
Indeed. Great monuments are of great significance, it's just silly to act like its impossible to preserve our cultural past and look after the natural wonders of life. We don't do enough preserving of either. But human civilisation is also of worth.
It's only a building. We should be concerned about the destruction of the natural environment due to human action rather than that of a monument to our misguided belief in the supernatural.
Don’t be a nitwit.
It was built with love and passion. It contains sublime treasures and art and craftsmanship. It honours the work of all those unknown people who created it. It is part of Europe's history, our history. It is irreplaceable.
You may not care for religion. For those who do, to lose such a building and in this week of all weeks (look it up if you don’t know what I’m referring to) is an added level of pain.
But anyone who values history, culture, beauty should feel sad at what we are seeing.
Prof Taylor is an enthusiast for his liquid diet, which is rather bland but works, but when I have seen him speak has been quite open that any diet that delivers the weight loss works. He is quite sceptical about exercise as he thinks this inhibits weight loss because of raised metabolism and hunger.
A kg of fat is about 9000 Calories, so to lose 10kg* means consuming 1500 fewer Calories per day for 60 days. Abdominal fat is the bit that matters for diabetes, and waist at belly button level should be less than half of height is a simple metric.
*Initial weight loss is stored glycogen and water, so quicker.
I'd really say to do more exercise if you can. 1 mile (20 minutes walking) is 70-100 calories depending on build, terrain and weight carried. Contrary to what you say above, I also find that exercise reduces my appetite. Just five or six miles a day can make a difference.
Exercise also really helps mental wellbeing: at least in my case.
Personally, I too am an exercise advocate. Much obesity is from snacking due to boredom, and exercise is a great treatment for boredom. Being outdoors too for mental health.
The problem is that humans, like other animals, are instinctively lazy! I would advocate taking up the exercise later, as it becomes easier after the weight loss, and is a good means of keeping it off.
I lost quite a lot of weight last year, 3+ stone. I found exercise a bit daunting to attempt much at first and I hate doing it, so just walked a lot and ate very little. It was only for the last stone that I needed to do actual strenuous exercise of any kind. Its incredible how much you can lose very quickly from no snacks and walking, so exercise can wait! A relative of mine cannot exercise hard due to leg back and lung problems but has still lost 4 stone .
It's the approach I followed two years ago - l lost 5 stone over a year by restricting to 1000 kcal per day low carbs, mainly protein and veg. No alcohol. We did this for an average of 6 days out of every 7 - which meant we could still enjoy family events, birthdays etc. without requesting diet rations at restaurants or when visting friends.
Since losing the weight I have plateaued for the past year, which is frustrating because I'd still like to lose a couple more stone. Main cause of the plateau has been that '6 out of 7' has trended to '3 or 4 out of 7' - must try harder, I guess.
I am a rather puritanical Christian, so prefer a far simpler architectural and litergical style, but am very saddened to see such loss of artistic and cultural heritage. It is part of all our history, not just the French.
I love medieval architecture, and especially Gothic. What I can't stand is the gilding and paint of Catholic churches - Pugin's interior's make me feel sick. It's almost as though they distract from the beauty of the medieval stoneworkers' and carvers' craft.
Having said that, many small churches were ruined by Victorian improvements.
I think that British churches were also very gilded and painted until the Puritans whitewashed over them and removed the idolatrous statuary.
It's only a building. We should be concerned about the destruction of the natural environment due to human action rather than that of a monument to our misguided belief in the supernatural.
I fear you're going to be fairly lonely in that viewpoint.
True, it's only a building, and thankfully it sounds as though no-one has been injured. But buildings - especially ones like this - tell us so much of where we have come from, and who we are.
I challenge you to stand in King's College Chapel, Cambridge, or Westminster Hall, look at their ceilings and woodwork and hold that view.
One snow leopard is worth a thousand cathedrals.
I share your concern about the loss of natural habitats. That is why I plant trees, a damn sight more useful than simply protesting. But a snow leopard can reproduce. So can plants. This cathedral cannot.
Taking such a harsh view about the worthiness of any human account accomplishments as sandy is doing just makes it so easy to paint those super concerned with the natural world as bitter and extremist. Its actively unhelpful to getting support for the natural world I'd suggest.
Can I just condemn whoever the female presenter is on BBC News atm: she is obsessing with non-expert witnesses about the reactions of the emergency services with very leading questions.
Can I just condemn whoever the female presenter is on BBC News atm: she is obsessing with non-expert witnesses about the reactions of the emergency services with very leading questions.
Dont get me wrong, I'm not glorifying in the destruction, I just have a different perspective as to the significance of the building.
The problem is that you're very selective. If you want to see something that has really damaged the environment (and continues to do so), don't focus on cathedrals, but on the computer you are using and the infrastructure it uses to connect to the Internet.
By all rights you shouldn't use computers or be on the Internet. The mining alone for rare earths is rather polluting and in some cases causes political and environmental issues, and the servers you use on t'Internet use loads of juice, however much Google et al try to use renewables.
Can I just condemn whoever the female presenter is on BBC News atm: she is obsessing with non-expert witnesses about the reactions of the emergency services with very leading questions.
Terrible 'reporting'.
Just tuned in. Whoever it is her comments are asinine - out of her depth
I am a rather puritanical Christian, so prefer a far simpler architectural and litergical style, but am very saddened to see such loss of artistic and cultural heritage. It is part of all our history, not just the French.
I love medieval architecture, and especially Gothic. What I can't stand is the gilding and paint of Catholic churches - Pugin's interior's make me feel sick. It's almost as though they distract from the beauty of the medieval stoneworkers' and carvers' craft.
Having said that, many small churches were ruined by Victorian improvements.
I think that British churches were also very gilded and painted until the Puritans whitewashed over them and removed the idolatrous statuary.
But all I can say is that the gilding isn't really my thing: the architecture is.
Until relatively recently we were a religious culture, and also one where politics was potentially risky. As such much art, politics and literature were conducted via religious imagery. Far safer to discuss the nature of monarchy via discussion of authority in the Old Testament. Hence both heresy and its suppression, as here be revolution. I think it difficult to understand our history, art or culture without Biblical knowledge, whether one believes it or not.
Christopher Hill wrote a very interesting book on the use of religious language in the Civil wars of the Seventeenth Century, "The World Turned Upside Down" which I hghly recommend.
Dont get me wrong, I'm not glorifying in the destruction, I just have a different perspective as to the significance of the building.
The problem is that you're very selective. If you want to see something that has really damaged the environment (and continues to do so), don't focus on cathedrals, but on the computer you are using and the infrastructure it uses to connect to the Internet.
By all rights you shouldn't use computers or be on the Internet. The mining alone for rare earths is rather polluting and in some cases causes political and environmental issues, and the servers you use on t'Internet use loads of juice, however much Google et al try to use renewables.
Oh, I agree; just about every facet of modern life has adverse effects on our planet. I can only see that ending with the extinction of our species.
That the Tory party in 2016 didn’t just give the job to Boris with instructions to dole out £350m a week to the NHS has got to be one of the biggest rickets in party political history
And then what?
Boris' time as MoL does not bode well.
The person who tipped the balance in the campaign would have had the chance to take responsibility instead of the neither here or there nonsense we’ve had since
Again, I refer you to Boris' track record ...
Who has a good comparable record? At least he’s won a couple of mayoralties and the referendum.
As I say I can take him or leave him, but at least he has energy and ideas. And the 350m a week promise was a no brainer
Lets be fair, you used to argue with me that UKIP should get rid of Farage if they wanted to prosper... hardly a great track record of predictions
Boris has energy? One of the complaints against him as MoL is exactly the opposite: he was lazy.
I think your last paragraph is incorrect: I doubt that was me.
It was you, but don’t worry about it I’m watching the football now.
I'd like to see a direct quote, because I think I would have said something rather different wrt Farage.
For one thing, I didn't want UKIP to prosper.
I don’t know when you said it, so I wouldn’t know how to find the quotes, but you seemed to think getting Suzanne Evans in and outing Farage would make them more popular, and disagreed and said, having campaigned with her, I didn’t think she was any more MOR than Farage.
Dont get me wrong, I'm not glorifying in the destruction, I just have a different perspective as to the significance of the building.
The building is significant, artistically and architecturally and historically, regardless of its religious quality. Though, in truth, understanding why such buildings were built and what they meant is essential to understanding our common European history and culture. Just as it is to understanding the value of similar buildings and places around the world - like Palmyra and Nimrud and the Bamiyan Buddhas. I mourn the loss of those places because of their irreplaceable and sacred quality, even if it was through deliberate evil rather than an accident (I assume).
It is not necessary to have faith to be a good person. But I would posit that to be a truly educated one it is necessary to have an understanding of its role in our history and culture.
Dont get me wrong, I'm not glorifying in the destruction, I just have a different perspective as to the significance of the building.
The problem is that you're very selective. If you want to see something that has really damaged the environment (and continues to do so), don't focus on cathedrals, but on the computer you are using and the infrastructure it uses to connect to the Internet.
By all rights you shouldn't use computers or be on the Internet. The mining alone for rare earths is rather polluting and in some cases causes political and environmental issues, and the servers you use on t'Internet use loads of juice, however much Google et al try to use renewables.
Oh, I agree; just about every facet of modern life has adverse effects on our planet. I can only see that ending with the extinction of our species.
They might not accept parents though. Having children in developed countries dwarfs the environmental impact of any other conceivable lifestyle change.
That the Tory party in 2016 didn’t just give the job to Boris with instructions to dole out £350m a week to the NHS has got to be one of the biggest rickets in party political history
And then what?
Boris' time as MoL does not bode well.
The person who tipped the balance in the campaign would have had the chance to take responsibility instead of the neither here or there nonsense we’ve had since
Again, I refer you to Boris' track record ...
Who has a good comparable record? At least he’s won a couple of mayoralties and the referendum.
As I say I can take him or leave him, but at least he has energy and ideas. And the 350m a week promise was a no brainer
Lets be fair, you used to argue with me that UKIP should get rid of Farage if they wanted to prosper... hardly a great track record of predictions
Why?
Who could say it was a lie on the side of a bus if he did it?
How are uncosted promises usually attacked in a general election?
They could have done it, aren’t they doing it now in fact?
I am a rather puritanical Christian, so prefer a far simpler architectural and litergical style, but am very saddened to see such loss of artistic and cultural heritage. It is part of all our history, not just the French.
I love medieval architecture, and especially Gothic. What I can't stand is the gilding and paint of Catholic churches - Pugin's interior's make me feel sick. It's almost as though they distract from the beauty of the medieval stoneworkers' and carvers' craft.
Having said that, many small churches were ruined by Victorian improvements.
I think that British churches were also very gilded and painted until the Puritans whitewashed over them and removed the idolatrous statuary.
But all I can say is that the gilding isn't really my thing: the architecture is.
It is not my thing either. But if you want to see the most over the top gilding ever, go to the Hermitage in Leningrad. You'll need sunglasses indoors.
Dont get me wrong, I'm not glorifying in the destruction, I just have a different perspective as to the significance of the building.
The problem is that you're very selective. If you want to see something that has really damaged the environment (and continues to do so), don't focus on cathedrals, but on the computer you are using and the infrastructure it uses to connect to the Internet.
By all rights you shouldn't use computers or be on the Internet. The mining alone for rare earths is rather polluting and in some cases causes political and environmental issues, and the servers you use on t'Internet use loads of juice, however much Google et al try to use renewables.
Oh, I agree; just about every facet of modern life has adverse effects on our planet. I can only see that ending with the extinction of our species.
They might not accept parents though. Having children in developed countries dwarfs the environmental impact of any other conceivable lifestyle change.
Can I just condemn whoever the female presenter is on BBC News atm: she is obsessing with non-expert witnesses about the reactions of the emergency services with very leading questions.
Terrible 'reporting'.
It's in the middle of Paris, a building sacred to the French Nation, I'm pretty sure there isn't a fire fighter idle within 30 miles of the place.
That the Tory party in 2016 didn’t just give the job to Boris with instructions to dole out £350m a week to the NHS has got to be one of the biggest rickets in party political history
And then what?
Boris' time as MoL does not bode well.
The person who tipped the balance in the campaign would have had the chance to take responsibility instead of the neither here or there nonsense we’ve had since
Again, I refer you to Boris' track record ...
Who has a good comparable record? At least he’s won a couple of mayoralties and the referendum.
As I say I can take him or leave him, but at least he has energy and ideas. And the 350m a week promise was a no brainer
Lets be fair, you used to argue with me that UKIP should get rid of Farage if they wanted to prosper... hardly a great track record of predictions
Boris has energy? One of the complaints against him as MoL is exactly the opposite: he was lazy.
I think your last paragraph is incorrect: I doubt that was me.
It was you, but don’t worry about it I’m watching the football now.
I'd like to see a direct quote, because I think I would have said something rather different wrt Farage.
For one thing, I didn't want UKIP to prosper.
I don’t know when you said it, so I wouldn’t know how to find the quotes, but you seemed to think getting Suzanne Evans in and outing Farage would make them more popular, and *disagreed and said, having campaigned with her, I didn’t think she was any more MOR than Farage.
That the Tory party in 2016 didn’t just give the job to Boris with instructions to dole out £350m a week to the NHS has got to be one of the biggest rickets in party political history
And then what?
Boris' time as MoL does not bode well.
The person who tipped the balance in the campaign would have had the chance to take responsibility instead of the neither here or there nonsense we’ve had since
Again, I refer you to Boris' track record ...
Who has a good comparable record? At least he’s won a couple of mayoralties and the referendum.
As I say I can take him or leave him, but at least he has energy and ideas. And the 350m a week promise was a no brainer
Lets be fair, you used to argue with me that UKIP should get rid of Farage if they wanted to prosper... hardly a great track record of predictions
Boris has energy? One of the complaints against him as MoL is exactly the opposite: he was lazy.
I think your last paragraph is incorrect: I doubt that was me.
It was you, but don’t worry about it I’m watching the football now.
I'd like to see a direct quote, because I think I would have said something rather different wrt Farage.
For one thing, I didn't want UKIP to prosper.
I don’t know when you said it, so I wouldn’t know how to find the quotes, but you seemed to think getting Suzanne Evans in and outing Farage would make them more popular, and disagreed and said, having campaigned with her, I didn’t think she was any more MOR than Farage.
ISTR that I pointed out that UKIP's prospectus that Evans was in charge of was rather more sane than the previous one (which Farage has disowned, despite him having signed it). I think you're slightly over-extending my thoughts there.
Whereas your vehement views against Evans were rather interesting, especially given how UKIP's descended morally and in the polls since.
It's only a building. We should be concerned about the destruction of the natural environment due to human action rather than that of a monument to our misguided belief in the supernatural.
Don’t be a nitwit.
It was built with love and passion. It contains sublime treasures and art and craftsmanship. It honours the work of all those unknown people who created it. It is part of Europe's history, our history. It is irreplaceable.
You may not care for religion. For those who do, to lose such a building and in this week of all weeks (look it up if you don’t know what I’m referring to) is an added level of pain.
But anyone who values history, culture, beauty should feel sad at what we are seeing.
If we wanted to do something for our planet and our health, we should be gardening in every possible available outside space: back gardens, front gardens (none of this paving over for cars nonsense), roof terraces, green roofs over bin sheds etc. We should be guerrilla gardening in roundabouts and planting under street trees. We should be putting up nest boxes for birds and leaving holes in our fences so that hedgehogs can travel around. We should be having insect boxes. We should have more allotments. We should ban artificial lawns (plastic in a garden, for the love of all that is holy!). We should be having water butts. We should be planting trees not pulling them down
Rather than just making a nuisance of ourselves in city streets.
It is not everything we should do but it is something that all of us can do and which would make a difference to our habitat and to making the places we live in, both private and public, both more beautiful and more healthy.
And yet you only have to walk around to see all sorts of areas crying out for such attention utterly neglected. I wonder how many of those demonstrating today, for instance, actually do any of this stuff. Gardening seems to be the preserve of the middle-aged and yet it is one of the greenest things even the youngest of us could be doing.
Dont get me wrong, I'm not glorifying in the destruction, I just have a different perspective as to the significance of the building.
The problem is that you're very selective. If you want to see something that has really damaged the environment (and continues to do so), don't focus on cathedrals, but on the computer you are using and the infrastructure it uses to connect to the Internet.
By all rights you shouldn't use computers or be on the Internet. The mining alone for rare earths is rather polluting and in some cases causes political and environmental issues, and the servers you use on t'Internet use loads of juice, however much Google et al try to use renewables.
Oh, I agree; just about every facet of modern life has adverse effects on our planet. I can only see that ending with the extinction of our species.
They might not accept parents though. Having children in developed countries dwarfs the environmental impact of any other conceivable lifestyle change.
Dont get me wrong, I'm not glorifying in the destruction, I just have a different perspective as to the significance of the building.
The problem is that you're very selective. If you want to see something that has really damaged the environment (and continues to do so), don't focus on cathedrals, but on the computer you are using and the infrastructure it uses to connect to the Internet.
By all rights you shouldn't use computers or be on the Internet. The mining alone for rare earths is rather polluting and in some cases causes political and environmental issues, and the servers you use on t'Internet use loads of juice, however much Google et al try to use renewables.
Oh, I agree; just about every facet of modern life has adverse effects on our planet. I can only see that ending with the extinction of our species.
Of course Notre Dame did once have a rival as the largest and most beautiful gothic cathedral in the world.
And that was lost to fire as well in 1666.
I was just reading Wiki on that, and it's interesting quite how poor the condition of Old St Paul's was. Wren wanted to pull it down even before the fire, and compromised with building a dome where the spire was. The Great Fire occurred as work was starting.
On a rather disjointed sidenote, the work of the Winchester Diver should always be remembered when talking about saving Medieval masterpieces.
Dont get me wrong, I'm not glorifying in the destruction, I just have a different perspective as to the significance of the building.
The building is significant, artistically and architecturally and historically, regardless of its religious quality. Though, in truth, understanding why such buildings were built and what they meant is essential to understanding our common European history and culture. Just as it is to understanding the value of similar buildings and places around the world - like Palmyra and Nimrud and the Bamiyan Buddhas. I mourn the loss of those places because of their irreplaceable and sacred quality, even if it was through deliberate evil rather than an accident (I assume).
It is not necessary to have faith to be a good person. But I would posit that to be a truly educated one it is necessary to have an understanding of its role in our history and culture.
I fully agree that any understanding of how human society got to where it is has to take full account of the significant role of religion in shaping cultural and political identity. Whether this is Christianity in Europe, Hinduism in India, or whatever, today's world has been forged by religious belief and this cannot be dismissed or forgotten.
Buddhism teaches us that everything is impermanent and that attachment is detrimental. To me, the destruction of the cathedral can be used as a way to remind ourselves of this teaching.
Dont get me wrong, I'm not glorifying in the destruction, I just have a different perspective as to the significance of the building.
The problem is that you're very selective. If you want to see something that has really damaged the environment (and continues to do so), don't focus on cathedrals, but on the computer you are using and the infrastructure it uses to connect to the Internet.
By all rights you shouldn't use computers or be on the Internet. The mining alone for rare earths is rather polluting and in some cases causes political and environmental issues, and the servers you use on t'Internet use loads of juice, however much Google et al try to use renewables.
Oh, I agree; just about every facet of modern life has adverse effects on our planet. I can only see that ending with the extinction of our species.
Dont get me wrong, I'm not glorifying in the destruction, I just have a different perspective as to the significance of the building.
The problem is that you're very selective. If you want to see something that has really damaged the environment (and continues to do so), don't focus on cathedrals, but on the computer you are using and the infrastructure it uses to connect to the Internet.
By all rights you shouldn't use computers or be on the Internet. The mining alone for rare earths is rather polluting and in some cases causes political and environmental issues, and the servers you use on t'Internet use loads of juice, however much Google et al try to use renewables.
Oh, I agree; just about every facet of modern life has adverse effects on our planet. I can only see that ending with the extinction of our species.
Which hopefully you don't want to see?
Or we could stop it by becoming an interplanetary species and using resources from elsewhere.
You should be genuflecting each night to statues of Musk and Bezos.
If we wanted to do something for our planet and our health, we should be gardening in every possible available outside space: back gardens, front gardens (none of this paving over for cars nonsense), roof terraces, green roofs over bin sheds etc. We should be guerrilla gardening in roundabouts and planting under street trees. We should be putting up nest boxes for birds and leaving holes in our fences so that hedgehogs can travel around. We should be having insect boxes. We should have more allotments. We should ban artificial lawns (plastic in a garden, for the love of all that is holy!). We should be having water butts. We should be planting trees not pulling them down
Rather than just making a nuisance of ourselves in city streets.
It is not everything we should do but it is something that all of us can do and which would make a difference to our habitat and to making the places we live in, both private and public, both more beautiful and more healthy.
And yet you only have to walk around to see all sorts of areas crying out for such attention utterly neglected. I wonder how many of those demonstrating today, for instance, actually do any of this stuff. Gardening seems to be the preserve of the middle-aged and yet it is one of the greenest things even the youngest of us could be doing.
Rant over.
Well said.
Plastic lawns, FFS. If you don't want a garden, don't live in a house with a garden.
If we wanted to do something for our planet and our health, we should be gardening in every possible available outside space: back gardens, front gardens (none of this paving over for cars nonsense), roof terraces, green roofs over bin sheds etc. We should be guerrilla gardening in roundabouts and planting under street trees. We should be putting up nest boxes for birds and leaving holes in our fences so that hedgehogs can travel around. We should be having insect boxes. We should have more allotments. We should ban artificial lawns (plastic in a garden, for the love of all that is holy!). We should be having water butts. We should be planting trees not pulling them down
Rather than just making a nuisance of ourselves in city streets.
It is not everything we should do but it is something that all of us can do and which would make a difference to our habitat and to making the places we live in, both private and public, both more beautiful and more healthy.
And yet you only have to walk around to see all sorts of areas crying out for such attention utterly neglected. I wonder how many of those demonstrating today, for instance, actually do any of this stuff. Gardening seems to be the preserve of the middle-aged and yet it is one of the greenest things even the youngest of us could be doing.
Rant over.
If that is a rant please continue ranting. Such sound sense
Well, while it's on fire they can hardly say they're sure it's going to be fine really, can they?
I don't think we're going to actually know much about the extent of the damage for a couple of days (unless it all falls in a heap). It will take that long, for a start, for it to cool down sufficiently for any inspections to begin.
Dont get me wrong, I'm not glorifying in the destruction, I just have a different perspective as to the significance of the building.
The building is significant, artistically and architecturally and historically, regardless of its religious quality. Though, in truth, understanding why such buildings were built and what they meant is essential to understanding our common European history and culture. Just as it is to understanding the value of similar buildings and places around the world - like Palmyra and Nimrud and the Bamiyan Buddhas. I mourn the loss of those places because of their irreplaceable and sacred quality, even if it was through deliberate evil rather than an accident (I assume).
It is not necessary to have faith to be a good person. But I would posit that to be a truly educated one it is necessary to have an understanding of its role in our history and culture.
I fully agree that any understanding of how human society got to where it is has to take full account of the significant role of religion in shaping cultural and political identity. Whether this is Christianity in Europe, Hinduism in India, or whatever, today's world has been forged by religious belief and this cannot be dismissed or forgotten.
Buddhism teaches us that everything is impermanent and that attachment is detrimental. To me, the destruction of the cathedral can be used as a way to remind ourselves of this teaching.
Sorry, I'm starting to ramble, so best stop now.
Or in the 4 Latin words I quoted just now.
Or for those of a religious bent, the words uttered on Ash Wednesday: "Remember thou art dust. And to dust thou will return".
I will stop too. I feel really upset about what is happening. It's not just Notre Dame but that it is in Paris, which seems to have suffered so much in recent years. And it is a city I love and so much of my and my family's history is bound up in the place. It feels personal.
That the Tory party in 2016 didn’t just give the job to Boris with instructions to dole out £350m a week to the NHS has got to be one of the biggest rickets in party political history
And then what?
Boris' time as MoL does not bode well.
The person who tipped the balance in the campaign would have had the chance to take responsibility instead of the neither here or there nonsense we’ve had since
Again, I refer you to Boris' track record ...
Who has a good comparable record? At least he’s won a couple of mayoralties and the referendum.
As I say I can take him or leave him, but at least he has energy and ideas. And the 350m a week promise was a no brainer
Lets be fair, you used to argue with me that UKIP should get rid of Farage if they wanted to prosper... hardly a great track record of predictions
Boris has energy? One of the complaints against him as MoL is exactly the opposite: he was lazy.
I think your last paragraph is incorrect: I doubt that was me.
It was you, but don’t worry about it I’m watching the football now.
I'd like to see a direct quote, because I think I would have said something rather different wrt Farage.
For one thing, I didn't want UKIP to prosper.
I don’t know when you said it, so I wouldn’t know how to find the quotes, but you seemed to think getting Suzanne Evans in and outing Farage would make them more popular, and disagreed and said, having campaigned with her, I didn’t think she was any more MOR than Farage.
ISTR that I pointed out that UKIP's prospectus that Evans was in charge of was rather more sane than the previous one (which Farage has disowned, despite him having signed it). I think you're slightly over-extending my thoughts there.
Whereas your vehement views against Evans were rather interesting, especially given how UKIP's descended morally and in the polls since.
It’s all on here somewhere, the truth will out maybe.
I don’t have vehement views against her, I quite like her, she just said things to me when we campaigned that if I repeated them would make you change your mind.
If we wanted to do something for our planet and our health, we should be gardening in every possible available outside space: back gardens, front gardens (none of this paving over for cars nonsense), roof terraces, green roofs over bin sheds etc. We should be guerrilla gardening in roundabouts and planting under street trees. We should be putting up nest boxes for birds and leaving holes in our fences so that hedgehogs can travel around. We should be having insect boxes. We should have more allotments. We should ban artificial lawns (plastic in a garden, for the love of all that is holy!). We should be having water butts. We should be planting trees not pulling them down
Rather than just making a nuisance of ourselves in city streets.
It is not everything we should do but it is something that all of us can do and which would make a difference to our habitat and to making the places we live in, both private and public, both more beautiful and more healthy.
And yet you only have to walk around to see all sorts of areas crying out for such attention utterly neglected. I wonder how many of those demonstrating today, for instance, actually do any of this stuff. Gardening seems to be the preserve of the middle-aged and yet it is one of the greenest things even the youngest of us could be doing.
Rant over.
Well said.
Plastic lawns, FFS. If you don't want a garden, don't live in a house with a garden.
Litter gets my goat. Recently I walked along the A1 for a mile as part of the London Loop, and the amount of litter was hideous.
Well, while it's on fire they can hardly say they're sure it's going to be fine really, can they?
I don't think we're going to actually know much about the extent of the damage for a couple of days (unless it all falls in a heap). It will take that long, for a start, for it to cool down sufficiently for any inspections to begin.
It's impossible to get a true sense of it from the news video live feeds, but it looks gone to me. They ain't bringing that back. I'd say it's more a salvage operation now with crews covered by jets to save what treasures they can.
If we wanted to do something for our planet and our health, we should be gardening in every possible available outside space: back gardens, front gardens (none of this paving over for cars nonsense), roof terraces, green roofs over bin sheds etc. We should be guerrilla gardening in roundabouts and planting under street trees. We should be putting up nest boxes for birds and leaving holes in our fences so that hedgehogs can travel around. We should be having insect boxes. We should have more allotments. We should ban artificial lawns (plastic in a garden, for the love of all that is holy!). We should be having water butts. We should be planting trees not pulling them down
Rather than just making a nuisance of ourselves in city streets.
It is not everything we should do but it is something that all of us can do and which would make a difference to our habitat and to making the places we live in, both private and public, both more beautiful and more healthy.
And yet you only have to walk around to see all sorts of areas crying out for such attention utterly neglected. I wonder how many of those demonstrating today, for instance, actually do any of this stuff. Gardening seems to be the preserve of the middle-aged and yet it is one of the greenest things even the youngest of us could be doing.
Rant over.
Well said.
Plastic lawns, FFS. If you don't want a garden, don't live in a house with a garden.
Litter gets my goat. Recently I walked along the A1 for a mile as part of the London Loop, and the amount of litter was hideous.
The by lanes around Cannock are all very bad for some reason. Mansty Lane near Penkridge is like a rubbish heap only messier.
If we wanted to do something for our planet and our health, we should be gardening in every possible available outside space: back gardens, front gardens (none of this paving over for cars nonsense), roof terraces, green roofs over bin sheds etc. We should be guerrilla gardening in roundabouts and planting under street trees. We should be putting up nest boxes for birds and leaving holes in our fences so that hedgehogs can travel around. We should be having insect boxes. We should have more allotments. We should ban artificial lawns (plastic in a garden, for the love of all that is holy!). We should be having water butts. We should be planting trees not pulling them down
Rather than just making a nuisance of ourselves in city streets.
It is not everything we should do but it is something that all of us can do and which would make a difference to our habitat and to making the places we live in, both private and public, both more beautiful and more healthy.
And yet you only have to walk around to see all sorts of areas crying out for such attention utterly neglected. I wonder how many of those demonstrating today, for instance, actually do any of this stuff. Gardening seems to be the preserve of the middle-aged and yet it is one of the greenest things even the youngest of us could be doing.
Rant over.
Well said.
Plastic lawns, FFS. If you don't want a garden, don't live in a house with a garden.
Mown lawns are not great either, unless you have an unpowered mower, or a scythe.
If we wanted to do something for our planet and our health, we should be gardening in every possible available outside space: back gardens, front gardens (none of this paving over for cars nonsense), roof terraces, green roofs over bin sheds etc. We should be guerrilla gardening in roundabouts and planting under street trees. We should be putting up nest boxes for birds and leaving holes in our fences so that hedgehogs can travel around. We should be having insect boxes. We should have more allotments. We should ban artificial lawns (plastic in a garden, for the love of all that is holy!). We should be having water butts. We should be planting trees not pulling them down
Rather than just making a nuisance of ourselves in city streets.
It is not everything we should do but it is something that all of us can do and which would make a difference to our habitat and to making the places we live in, both private and public, both more beautiful and more healthy.
And yet you only have to walk around to see all sorts of areas crying out for such attention utterly neglected. I wonder how many of those demonstrating today, for instance, actually do any of this stuff. Gardening seems to be the preserve of the middle-aged and yet it is one of the greenest things even the youngest of us could be doing.
Rant over.
Well said.
Plastic lawns, FFS. If you don't want a garden, don't live in a house with a garden.
Mown lawns are not great either, unless you have an unpowered mower, or a scythe.
Dunno about others but I could live without the contemporaneous updates from various talking heads on Notre Dame. It’s horrible news, but some PBers demonstrate a fetishistic fascination with this sort of thing.
It’s all on here somewhere, the truth will out maybe.
I don’t have vehement views against her, I quite like her, she just said things to me when we campaigned that if I repeated them would make you change your mind.
If we wanted to do something for our planet and our health, we should be gardening in every possible available outside space: back gardens, front gardens (none of this paving over for cars nonsense), roof terraces, green roofs over bin sheds etc. We should be guerrilla gardening in roundabouts and planting under street trees. We should be putting up nest boxes for birds and leaving holes in our fences so that hedgehogs can travel around. We should be having insect boxes. We should have more allotments. We should ban artificial lawns (plastic in a garden, for the love of all that is holy!). We should be having water butts. We should be planting trees not pulling them down
Rather than just making a nuisance of ourselves in city streets.
It is not everything we should do but it is something that all of us can do and which would make a difference to our habitat and to making the places we live in, both private and public, both more beautiful and more healthy.
And yet you only have to walk around to see all sorts of areas crying out for such attention utterly neglected. I wonder how many of those demonstrating today, for instance, actually do any of this stuff. Gardening seems to be the preserve of the middle-aged and yet it is one of the greenest things even the youngest of us could be doing.
Rant over.
Well said.
Plastic lawns, FFS. If you don't want a garden, don't live in a house with a garden.
Mown lawns are not great either, unless you have an unpowered mower, or a scythe.
If we wanted to do something for our planet and our health, we should be gardening in every possible available outside space: back gardens, front gardens (none of this paving over for cars nonsense), roof terraces, green roofs over bin sheds etc. We should be guerrilla gardening in roundabouts and planting under street trees. We should be putting up nest boxes for birds and leaving holes in our fences so that hedgehogs can travel around. We should be having insect boxes. We should have more allotments. We should ban artificial lawns (plastic in a garden, for the love of all that is holy!). We should be having water butts. We should be planting trees not pulling them down
Rather than just making a nuisance of ourselves in city streets.
It is not everything we should do but it is something that all of us can do and which would make a difference to our habitat and to making the places we live in, both private and public, both more beautiful and more healthy.
And yet you only have to walk around to see all sorts of areas crying out for such attention utterly neglected. I wonder how many of those demonstrating today, for instance, actually do any of this stuff. Gardening seems to be the preserve of the middle-aged and yet it is one of the greenest things even the youngest of us could be doing.
Rant over.
Well said.
Plastic lawns, FFS. If you don't want a garden, don't live in a house with a garden.
And we should have washing lines. I am the only one in my street to have one. No dryers chez Cyclefree. Just wind and dry air. All that wasted electricity to make your clothes smell like dog blankets.... ugh.
If we wanted to do something for our planet and our health, we should be gardening in every possible available outside space: back gardens, front gardens (none of this paving over for cars nonsense), roof terraces, green roofs over bin sheds etc. We should be guerrilla gardening in roundabouts and planting under street trees. We should be putting up nest boxes for birds and leaving holes in our fences so that hedgehogs can travel around. We should be having insect boxes. We should have more allotments. We should ban artificial lawns (plastic in a garden, for the love of all that is holy!). We should be having water butts. We should be planting trees not pulling them down
Rather than just making a nuisance of ourselves in city streets.
It is not everything we should do but it is something that all of us can do and which would make a difference to our habitat and to making the places we live in, both private and public, both more beautiful and more healthy.
And yet you only have to walk around to see all sorts of areas crying out for such attention utterly neglected. I wonder how many of those demonstrating today, for instance, actually do any of this stuff. Gardening seems to be the preserve of the middle-aged and yet it is one of the greenest things even the youngest of us could be doing.
Rant over.
Who are you to say that the people protesting in the city streets aren't doing the other things too?
And yet it isn't enough. Governments are the best tool we have for organising collective action, and we need them to organise determined, urgent action to avert the worst.
Without collective action everything else is just raging against the dying of the light. Sure, I'll do it anyway, because what else am I going to do, but the decisive action needs to be taken on a different scale - and that clearly isn't going to happen without pressure on governments from voting, protests, school strikes, anything people can think of and organise.
If we wanted to do something for our planet and our health, we should be gardening in every possible available outside space: back gardens, front gardens (none of this paving over for cars nonsense), roof terraces, green roofs over bin sheds etc. We should be guerrilla gardening in roundabouts and planting under street trees. We should be putting up nest boxes for birds and leaving holes in our fences so that hedgehogs can travel around. We should be having insect boxes. We should have more allotments. We should ban artificial lawns (plastic in a garden, for the love of all that is holy!). We should be having water butts. We should be planting trees not pulling them down
Rather than just making a nuisance of ourselves in city streets.
It is not everything we should do but it is something that all of us can do and which would make a difference to our habitat and to making the places we live in, both private and public, both more beautiful and more healthy.
And yet you only have to walk around to see all sorts of areas crying out for such attention utterly neglected. I wonder how many of those demonstrating today, for instance, actually do any of this stuff. Gardening seems to be the preserve of the middle-aged and yet it is one of the greenest things even the youngest of us could be doing.
Rant over.
Well said.
Plastic lawns, FFS. If you don't want a garden, don't live in a house with a garden.
And we should have washing lines. I am the only one in my street to have one. No dryers chez Cyclefree. Just wind and dry air. All that wasted electricity to make your clothes smell like dog blankets.... ugh.
Well, while it's on fire they can hardly say they're sure it's going to be fine really, can they?
I don't think we're going to actually know much about the extent of the damage for a couple of days (unless it all falls in a heap). It will take that long, for a start, for it to cool down sufficiently for any inspections to begin.
It's impossible to get a true sense of it from the news video live feeds, but it looks gone to me. They ain't bringing that back. I'd say it's more a salvage operation now with crews covered by jets to save what treasures they can.
Well, you know a lot more about these things than me, and it certainly looks very bad. But medieval buildings because of the materials used in their construction can be surprisingly resistant to fire. If the Great Fire of London left the walls of St Paul's standing so they had to be blown up with gunpowder, and if Coventry is still there, I'm not giving up hope yet.
If we wanted to do something for our planet and our health, we should be gardening in every possible available outside space: back gardens, front gardens (none of this paving over for cars nonsense), roof terraces, green roofs over bin sheds etc. We should be guerrilla gardening in roundabouts and planting under street trees. We should be putting up nest boxes for birds and leaving holes in our fences so that hedgehogs can travel around. We should be having insect boxes. We should have more allotments. We should ban artificial lawns (plastic in a garden, for the love of all that is holy!). We should be having water butts. We should be planting trees not pulling them down
Rather than just making a nuisance of ourselves in city streets.
It is not everything we should do but it is something that all of us can do and which would make a difference to our habitat and to making the places we live in, both private and public, both more beautiful and more healthy.
And yet you only have to walk around to see all sorts of areas crying out for such attention utterly neglected. I wonder how many of those demonstrating today, for instance, actually do any of this stuff. Gardening seems to be the preserve of the middle-aged and yet it is one of the greenest things even the youngest of us could be doing.
Rant over.
Well said.
Plastic lawns, FFS. If you don't want a garden, don't live in a house with a garden.
Mown lawns are not great either, unless you have an unpowered mower, or a scythe.
I don't have a lawn. Got rid of it once the children could go to the park to kick a football. And I used an old-fashioned unpowered mower, which work fine in normal gardens.
BTW bees like purple flowers. So if you want to encourage bees that's what you need to grow.
So much of the green stuff we do now is what our parents/grand-parents did as a matter of course when the consumer throw-away society had not taken off. Like repairing things - which also seems to have gone out of fashion and ought to come back in.
Well, while it's on fire they can hardly say they're sure it's going to be fine really, can they?
I don't think we're going to actually know much about the extent of the damage for a couple of days (unless it all falls in a heap). It will take that long, for a start, for it to cool down sufficiently for any inspections to begin.
It's impossible to get a true sense of it from the news video live feeds, but it looks gone to me. They ain't bringing that back. I'd say it's more a salvage operation now with crews covered by jets to save what treasures they can.
Well, you know a lot more about these things than me, and it certainly looks very bad. But medieval buildings because of the materials used in their construction can be surprisingly resistant to fire. If the Great Fire of London left the walls of St Paul's standing so they had to be blown up with gunpowder, and if Coventry is still there, I'm not giving up hope yet.
There will be a walls standing, but the rest of it is gone. The crews will probably be just trying to save what they can and stop it spreading to other properties ( I don't know the layout of the area, so don't know what it is near).
Well, while it's on fire they can hardly say they're sure it's going to be fine really, can they?
I don't think we're going to actually know much about the extent of the damage for a couple of days (unless it all falls in a heap). It will take that long, for a start, for it to cool down sufficiently for any inspections to begin.
It's impossible to get a true sense of it from the news video live feeds, but it looks gone to me. They ain't bringing that back. I'd say it's more a salvage operation now with crews covered by jets to save what treasures they can.
I'd want to see evidence that the stone vaults had gone before thinking it was beyond salvation. Clearly, the timber roof above the vaults has been completely consumed but the whole idea of stone vaulted roofs was to protect against fire.
Dont get me wrong, I'm not glorifying in the destruction, I just have a different perspective as to the significance of the building.
The building is significant, artistically and architecturally and historically, regardless of its religious quality. Though, in truth, understanding why such buildings were built and what they meant is essential to understanding our common European history and culture. Just as it is to understanding the value of similar buildings and places around the world - like Palmyra and Nimrud and the Bamiyan Buddhas. I mourn the loss of those places because of their irreplaceable and sacred quality, even if it was through deliberate evil rather than an accident (I assume).
It is not necessary to have faith to be a good person. But I would posit that to be a truly educated one it is necessary to have an understanding of its role in our history and culture.
Thank you for some excellent words on this topic. As a Catholic, and at the start of Holy Week, this is a very painful event. It isn't just a building.
If we wanted to do something for our planet and our health, we should be gardening in every possible available outside space: back gardens, front gardens (none of this paving over for cars nonsense), roof terraces, green roofs over bin sheds etc. We should be guerrilla gardening in roundabouts and planting under street trees. We should be putting up nest boxes for birds and leaving holes in our fences so that hedgehogs can travel around. We should be having insect boxes. We should have more allotments. We should ban artificial lawns (plastic in a garden, for the love of all that is holy!). We should be having water butts. We should be planting trees not pulling them down
Rather than just making a nuisance of ourselves in city streets.
It is not everything we should do but it is something that all of us can do and which would make a difference to our habitat and to making the places we live in, both private and public, both more beautiful and more healthy.
And yet you only have to walk around to see all sorts of areas crying out for such attention utterly neglected. I wonder how many of those demonstrating today, for instance, actually do any of this stuff. Gardening seems to be the preserve of the middle-aged and yet it is one of the greenest things even the youngest of us could be doing.
Rant over.
Well said.
Plastic lawns, FFS. If you don't want a garden, don't live in a house with a garden.
And we should have washing lines. I am the only one in my street to have one. No dryers chez Cyclefree. Just wind and dry air. All that wasted electricity to make your clothes smell like dog blankets.... ugh.
Only viable if one has nice underwear.
I will probably regret this - but can I suggest plain white underwear. Available from all good retail outlets.
Honestly, how else can you dry your sheets and duvet covers and pillow-cases if not on a washing-line.
Well, while it's on fire they can hardly say they're sure it's going to be fine really, can they?
I don't think we're going to actually know much about the extent of the damage for a couple of days (unless it all falls in a heap). It will take that long, for a start, for it to cool down sufficiently for any inspections to begin.
It's impossible to get a true sense of it from the news video live feeds, but it looks gone to me. They ain't bringing that back. I'd say it's more a salvage operation now with crews covered by jets to save what treasures they can.
Well, you know a lot more about these things than me, and it certainly looks very bad. But medieval buildings because of the materials used in their construction can be surprisingly resistant to fire. If the Great Fire of London left the walls of St Paul's standing so they had to be blown up with gunpowder, and if Coventry is still there, I'm not giving up hope yet.
There will be a walls standing, but the rest of it is gone. The crews will probably be just trying to save what they can and stop it spreading to other properties ( I don't know the layout of the area, so don't know what it is near).
I think I'm right in saying it stands with a massive square in front of it and garden space all around it, although I've never been there. So I doubt if any other properties are at risk.
Well, while it's on fire they can hardly say they're sure it's going to be fine really, can they?
I don't think we're going to actually know much about the extent of the damage for a couple of days (unless it all falls in a heap). It will take that long, for a start, for it to cool down sufficiently for any inspections to begin.
It's impossible to get a true sense of it from the news video live feeds, but it looks gone to me. They ain't bringing that back. I'd say it's more a salvage operation now with crews covered by jets to save what treasures they can.
I'd want to see evidence that the stone vaults had gone before thinking it was beyond salvation. Clearly, the timber roof above the vaults has been completely consumed but the whole idea of stone vaulted roofs was to protect against fire.
Time will tell.
As I say, there will be walls left standing and maybe the vaults have done their job but if they haven't, and the compartmentalisation has been compromised, there will be nowt else left. Saying that, we're only getting a few angles from the live footage, and the newsies will only focus on the dangerous looking bits. There might be loads out of camera shot that isn't as bad.
If we wanted to do something for our planet and our health, we should be gardening in every possible available outside space: back gardens, front gardens (none of this paving over for cars nonsense), roof terraces, green roofs over bin sheds etc. We should be guerrilla gardening in roundabouts and planting under street trees. We should be putting up nest boxes for birds and leaving holes in our fences so that hedgehogs can travel around. We should be having insect boxes. We should have more allotments. We should ban artificial lawns (plastic in a garden, for the love of all that is holy!). We should be having water butts. We should be planting trees not pulling them down
Rather than just making a nuisance of ourselves in city streets.
It is not everything we should do but it is something that all of us can do and which would make a difference to our habitat and to making the places we live in, both private and public, both more beautiful and more healthy.
And yet you only have to walk around to see all sorts of areas crying out for such attention utterly neglected. I wonder how many of those demonstrating today, for instance, actually do any of this stuff. Gardening seems to be the preserve of the middle-aged and yet it is one of the greenest things even the youngest of us could be doing.
Rant over.
Well said.
Plastic lawns, FFS. If you don't want a garden, don't live in a house with a garden.
Mown lawns are not great either, unless you have an unpowered mower, or a scythe.
I don't have a lawn. Got rid of it once the children could go to the park to kick a football. And I used an old-fashioned unpowered mower, which work fine in normal gardens.
BTW bees like purple flowers. So if you want to encourage bees that's what you need to grow.
So much of the green stuff we do now is what our parents/grand-parents did as a matter of course when the consumer throw-away society had not taken off. Like repairing things - which also seems to have gone out of fashion and ought to come back in.
I grow globe artichokes and let some of the heads flower to keep the bees happy.
Well, while it's on fire they can hardly say they're sure it's going to be fine really, can they?
I don't think we're going to actually know much about the extent of the damage for a couple of days (unless it all falls in a heap). It will take that long, for a start, for it to cool down sufficiently for any inspections to begin.
It's impossible to get a true sense of it from the news video live feeds, but it looks gone to me. They ain't bringing that back. I'd say it's more a salvage operation now with crews covered by jets to save what treasures they can.
I'd want to see evidence that the stone vaults had gone before thinking it was beyond salvation. Clearly, the timber roof above the vaults has been completely consumed but the whole idea of stone vaulted roofs was to protect against fire.
Time will tell.
That was the intent, and I hope you are right.
But it should be remembered that these Cathedrals were not engineered. The builders would look at what had been done before, push it further, innovate, and if it fell down during construction or after, they or someone else would try with another innovation. Many of our Cathedrals show the scars of this if you look carefully: e.g. Ely's northwest transept, or Lincoln's central spire.
The intent of the vaulting might have been to protect against fire; it was not 'engineered' in a modern sense to do that; and it might have been only to prevent small fires, not the conflagration we sadly saw today.
If we wanted to do something for our planet and our health, we should be gardening in every possible available outside space: back gardens, front gardens (none of this paving over for cars nonsense), roof terraces, green roofs over bin sheds etc. We should be guerrilla gardening in roundabouts and planting under street trees. We should be putting up nest boxes for birds and leaving holes in our fences so that hedgehogs can travel around. We should be having insect boxes. We should have more allotments. We should ban artificial lawns (plastic in a garden, for the love of all that is holy!). We should be having water butts. We should be planting trees not pulling them down
It is not everything we should do but it is something that all of us can do and which would make a difference to our habitat and to making the places we live in, both private and public, both more beautiful and more healthy.
And yet you only have to walk around to see all sorts of areas crying out for such attention utterly neglected. I wonder how many of those demonstrating today, for instance, actually do any of this stuff. Gardening seems to be the preserve of the middle-aged and yet it is one of the greenest things even the youngest of us could be doing.
Rant over.
Who are you to say that the people protesting in the city streets aren't doing the other things too?
And yet it isn't enough. Governments are the best tool we have for organising collective action, and we need them to organise determined, urgent action to avert the worst.
Without collective action everything else is just raging against the dying of the light. Sure, I'll do it anyway, because what else am I going to do, but the decisive action needs to be taken on a different scale - and that clearly isn't going to happen without pressure on governments from voting, protests, school strikes, anything people can think of and organise.
I didn't say they weren't. I was asking. I don't see many young people at gardening centres or gardening and it is a perennial topic of debate in the RHS how to get more people interested and how to make it viable as a career.
Of course the other stuff is needed. But demos without personal action is not good enough. If we really want to care about our environment we don't just outsource it to the state. Schoolchildren would, IMO, be better off creating a school garden and helping others create one and learning about growing their own food. Everyone who cares about this could do something tomorrow to help. It would be nice to think that those jugglers on Westminster Bridge would tomorrow go out and plant a tree which will long outlive them and provide shelter for birds, insects and fungi.
"Nobody made a greater mistake than he who did nothing because he could not do everything."
Comments
The problem is that humans, like other animals, are instinctively lazy! I would advocate taking up the exercise later, as it becomes easier after the weight loss, and is a good means of keeping it off.
For one thing, I didn't want UKIP to prosper.
https://twitter.com/GreggFavre/status/1117847726786371585
Sky reporting one of the towers now on fire
Having said that, many small churches were ruined by Victorian improvements.
And what did they achieve? Very little. Massive damage to gratify their personal inadequacies, that left everyone and especially their own people much the poorer.
You could almost say applied more widely that would be an epitaph for Communism.
True, it's only a building, and thankfully it sounds as though no-one has been injured. But buildings - especially ones like this - tell us so much of where we have come from, and who we are.
I challenge you to stand in King's College Chapel, Cambridge, or Westminster Hall, look at their ceilings and woodwork and hold that view.
I have found that having something to do with my hands while sitting down (knitting) makes it easier to keep away from the snacks at those times.
It was built with love and passion. It contains sublime treasures and art and craftsmanship. It honours the work of all those unknown people who created it. It is part of Europe's history, our history. It is irreplaceable.
You may not care for religion. For those who do, to lose such a building and in this week of all weeks (look it up if you don’t know what I’m referring to) is an added level of pain.
But anyone who values history, culture, beauty should feel sad at what we are seeing.
If you want a feel for what a Medieval English church probably looked like, Thomas Parry's church at Highnam just outside Gloucester gives a good idea, although it's a romantic reconstruction.
Since losing the weight I have plateaued for the past year, which is frustrating because I'd still like to lose a couple more stone. Main cause of the plateau has been that '6 out of 7' has trended to '3 or 4 out of 7' - must try harder, I guess.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St_Botolph's_Church,_Hardham#/media/File:Hardham_church,_interior.jpg
But all I can say is that the gilding isn't really my thing: the architecture is.
Terrible 'reporting'.
By all rights you shouldn't use computers or be on the Internet. The mining alone for rare earths is rather polluting and in some cases causes political and environmental issues, and the servers you use on t'Internet use loads of juice, however much Google et al try to use renewables.
Christopher Hill wrote a very interesting book on the use of religious language in the Civil wars of the Seventeenth Century, "The World Turned Upside Down" which I hghly recommend.
It is not necessary to have faith to be a good person. But I would posit that to be a truly educated one it is necessary to have an understanding of its role in our history and culture.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voluntary_Human_Extinction_Movement
They might not accept parents though. Having children in developed countries dwarfs the environmental impact of any other conceivable lifestyle change.
And that was lost to fire as well in 1666.
Whereas your vehement views against Evans were rather interesting, especially given how UKIP's descended morally and in the polls since.
Rather than just making a nuisance of ourselves in city streets.
It is not everything we should do but it is something that all of us can do and which would make a difference to our habitat and to making the places we live in, both private and public, both more beautiful and more healthy.
And yet you only have to walk around to see all sorts of areas crying out for such attention utterly neglected. I wonder how many of those demonstrating today, for instance, actually do any of this stuff. Gardening seems to be the preserve of the middle-aged and yet it is one of the greenest things even the youngest of us could be doing.
Rant over.
On a rather disjointed sidenote, the work of the Winchester Diver should always be remembered when talking about saving Medieval masterpieces.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Walker_(diver)
Buddhism teaches us that everything is impermanent and that attachment is detrimental. To me, the destruction of the cathedral can be used as a way to remind ourselves of this teaching.
Sorry, I'm starting to ramble, so best stop now.
Or we could stop it by becoming an interplanetary species and using resources from elsewhere.
You should be genuflecting each night to statues of Musk and Bezos.
Plastic lawns, FFS. If you don't want a garden, don't live in a house with a garden.
I don't think we're going to actually know much about the extent of the damage for a couple of days (unless it all falls in a heap). It will take that long, for a start, for it to cool down sufficiently for any inspections to begin.
Or for those of a religious bent, the words uttered on Ash Wednesday: "Remember thou art dust. And to dust thou will return".
I will stop too. I feel really upset about what is happening. It's not just Notre Dame but that it is in Paris, which seems to have suffered so much in recent years. And it is a city I love and so much of my and my family's history is bound up in the place. It feels personal.
I don’t have vehement views against her, I quite like her, she just said things to me when we campaigned that if I repeated them would make you change your mind.
And yet it isn't enough. Governments are the best tool we have for organising collective action, and we need them to organise determined, urgent action to avert the worst.
Without collective action everything else is just raging against the dying of the light. Sure, I'll do it anyway, because what else am I going to do, but the decisive action needs to be taken on a different scale - and that clearly isn't going to happen without pressure on governments from voting, protests, school strikes, anything people can think of and organise.
https://twitter.com/EmmanuelMacron/status/1117851407644684288?s=20
https://twitter.com/JustinWelby/status/1117877271568633856?s=20
https://twitter.com/FLOTUS/status/1117851477693718528?s=20
https://twitter.com/JustinTrudeau/status/1117872005724852224?s=20
BTW bees like purple flowers. So if you want to encourage bees that's what you need to grow.
So much of the green stuff we do now is what our parents/grand-parents did as a matter of course when the consumer throw-away society had not taken off. Like repairing things - which also seems to have gone out of fashion and ought to come back in.
Time will tell.
Honestly, how else can you dry your sheets and duvet covers and pillow-cases if not on a washing-line.
But it should be remembered that these Cathedrals were not engineered. The builders would look at what had been done before, push it further, innovate, and if it fell down during construction or after, they or someone else would try with another innovation. Many of our Cathedrals show the scars of this if you look carefully: e.g. Ely's northwest transept, or Lincoln's central spire.
The intent of the vaulting might have been to protect against fire; it was not 'engineered' in a modern sense to do that; and it might have been only to prevent small fires, not the conflagration we sadly saw today.
Of course the other stuff is needed. But demos without personal action is not good enough. If we really want to care about our environment we don't just outsource it to the state. Schoolchildren would, IMO, be better off creating a school garden and helping others create one and learning about growing their own food. Everyone who cares about this could do something tomorrow to help. It would be nice to think that those jugglers on Westminster Bridge would tomorrow go out and plant a tree which will long outlive them and provide shelter for birds, insects and fungi.
"Nobody made a greater mistake than he who did nothing because he could not do everything."
Edmund Burke.