London = Awesome / Rest of UK = Rubbish... Discuss...

[MarshPhantom]

Hackney said:

MarshPhantom said:

I can be in Whitstable in 45 mins, Brighton about an hour and the rest of Europe is about an hour away.

Do you own a helicopter / aeroplane? Nowhere in Europe is an hour away from South East London.
It will take you an hour just to get to an airport / ferry terminal / St. Pancras.

I could be on the continent via the tunnel in about an hour and a half.

[Hackney]

MarshPhantom said:

Hackney said:

MarshPhantom said:

I can be in Whitstable in 45 mins, Brighton about an hour and the rest of Europe is about an hour away.

Do you own a helicopter / aeroplane? Nowhere in Europe is an hour away from South East London.
It will take you an hour just to get to an airport / ferry terminal / St. Pancras.

I could be on the continent via the tunnel in about an hour and a half.

So instead of "the rest of Europe is about an hour away", you meant, "the very closest bit of europe is about 90 minutes away", or "the closest bit of Europe takes 50% longer to get to than I originally said".

By any chance does "South East London" actually mean Sevenoaks? (Another recurring theme of this thread)

[Lost soul]

Scuffers said:

London = toilet IMHO

get in, do your business and get out as fast as possible...

[TwigtheWonderkid]

JensenA said:

I used to travel to London from Swindon to work. Absolutely hated it.

I've been to Swindon, and would quite happily commute to Gaza to get out of Swindon.

[MarshPhantom]

Hackney said:

MarshPhantom said:

Hackney said:

MarshPhantom said:

I can be in Whitstable in 45 mins, Brighton about an hour and the rest of Europe is about an hour away.

Do you own a helicopter / aeroplane? Nowhere in Europe is an hour away from South East London.
It will take you an hour just to get to an airport / ferry terminal / St. Pancras.

I could be on the continent via the tunnel in about an hour and a half.

So instead of "the rest of Europe is about an hour away", you meant, "the very closest bit of europe is about 90 minutes away", or "the closest bit of Europe takes 50% longer to get to than I originally said".

By any chance does "South East London" actually mean Sevenoaks? (Another recurring theme of this thread)

Lee Green, very handy for the A20.

[Hackney]

MarshPhantom said:

Lee Green, very handy for the A20.

You know, I almost put Orpington rather than Sevenoaks.

So, anyway...

MarshPhantom said:

the rest of Europe is about an hour away.

but....

MarshPhantom said:

I could be on the continent via the tunnel in about an hour and a half.

[Einion Yrth]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

JensenA said:

I used to travel to London from Swindon to work. Absolutely hated it.

I've been to Swindon, and would quite happily commute to Gaza to get out of Swindon.

Harsh but entirely fair.

[GetCarter]

Just read todays figures

"51,000 Londoners have died prematurely of respiratory symptoms linked to air pollution since 2008".

That is pretty awesome.

[Hackney]

GetCarter said:

Just read todays figures

"51,000 Londoners have died prematurely of respiratory symptoms linked to air pollution since 2008".

That is pretty awesome.

Although it can't be tested, proved, measured etc it's basically a figure plucked out of the [very polluted] air.

[GetCarter]

Hackney said:

GetCarter said:

Just read todays figures

"51,000 Londoners have died prematurely of respiratory symptoms linked to air pollution since 2008".

That is pretty awesome.

Although it can't be tested, proved, measured etc it's basically a figure plucked out of the [very polluted] air.

The figure was highlighted by some bloke who always tries to tell the world how good London is. Some bloke called Boris. I wonder how bad it really is.

[Axionknight]

MarshPhantom said:

Could be.

Some going,

[Hackney]

GetCarter said:

Hackney said:

GetCarter said:

Just read todays figures

"51,000 Londoners have died prematurely of respiratory symptoms linked to air pollution since 2008".

That is pretty awesome.

Although it can't be tested, proved, measured etc it's basically a figure plucked out of the [very polluted] air.

The figure was highlighted by some bloke who always tries to tell the world how good London is. Some bloke called Boris. I wonder how bad it really is.

Not as bad as the people who will tax you based on how bad it is actually tell you.

[turbobloke]

GetCarter said:

Hackney said:

GetCarter said:

Just read todays figures

"51,000 Londoners have died prematurely of respiratory symptoms linked to air pollution since 2008".

That is pretty awesome.

Although it can't be tested, proved, measured etc it's basically a figure plucked out of the [very polluted] air.

The figure was highlighted by some bloke who always tries to tell the world how good London is. Some bloke called Boris. I wonder how bad it really is.

The figure quoted isn't worth a dime, as per other similar numbers.

http://wmbriggs.com/blog/?p=13029

As to very polluted air in London, it was better before the Con Charge was introduced than at any time in the last 400 years, and indoor air is between 10 and 100 times more polluted (plus we spend about 90% of time indoors). The numbers from EPA (USA) and BRE (UK) match up well.

http://www.ecoearth.info/shared/reader/welcome.asp...

http://draxe.com/indoor-air-pollution-worse-than-o...

That said, it can only be good news if there's a reasonable way of improving London's outdoor air quality further.

[GetCarter]

turbobloke said:

GetCarter said:

Hackney said:

GetCarter said:

Just read todays figures

"51,000 Londoners have died prematurely of respiratory symptoms linked to air pollution since 2008".

That is pretty awesome.

Although it can't be tested, proved, measured etc it's basically a figure plucked out of the [very polluted] air.

The figure was highlighted by some bloke who always tries to tell the world how good London is. Some bloke called Boris. I wonder how bad it really is.

The figure quoted isn't worth a dime, as per other similar numbers.

http://wmbriggs.com/blog/?p=13029

As to very polluted air in London, it was better before the Con Charge was introduced than at any time in the last 400 years, and indoor air is between 10 and 100 times more polluted (plus we spend about 90% of time indoors). The numbers from EPA (USA) and BRE (UK) match up well.

http://www.ecoearth.info/shared/reader/welcome.asp...

http://draxe.com/indoor-air-pollution-worse-than-o...

That said, it can only be good news if there's a reasonable way of improving London's outdoor air quality further.

Don't tell us, tell the Mayor of London, who posted the figures.

ETA: He thinks nearly 10,000 people a year die prematurely due to the air quality in London.... and he's the bloke promoting the place!

Edited by GetCarter on Wednesday 30th July 17:13

[turbobloke]

GetCarter said:

turbobloke said:

GetCarter said:

Hackney said:

GetCarter said:

Just read todays figures

"51,000 Londoners have died prematurely of respiratory symptoms linked to air pollution since 2008".

That is pretty awesome.

Although it can't be tested, proved, measured etc it's basically a figure plucked out of the [very polluted] air.

The figure was highlighted by some bloke who always tries to tell the world how good London is. Some bloke called Boris. I wonder how bad it really is.

The figure quoted isn't worth a dime, as per other similar numbers.

http://wmbriggs.com/blog/?p=13029

As to very polluted air in London, it was better before the Con Charge was introduced than at any time in the last 400 years, and indoor air is between 10 and 100 times more polluted (plus we spend about 90% of time indoors). The numbers from EPA (USA) and BRE (UK) match up well.

http://www.ecoearth.info/shared/reader/welcome.asp...

http://draxe.com/indoor-air-pollution-worse-than-o...

That said, it can only be good news if there's a reasonable way of improving London's outdoor air quality further.

Don't tell us, tell the Mayor of London, who posted the figures.

Done a long time ago. If others want to use the info to do likewise they can

[GetCarter]

turbobloke said:

GetCarter said:

turbobloke said:

GetCarter said:

Hackney said:

GetCarter said:

Just read todays figures

"51,000 Londoners have died prematurely of respiratory symptoms linked to air pollution since 2008".

That is pretty awesome.

Although it can't be tested, proved, measured etc it's basically a figure plucked out of the [very polluted] air.

The figure was highlighted by some bloke who always tries to tell the world how good London is. Some bloke called Boris. I wonder how bad it really is.

The figure quoted isn't worth a dime, as per other similar numbers.

http://wmbriggs.com/blog/?p=13029

As to very polluted air in London, it was better before the Con Charge was introduced than at any time in the last 400 years, and indoor air is between 10 and 100 times more polluted (plus we spend about 90% of time indoors). The numbers from EPA (USA) and BRE (UK) match up well.

http://www.ecoearth.info/shared/reader/welcome.asp...

http://draxe.com/indoor-air-pollution-worse-than-o...

That said, it can only be good news if there's a reasonable way of improving London's outdoor air quality further.

Don't tell us, tell the Mayor of London, who posted the figures.

Done a long time ago. If others want to use the info to do likewise they can

51,000 admitted by the Mayor. Can you imagine what the real number is. It is just frightening how many are being killed each day.

[turbobloke]

GetCarter said:

turbobloke said:

GetCarter said:

turbobloke said:

GetCarter said:

Hackney said:

GetCarter said:

Just read todays figures

"51,000 Londoners have died prematurely of respiratory symptoms linked to air pollution since 2008".

That is pretty awesome.

Although it can't be tested, proved, measured etc it's basically a figure plucked out of the [very polluted] air.

The figure was highlighted by some bloke who always tries to tell the world how good London is. Some bloke called Boris. I wonder how bad it really is.

The figure quoted isn't worth a dime, as per other similar numbers.

http://wmbriggs.com/blog/?p=13029

As to very polluted air in London, it was better before the Con Charge was introduced than at any time in the last 400 years, and indoor air is between 10 and 100 times more polluted (plus we spend about 90% of time indoors). The numbers from EPA (USA) and BRE (UK) match up well.

http://www.ecoearth.info/shared/reader/welcome.asp...

http://draxe.com/indoor-air-pollution-worse-than-o...

That said, it can only be good news if there's a reasonable way of improving London's outdoor air quality further.

Don't tell us, tell the Mayor of London, who posted the figures.

Done a long time ago. If others want to use the info to do likewise they can

51,000 admitted by the Mayor. Can you imagine what the real number is. It is just frightening how many are being killed each day.

On that basis if Boris admitted he ate small children you'd probably ask how many each year

Clearly, Boris admitting something doesn't make it so - only Capt Picard has such powers

As to premature deaths in the manner described, there are very few indeed and at the moment, the number demonstrated (credibly) is close to zero.

[GetCarter]

turbobloke said:

the number demonstrated (credibly) is close to zero.

Source please.

Edited by GetCarter on Wednesday 30th July 18:56

[turbobloke]

GetCarter said:

turbobloke said:

the number demonstrated (credibly) is close to zero.

Source please.

I've already given sources, which you cannot possibly have read or you would have been able to avoid that needless question.

Also it's the wrong way round to ask the question that way, as the claim for X0,000 has no basis and still needs justifying, which you would have seen if you'd read the links I posted referring to The Lancet/Briggs/Lomborg/EPA, I strongly suspect you passed on all of them.

Researchers, as per the Briggs review linked earlier, are making what are in effect arbitrary claims for X0,000 premature deaths due to air quality problems. They have never measured the amount of air pollution any person was exposed to. Nor have they shown that the prematurity of death is real by excluding possible prognosis and life expectancy errors, also there is no attempt to exclude indoor air pollution as a factor when it's between 10 and 100 times worse than city smog. Also as Briggs indicated, the large errors in the ‘exposure’ estimates are not encapsulated in the statistical analysis so guesses are taken as fixed and factual without accompanying plus-or-minus error bars. If that were done, the claimed results for premature deaths would have been rendered insignificant. Any claim for X0,000 deaths is what needs a credible source, and the Independent quoting the Mayor of London parroting something he read about a duff study is not a credible source.

IIRC there was a report of somebody collapsing and dying of an asthma attach near a bus stop in London though it's proving tricky to locate, meanwhile there are other reports of people in and around the heavily polluted air associated with buses that get into difficulties, this is why (in the absence of any credible evidence from other sources) I used the term close to zero rather than zero.

http://www.thecomet.net/news/girl_died_after_asthm...

There are bound to be a handful of cases, if there were more then people who take a close interest in the research around this area, who also understand what validity and reliability mean, would know about them.

[GetCarter]

turbobloke said:

GetCarter said:

turbobloke said:

the number demonstrated (credibly) is close to zero.

Source please.

I've already given sources, which you cannot possibly have read or you would have been able to avoid that needless question.

Also it's the wrong way round to ask the question that way, as the claim for X0,000 has no basis and still needs justifying, which you would have seen if you'd read the links I posted referring to The Lancet/Briggs/Lomborg/EPA, I strongly suspect you passed on all of them.

Researchers, as per the Briggs review linked earlier, are making what are in effect arbitrary claims for X0,000 premature deaths due to air quality problems. They have never measured the amount of air pollution any person was exposed to. Nor have they shown that the prematurity of death is real by excluding possible prognosis and life expectancy errors, also there is no attempt to exclude indoor air pollution as a factor when it's between 10 and 100 times worse than coty smog. Also as Briggs indicated, the large errors in the ‘exposure’ estimates are not encapsulated in the statistical analysis so guesses are taken as fixed and factual without accompanying plus-or-minus error bars. If that were done, the claimed results for premature deaths would have been rendered insignificant. Any claim for X0,000 deaths is what needs a credible source, and the Independent quoting the Mayor of London parroting something he read about a duff study is not a credible source.

IIRC there was a report of somebody collapsing and dying of an asthma attach near a bus stop in London though it's proving tricky to locate, meanwhile there are other reports of people in and around the heavily polluted air associated with buses that get into difficulties, this is why (in the absence of any credible evidence from other sources) I used the term close to zero rather than zero.

http://www.thecomet.net/news/girl_died_after_asthm...

There are bound to be a handful of cases, if there were more then people who take a close interest in the research around this area, who also understand what validity and reliability mean, would know about them.

Excellent. So almost nobody dies... just a few, and you can tell Boris he's making it all up. It's a win win.

Or you might be wrong of course.

Don't take it up with me, take it up with the Mayor of London, who doesn't agree with you. He thinks you are +/- 51,000 deaths off the mark.

I don't believe a word he says (he is a politician), but I also see what I cough up whenever I come to London. That is the truth that I know. (Plus the fact that my dad died from the crap in his lungs, and always blamed the traffic for his 'black handkerchief').