A Royal Mail postman has been caught writing 'racists' on Reform UK leaflets

[richietns]

Climate change is clearly a tax everything around us is money money money to think otherwise is just dumb...have you ever noticed there's always a crisis (we have global warming..right pay up and by the way if you want to go into the city with your car you can pay for the privilege).

Why are all these scientists complicit do you think? Do you believe in science? Maybe there just always is some crisis or another? I get it, people would prefer to believe in crackpot conspiracy theories, rather than grasp the grim reality, but you only have to look at the conflicts around the world right now to see how unstable everything is. Sometimes a crisis is just a crisis.

Conflicts are wars and are man made and its always for money and more importantly power.

So you aren’t going to answer the question? Fine. Neither will milly. Nobody ever does when it comes to defending conspiracy theories that are disproven by science.

Milly has already answered you...is that your thing call everybody a buzz word when they disagree and then repeat the same question over and over until you get them to agree.

So you too think that literally 97% of the world’s scientists are being paid to fabricate this problem then? That’s fine. There is no point even continuing to engage as you are too far gone.

Oh no what am I going do...lol

[richietns]

"The constituency is believed to be Worsley and Eccles, where Craig Birtwistle is standing for Reform. Under electoral law, the postman could be charged with electoral fraud, should the claim that Birtwistle or Reform candidates in general are 'racists' be considered false"

Looks like he could be going to court rightly so,I'm amazed how hatefull he is.

[Tman]

Hopefully when we have a change in government later today, the need for these crackpot conspiracy theories online will be reduced and people can start to heal their brains.

I rather doubt that we'll see a more naive statement this year. Some are pinning a lot of hopes on a Starmer administration but until now I haven't seen any claims from his camp that he/they will somehow reduce the need for C/T's.

[milly]

I've no doubt the Starmer fans will be crying, if and when they start targeting savings and pensions.
Don't be surprised to see the 25% tax free lump sum abolished.
And pensions being forced to invest in government debt and ESG.

[TrueBlueTerrier]

2nd attempt - did posters miss this.

However I will add - please discuss Political matters generally in the Canteen section, that way it won't take over threads like this one has been.

This is not an attempt to ban political discussion, just a suggestion so that Political Nerds (of which I am one) can discuss issues and not drown out other posters.

Fair warning - the discussion in this thread has shifted from critiquing a Postman's actions to delving into personalities and attempting to discredit differing opinions by labelling them as racist or not.

Racism and its interpretation aren't simply black and white, they exist on a broad spectrum of opinions. Everyone holds distinct views on what constitutes racism, and it's unjust to force your perspective onto others.

Despite the contentious nature of racism and politics, my intention in sharing this article was to raise awareness about the potential consequences (dismissal), not to sow discord among individuals.

I share articles to facilitate discussions regarding the content and its implications for postal workers. While politics may occasionally seep into these conversations if it begins to dominate a thread and detract from its informative nature, the thread's value must be reconsidered.

[Barnacle]

"The constituency is believed to be Worsley and Eccles, where Craig Birtwistle is standing for Reform. Under electoral law, the postman could be charged with electoral fraud, should the claim that Birtwistle or Reform candidates in general are 'racists' be considered false"

Looks like he could be going to court rightly so,I'm amazed how hatefull he is.

It isn’t really that he wrote ‘racists’, it’s that he wrote anything at all on an election leaflet. If he’d written, ‘lovely bloke’ on it the problem would be the same. We can’t do anything to influence the democratic process. Just deliver it and move on.

[thefox]

"The constituency is believed to be Worsley and Eccles, where Craig Birtwistle is standing for Reform. Under electoral law, the postman could be charged with electoral fraud, should the claim that Birtwistle or Reform candidates in general are 'racists' be considered false"

Looks like he could be going to court rightly so,I'm amazed how hatefull he is.

Great news

[clashcityrocker]

Researchers from the National Museum in Copenhagen say the answer to the question is ‘yes’. Blah blah blah.

We can all read Milly but you are quoting selectively.

Researchers believe the Vikings probably grew barley in small quantities, compared with the large, billowing cornfields we have today, and sowed barley in small enclosures that were no bigger than their ability to irrigate the corn and keep hungry animals out.

If barley was grown it was in small quantities, hardly enough to sustain the Viking population and only on the southern tip.


“We carried out several excavations at 12 different ruined Viking farms, even though they were abandoned 700 to 800 years ago,” says the researcher. “Many of the farms were well preserved. The peat and stone walls can still be seen, and in some places they’re a metre and a half high.”

“We excavated the rubbish heaps down to the bottom layers, which date from the time the settlers arrived,” says Henriksen, whose team took 300 kg of samples for further analysis. “The sample we took from the bottom layer of a heap contained grains of corn. The grains had been close to a fire and were charred, which preserved them.”

From 12 farms excavated only one rubbish heap provided evidence of barley and there is no evidence that barley was ever grown on Greenland.
The researchers might want to believe that but they can't conclusively prove that it happened.
Obviously researchers need to find something otherwise their funding will dry up.
Just follow the money ......

[milly]

Researchers from the National Museum in Copenhagen say the answer to the question is ‘yes’. Blah blah blah.

We can all read Milly but you are quoting selectively.

Researchers believe the Vikings probably grew barley in small quantities, compared with the large, billowing cornfields we have today, and sowed barley in small enclosures that were no bigger than their ability to irrigate the corn and keep hungry animals out.

If barley was grown it was in small quantities, hardly enough to sustain the Viking population and only on the southern tip.


“We carried out several excavations at 12 different ruined Viking farms, even though they were abandoned 700 to 800 years ago,” says the researcher. “Many of the farms were well preserved. The peat and stone walls can still be seen, and in some places they’re a metre and a half high.”

“We excavated the rubbish heaps down to the bottom layers, which date from the time the settlers arrived,” says Henriksen, whose team took 300 kg of samples for further analysis. “The sample we took from the bottom layer of a heap contained grains of corn. The grains had been close to a fire and were charred, which preserved them.”

From 12 farms excavated only one rubbish heap provided evidence of barley and there is no evidence that barley was ever grown on Greenland.
The researchers might want to believe that but they can't conclusively prove that it happened.
Obviously researchers need to find something otherwise their funding will dry up.
Just follow the money ......

So you refute the researchers findings?
The only other plausible explanation would be that they imported barley from Scandinavia which is highly unlikely due to the vast distances involved.

[clashcityrocker]

So you refute the researchers findings?
The only other plausible explanation would be that they imported barley from Scandinavia which is highly unlikely due to the vast distances involved.

I don't care whether the Vikings grew barley on Greenland or not.
I was simply pointing out that their findings may have been driven by monetary considerations, in order to preserve their funding.
You choose to discount one set of scientific findings yet choose to blindly accept others because they fit your agenda.

Isn't it plausible that they took some barley over and found they couldn't grow it in sufficient quantities and threw it away?
That's why it was in the rubbish heap.

There certainly isn't any evidence of them growing barley because the evidence apparently couldn't survive due to the thin nature of Greenland's soil and the passage of time.

[milly]

So you refute the researchers findings?
The only other plausible explanation would be that they imported barley from Scandinavia which is highly unlikely due to the vast distances involved.

I don't care whether the Vikings grew barley on Greenland or not.
I was simply pointing out that their findings may have been driven by monetary considerations, in order to preserve their funding.
You choose to discount one set of scientific findings yet choose to blindly accept others because they fit your agenda.

Isn't it plausible that they took some barley over and found they couldn't grow it in sufficient quantities and threw it away?
That's why it was in the rubbish heap.

There certainly isn't any evidence of them growing barley because the evidence apparently couldn't survive due to the thin nature of Greenland's soil and the passage of time.

There's a big difference between large corporations funding scientists to say that junk food isn't that bad for you, compared with scientists studying anthropology.
Unless of course a Flour company paid for the research into the vikings growing barley on Greenland then there would be a conflict of interest.

[Barnacle]

So you refute the researchers findings?
The only other plausible explanation would be that they imported barley from Scandinavia which is highly unlikely due to the vast distances involved.

I don't care whether the Vikings grew barley on Greenland or not.
I was simply pointing out that their findings may have been driven by monetary considerations, in order to preserve their funding.
You choose to discount one set of scientific findings yet choose to blindly accept others because they fit your agenda.

Isn't it plausible that they took some barley over and found they couldn't grow it in sufficient quantities and threw it away?
That's why it was in the rubbish heap.

There certainly isn't any evidence of them growing barley because the evidence apparently couldn't survive due to the thin nature of Greenland's soil and the passage of time.

There's a big difference between large corporations funding scientists to say that junk food isn't that bad for you, compared with scientists studying anthropology.
Unless of course a Flour company paid for the research into the vikings growing barley on Greenland then there would be a conflict of interest.

What have Vikings on Greenland got to do with global warming now in 2024? Absolutely nothing. Their existence doesn’t disprove the impact of humans on the climate.

There are over 7 billion more people on the planet now than there were then and we hadn’t begun to burn fossil fuels on an industrial scale until the 1800s and we hadn’t begun dumping plastics in the world’s oceans until the 1950s onwards.

We’ve been very busy trashing everything for a couple of hundred years and finally we’re realising that there is a limit.

[milly]

So you refute the researchers findings?
The only other plausible explanation would be that they imported barley from Scandinavia which is highly unlikely due to the vast distances involved.

I don't care whether the Vikings grew barley on Greenland or not.
I was simply pointing out that their findings may have been driven by monetary considerations, in order to preserve their funding.
You choose to discount one set of scientific findings yet choose to blindly accept others because they fit your agenda.

Isn't it plausible that they took some barley over and found they couldn't grow it in sufficient quantities and threw it away?
That's why it was in the rubbish heap.

There certainly isn't any evidence of them growing barley because the evidence apparently couldn't survive due to the thin nature of Greenland's soil and the passage of time.

There's a big difference between large corporations funding scientists to say that junk food isn't that bad for you, compared with scientists studying anthropology.
Unless of course a Flour company paid for the research into the vikings growing barley on Greenland then there would be a conflict of interest.

What have Vikings on Greenland got to do with global warming now in 2024? Absolutely nothing. Their existence doesn’t disprove the impact of humans on the climate.

There are over 7 billion more people on the planet now than there were then and we hadn’t begun to burn fossil fuels on an industrial scale until the 1800s and we hadn’t begun dumping plastics in the world’s oceans until the 1950s onwards.

We’ve been very busy trashing everything for a couple of hundred years and finally we’re realising that there is a limit.

It shows that the Climate always has and always will change regardless of humans.
Only Malthusians/Eugenicists like yourself blame humans for climate change.

[moonjaguar]

Last time I looked at this thread was about 15 pages ago. How on earth did it go from someone writing on a leaflet to Vikings growing barley in Greenland. How bizarre.

[thefox]

Jesus christ this has went mental