On 01/10/2023 08:45, Salud wrote:
> On Sat, 30 Sep 2023 18:20:08 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>> On 30/09/2023 15:47, Salud wrote:
>>> On Sat, 30 Sep 2023 10:02:31 +0100, Chris Hogg wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sat, 30 Sep 2023 09:27:58 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
>>>> <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 30/09/2023 08:22, ? wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Seriously. Get a crane, get some glue, stick it back on.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Could that work?
>>>>> Sort of grafting? It might, it might well..
>>>>> But I hate sycamore. Bloody weeds
>>>>
>>>> I've seen them described as 'tree weeds'! Bearing in mind that in
>>>> Autumn, sycamores shed seeds like confetti which readily germinate,
>>>> it's surprising that there aren't a lot more of them all around.
>>>>
>>>> The 'experts' say the stump might send up several shoots, much as in
>>>> pollarding, but the tree that resulted would never look the same, and
>>>> it would take centuries to get anywhere near the same size or visual
>>>> impact of the original, which was apparently 300 years old.
>>>>
>>>> That gap must be a very exposed site and the wind must roar through
>>>> there on stormy days, but I see someone has already planted another
>>>> sycamore nearby, about 2 metres tall and protected with a tree-sleeve
>>>> to keep rabbits and deer from nibbling it.
>>>>
>>>> I wonder what drove the misguided tree-feller to fell it.
>>>
>>> I read that he's some sort of right wing anti environmentalist nutjob.
>> As opposed to a left wing anti-environemntalist nut job?
>
> It seems to have been a farmer and an ex-lumberjack with a grudge against
> the National Trust. Like I said, some sort of right wing anti
> environmentalist nutjob.

Not really. Isn't he the guy that was being evicted by the Jesuits from
the cottage in which he was born?

--
Gun Control: The law that ensures that only criminals have guns.

In article <ps9SM.791377$98Pa.400994@usenetxs.com>,
Salud <news@privacy.net> wrote:
> On Sat, 30 Sep 2023 18:20:08 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> > On 30/09/2023 15:47, Salud wrote:
> >> On Sat, 30 Sep 2023 10:02:31 +0100, Chris Hogg wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Sat, 30 Sep 2023 09:27:58 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
> >>> <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On 30/09/2023 08:22, ? wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Seriously. Get a crane, get some glue, stick it back on.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Could that work?
> >>>> Sort of grafting? It might, it might well..
> >>>> But I hate sycamore. Bloody weeds
> >>>
> >>> I've seen them described as 'tree weeds'! Bearing in mind that in
> >>> Autumn, sycamores shed seeds like confetti which readily germinate,
> >>> it's surprising that there aren't a lot more of them all around.
> >>>
> >>> The 'experts' say the stump might send up several shoots, much as in
> >>> pollarding, but the tree that resulted would never look the same, and
> >>> it would take centuries to get anywhere near the same size or visual
> >>> impact of the original, which was apparently 300 years old.
> >>>
> >>> That gap must be a very exposed site and the wind must roar through
> >>> there on stormy days, but I see someone has already planted another
> >>> sycamore nearby, about 2 metres tall and protected with a tree-sleeve
> >>> to keep rabbits and deer from nibbling it.
> >>>
> >>> I wonder what drove the misguided tree-feller to fell it.
> >>
> >> I read that he's some sort of right wing anti environmentalist nutjob.
> > As opposed to a left wing anti-environemntalist nut job?

> It seems to have been a farmer and an ex-lumberjack with a grudge against
> the National Trust. Like I said, some sort of right wing anti
> environmentalist nutjob.

according to The Sunday Times his landlords were "Jesuits in Britain".

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England - sent from my RISC OS 4té²
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle

On Sun, 1 Oct 2023 10:47:16 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
<tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

>>
>WEll if you look at what windmills BEVS, solar panels etc actually do to
>the environment, its clear that their advocates along with the climate
>change alarmists don't give a fuck about the environment.
>
There's an argument going on in West Cornwall about a Canadian company
that wants to add magnesium hydroxide (brucite, Mg(OH)2, milk of
magnesia) to a local sewer sea-outfall under the guise of protecting
the oceans from acidification by CO2. All utter bollocks of course.
Apart from the fact that the term 'acidification' is perfidious - the
oceans are not 'becoming acid' - they are naturally slightly alkaline
(pH of around 8-8.5) and the seas washing against chalk and limestone
cliffs around the world, and the rivers that flow over inland
limestone and chalk soils, naturally buffer the ocean pH in that
range.

The local residents in Quebec have been calling for something to be
done about the asbestos mine waste for years, because the dust that
blows off the tips contains traces of asbestos. This firm wants to
extract brucite from the mine waste, ship it across the Atlantic and
dump it into the sea here.

The amount of brucite available in the mining waste is trivial
compared with the amount of CO2 that dissolves every year into the
oceans. It's just a scam to pay for the removal of the asbestos waste
tips and to line the pockets of the directors. Musk has apparently
contributed $15 million, and it could potentially qualify for huge
sums of carbon credit.

The location where they want to dispose of the brucite has SSSI's on
both sides, as well as an RSPB bird sanctuary close by. The fact that
they are prepared to dump their waste into the sea in that
scientifically important area, shows their true concern for the
environment. As you say, they don't give a fuck about the environment.

--
Chris

On Saturday, 30 September 2023 at 08:22:47 UTC+1, Ħ wrote:
> Seriously. Get a crane, get some glue, stick it back on.
>
> Could that work?

Maybe a graft but don't hold your breath. https://youtu.be/SjdkFrDvHBo?feature=shared

On 10/1/2023 3:45 AM, Bob Henson wrote:
> The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>> On 30/09/2023 15:47, Salud wrote:
>>> On Sat, 30 Sep 2023 10:02:31 +0100, Chris Hogg wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sat, 30 Sep 2023 09:27:58 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
>>>> <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 30/09/2023 08:22, ? wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Seriously. Get a crane, get some glue, stick it back on.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Could that work?
>>>>> Sort of grafting? It might, it might well..
>>>>> But I hate sycamore. Bloody weeds
>>>>
>>>> I've seen them described as 'tree weeds'! Bearing in mind that in
>>>> Autumn, sycamores shed seeds like confetti which readily germinate, it's
>>>> surprising that there aren't a lot more of them all around.
>>>>
>>>> The 'experts' say the stump might send up several shoots, much as in
>>>> pollarding, but the tree that resulted would never look the same, and it
>>>> would take centuries to get anywhere near the same size or visual impact
>>>> of the original, which was apparently 300 years old.
>>>>
>>>> That gap must be a very exposed site and the wind must roar through
>>>> there on stormy days, but I see someone has already planted another
>>>> sycamore nearby, about 2 metres tall and protected with a tree-sleeve to
>>>> keep rabbits and deer from nibbling it.
>>>>
>>>> I wonder what drove the misguided tree-feller to fell it.
>>>
>>> I read that he's some sort of right wing anti environmentalist nutjob.
>> As opposed to a left wing anti-environemntalist nut job?
>
> Surely there aren't any? All the environmentalist are left wing per se,
> despite their fascist tendencies.
>

I think the practice of sorting people in these cases,
into "bins", is tired.

We don't know why people do stuff. Whether it is mental illness
or a bad upbringing, there are "lots of damaged goods out there, to go around".

https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/wellness-and-prevention/mental-health-disorder-statistics

"An estimated 26% of Americans ages 18 and older -- about 1 in 4 adults --
suffers from a diagnosable mental disorder in a given year."

https://www.camh.ca/en/camh-news-and-stories/mental-illness-and-the-prison-system

"Mental illness rates are about 4 to 7 times more common in prison than in the community."

In the first statistic, not all the people have "visible symptoms".
They can be very good at hiding it. Only a portion of those 26%,
are "visible as being disturbed". Many of the conditions would be
considered more subtle.

In the second statistic, they're comparing visible conditions, in the
two environments. Like, the people in jail, who don't know they're in jail,
they are that far gone.

When I was younger, one of my friends wanted to visit some relative
in the mental hospital. He needed some accompaniment for the trip,
so we "went with". And once that iron door closed in the ward, it
was just like the movies :-) Some of the people were lucid enough,
to stay in a bed (his relative). And some of them just had to walk
around and talk to themselves, to control their level of anxiety.
Not all the people who deserve to be in that ward, are in there yet :-)
Some of them are outside, cutting down sycamore trees.

Paul

On 2023-10-01, Chris Hogg <me@privacy.net> wrote:
> On Sun, 1 Oct 2023 10:47:16 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
><tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>>>
>>WEll if you look at what windmills BEVS, solar panels etc actually do to
>>the environment, its clear that their advocates along with the climate
>>change alarmists don't give a fuck about the environment.
>>
> There's an argument going on in West Cornwall about a Canadian company
> that wants to add magnesium hydroxide (brucite, Mg(OH)2, milk of
> magnesia) to a local sewer sea-outfall under the guise of protecting
> the oceans from acidification by CO2. All utter bollocks of course.
> Apart from the fact that the term 'acidification' is perfidious - the
> oceans are not 'becoming acid' - they are naturally slightly alkaline
> (pH of around 8-8.5) and the seas washing against chalk and limestone
> cliffs around the world, and the rivers that flow over inland
> limestone and chalk soils, naturally buffer the ocean pH in that
> range.
>
> The local residents in Quebec have been calling for something to be
> done about the asbestos mine waste for years, because the dust that
> blows off the tips contains traces of asbestos. This firm wants to
> extract brucite from the mine waste, ship it across the Atlantic and
> dump it into the sea here.
>
> The amount of brucite available in the mining waste is trivial
> compared with the amount of CO2 that dissolves every year into the
> oceans. It's just a scam to pay for the removal of the asbestos waste
> tips and to line the pockets of the directors. Musk has apparently
> contributed $15 million, and it could potentially qualify for huge
> sums of carbon credit.
>
> The location where they want to dispose of the brucite has SSSI's on
> both sides, as well as an RSPB bird sanctuary close by. The fact that
> they are prepared to dump their waste into the sea in that
> scientifically important area, shows their true concern for the
> environment. As you say, they don't give a fuck about the environment.
>

Asbestos has its good points. A parasite has charged my daughter over
500 euros to certify that her newly bought (2nd hand) house is asbestos
free. While that sort of thing happens, asbestos will be a problem.

--
greymausg@mail.com
Death to the Influencers, hung, drawn and Quartered is more than they deserve.
Meantime, back at the Estancia, etc.

On 30/09/2023 17:50, Tim+ wrote:
> charles <charles@candehope.me.uk> wrote:
>> In article
>> <428084022.717783335.217609.tim.downie-gmail.com@news.individual.net>, Tim+
>> <tim.downie@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Chris Hogg <me@privacy.net> wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 30 Sep 2023 09:27:58 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
>>>> <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 30/09/2023 08:22, ? wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Seriously. Get a crane, get some glue, stick it back on.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Could that work?
>>>>> Sort of grafting? It might, it might well.. But I hate sycamore.
>>>>> Bloody weeds
>>>>
>>>> I've seen them described as 'tree weeds'! Bearing in mind that in
>>>> Autumn, sycamores shed seeds like confetti which readily germinate,
>>>> it's surprising that there aren't a lot more of them all around.
>>>>
>>>> The 'experts' say the stump might send up several shoots, much as in
>>>> pollarding, but the tree that resulted would never look the same, and
>>>> it would take centuries to get anywhere near the same size or visual
>>>> impact of the original, which was apparently 300 years old.
>>>>
>>>> That gap must be a very exposed site and the wind must roar through
>>>> there on stormy days, but I see someone has already planted another
>>>> sycamore nearby, about 2 metres tall and protected with a tree-sleeve
>>>> to keep rabbits and deer from nibbling it.
>>>>
>>>> I wonder what drove the misguided tree-feller to fell it.
>>>>
>>
>>> Probably a disgruntled tenant farmer on National Trust land. Probably
>>> being evicted so took his revenge with a chainsaw.
>>
>>> If he wasn‘t being evicted before, he will be now!
>>
>> Probably upset by people trampling over his crops and leaving gates open to
>> take 'selfies' by the tree.
>>
>
> I doubt it’s arable land. All sheep up there! It’s got to have been more
> than an annoyance with trippers though as cutting down a protected tree in
> a national park (or at least National Trust land) will have him out on his
> ear (and possible imprisoned).

Criminal Damage: Intent to cause serious damage to property = maximum
culpability. High degree of planning = maximum culpability. Serious
consequential economic or social impact = maximum harm. High value of
damage (a tree like that could easily be valued at around £1 million
under DEFRA guidelines) = maximum harm. Sentencing Council guidelines
for criminal damage of over £5,000 with maximum culpability and maximum
harm is a starting point of 18 months custodial, with a range of 6
months - 4 years custodial. Damage caused to heritage and/or cultural
assets should increase the sentence, but sentences of two years or under
may be suspended. So, I think prison is a distinct possibility.

--
Colin Bignell

On 30/09/2023 08:22, Ħ wrote:
>
> Seriously. Get a crane, get some glue, stick it back on.
>
> Could that work?
300 years through its 400 year life....it will grow again

On 03/10/2023 08:20, Colin Bignell wrote:
> On 30/09/2023 17:50, Tim+ wrote:
>> charles <charles@candehope.me.uk> wrote:
>>> In article
>>> <428084022.717783335.217609.tim.downie-gmail.com@news.individual.net>, Tim+
>>> <tim.downie@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Chris Hogg <me@privacy.net> wrote:
>>>>> On Sat, 30 Sep 2023 09:27:58 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
>>>>> <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 30/09/2023 08:22, ? wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Seriously. Get a crane, get some glue, stick it back on.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Could that work?
>>>>>> Sort of grafting? It might, it might well.. But I hate sycamore.
>>>>>> Bloody weeds
>>>>>
>>>>> I've seen them described as 'tree weeds'! Bearing in mind that in
>>>>> Autumn, sycamores shed seeds like confetti which readily germinate,
>>>>> it's surprising that there aren't a lot more of them all around.
>>>>>
>>>>> The 'experts' say the stump might send up several shoots, much as in
>>>>> pollarding, but the tree that resulted would never look the same, and
>>>>> it would take centuries to get anywhere near the same size or visual
>>>>> impact of the original, which was apparently 300 years old.
>>>>>
>>>>> That gap must be a very exposed site and the wind must roar through
>>>>> there on stormy days, but I see someone has already planted another
>>>>> sycamore nearby, about 2 metres tall and protected with a tree-sleeve
>>>>> to keep rabbits and deer from nibbling it.
>>>>>
>>>>> I wonder what drove the misguided tree-feller to fell it.
>>>>>
>>>
>>>> Probably a disgruntled tenant farmer on National Trust land. Probably
>>>> being evicted so took his revenge with a chainsaw.
>>>
>>>> If he wasn‘t being evicted before, he will be now!
>>>
>>> Probably upset by people trampling over his crops and leaving gates
>>> open to
>>> take 'selfies' by the tree.
>>>
>>
>> I doubt it’s arable land.  All sheep up there! It’s got to have been more
>> than an annoyance with trippers though as cutting down a protected
>> tree in
>> a national park (or at least National Trust land) will have him out on
>> his
>> ear (and possible imprisoned).
>
> Criminal Damage: Intent to cause serious damage to property = maximum
> culpability.

Does it belong to anyone?
> High degree of planning = maximum culpability.
Agreed.

>Serious consequential economic or social impact = maximum harm.
No consequential economic or social impact. No one had even heard of the
fucking thing till he cut it down

> High value of
> damage (a tree like that could easily be valued at around £1 million
> under DEFRA guidelines) = maximum harm.

Bollocks, its not worth even £20 for firewood.

> Sentencing Council guidelines
> for criminal damage of over £5,000 with maximum culpability and maximum
> harm is a starting point of 18 months custodial, with a range of 6
> months - 4 years custodial. Damage caused to heritage and/or cultural
> assets should increase the sentence, but sentences of two years or under
> may be suspended. So, I think prison is a distinct possibility.
>
He will get off with a fine and a slap on the wrist

--
"When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign,
that the dunces are all in confederacy against him."

Jonathan Swift.

On 03/10/2023 09:16, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 03/10/2023 08:20, Colin Bignell wrote:
>> On 30/09/2023 17:50, Tim+ wrote:
>>> charles <charles@candehope.me.uk> wrote:
>>>> In article
>>>> <428084022.717783335.217609.tim.downie-gmail.com@news.individual.net>, Tim+
>>>> <tim.downie@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Chris Hogg <me@privacy.net> wrote:
>>>>>> On Sat, 30 Sep 2023 09:27:58 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
>>>>>> <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 30/09/2023 08:22, ? wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Seriously. Get a crane, get some glue, stick it back on.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Could that work?
>>>>>>> Sort of grafting? It might, it might well.. But I hate sycamore.
>>>>>>> Bloody weeds
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I've seen them described as 'tree weeds'! Bearing in mind that in
>>>>>> Autumn, sycamores shed seeds like confetti which readily germinate,
>>>>>> it's surprising that there aren't a lot more of them all around.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The 'experts' say the stump might send up several shoots, much as in
>>>>>> pollarding, but the tree that resulted would never look the same, and
>>>>>> it would take centuries to get anywhere near the same size or visual
>>>>>> impact of the original, which was apparently 300 years old.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That gap must be a very exposed site and the wind must roar through
>>>>>> there on stormy days, but I see someone has already planted another
>>>>>> sycamore nearby, about 2 metres tall and protected with a tree-sleeve
>>>>>> to keep rabbits and deer from nibbling it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I wonder what drove the misguided tree-feller to fell it.
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Probably a disgruntled tenant farmer on National Trust land. Probably
>>>>> being evicted so took his revenge with a chainsaw.
>>>>
>>>>> If he wasn‘t being evicted before, he will be now!
>>>>
>>>> Probably upset by people trampling over his crops and leaving gates
>>>> open to
>>>> take 'selfies' by the tree.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I doubt it’s arable land.  All sheep up there! It’s got to have been
>>> more
>>> than an annoyance with trippers though as cutting down a protected
>>> tree in
>>> a national park (or at least National Trust land) will have him out
>>> on his
>>> ear (and possible imprisoned).
>>
>> Criminal Damage: Intent to cause serious damage to property = maximum
>> culpability.
>
> Does it belong to anyone?

The National Trust according to the news reports.

>> High degree of planning = maximum culpability.
> Agreed.
>
>> Serious  consequential economic or social impact = maximum harm.
> No consequential economic or social impact. No one had even heard of the
> fucking thing till he cut it down

At least 7,123 people had, as that is how many voted for it in the 2017
European Tree of the Year competition.

>> High value of damage (a tree like that could easily be valued at
>> around £1 million under DEFRA guidelines) = maximum harm.
>
> Bollocks, its not worth even £20 for firewood.

Once cut down, the wood will be worth a lot less than the living tree.
DEFRA have calculated the value of non-woodland trees by their
contribution to the environment:

https://cdn.forestresearch.gov.uk/2022/09/Valuing-our-Non-Woodland-Trees_Final-Report_2022-09-07.pdf

>> Sentencing Council guidelines for criminal damage of over £5,000 with
>> maximum culpability and maximum harm is a starting point of 18 months
>> custodial, with a range of 6 months - 4 years custodial. Damage caused
>> to heritage and/or cultural assets should increase the sentence, but
>> sentences of two years or under may be suspended. So, I think prison
>> is a distinct possibility.
>>
> He will get off with a fine and a slap on the wrist

That sentence could easily be appealed as far too lenient, given the
Sentencing Council guidelines. If he is lucky, he will get no more than
two years, which is the maximum that can be suspended.

--
Colin Bignell

On 03/10/2023 10:19, Colin Bignell wrote:
> On 03/10/2023 09:16, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> Once cut down, the wood will be worth a lot less than the living tree.
> DEFRA have calculated the value of non-woodland trees by their
> contribution to the environment:
>
> https://cdn.forestresearch.gov.uk/2022/09/Valuing-our-Non-Woodland-Trees_Final-Report_2022-09-07.pdf

Even cut down, a deciduous tree in decent condition may yield several
thousand quid's worth of timber. (and significantly more by the time it
is milled, and dried etc.

>>> Sentencing Council guidelines for criminal damage of over £5,000 with
>>> maximum culpability and maximum harm is a starting point of 18 months
>>> custodial, with a range of 6 months - 4 years custodial. Damage
>>> caused to heritage and/or cultural assets should increase the
>>> sentence, but sentences of two years or under may be suspended. So, I
>>> think prison is a distinct possibility.
>>>
>> He will get off with a fine and a slap on the wrist
>
> That sentence could easily be appealed as far too lenient, given the
> Sentencing Council guidelines. If he is lucky, he will get no more than
> two years, which is the maximum that can be suspended.

The severity will likely depend on whether he failed to use the right
pronouns at any point! :-)

--
Cheers,

John.

/=================================================================\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\=================================================================/