Cath Smith🇮🇲🇬🇷 @Fit2You

@ktboldy Many I follow have said the same, Keith, so I don’t think it’s you in any shape or form!

Look at the maps. Summer 1976: most of the world cooler than average, except for one hot spot over Britain. Summer 2025: the whole planet much hotter than the same baseline. You do not have to like climate activism, trust politicians, or support every green policy to accept what these maps show. In 1976, summer temperature anomalies were mixed. In 2025, warmth is far more widespread across the globe. That does not prove every detail on its own, but it fits the long-term pattern measured across many independent records: the world has warmed significantly. The simplest explanation is also the strongest one. We have burned enormous amounts of coal, oil, and gas, raising CO₂ levels in the atmosphere. CO₂ traps heat. Add more of it, and the planet's energy balance shifts. Natural variability still exists, which is why some places or years are cooler than others. But variability now plays out on top of a warmer baseline. That makes broad hot spells more likely and more intense. You can argue about the best response. You can support nuclear power, domestic industry, cheap energy, and more resilient infrastructure. But calling the warming itself a hoax no longer fits the evidence.

keyboard_arrow_left Previous keyboard_arrow_right Next

We have been chasing the most violent storms on earth together for over 25 years. Now, we are bringing the ultimate intercept to the BIG SCREEN. 🌪️🎥 I am beyond excited to announce that NEVER STOP CHASING is hitting theaters nationwide on August 21! Huge thanks to Deadline for breaking the news this morning. You can read the exclusive announcement and watch the full official trailer here: deadline.com/2026/06/reed-t… Directed by my longtime chase partner Ken Cole, this documentary takes you directly inside the bear's cage. We mastered the entire film in Dolby Vision and immersive Dolby Atmos sound so you can actually feel the roar of a massive wedge tornado right in your theater seat. This is the real deal, and I can't wait for you to experience it with us. Check out neverstopchasingfilm.com for updates and theater info! #NeverStopChasing #StormChasing #Dominator #Tornado#Dominator #Tornado

@Walshag @SarahjevsEvans This has just made me lol! 😂

My advice today, and always:

Don’t let your life 'narrow'. I’ve been an orthopedic surgeon for 30 years. The thing I watch happen to people — more than any injury or surgery — is what I call the narrowing. Most of my patients have no idea it’s happening. They think it’s just aging. It’s not...

Seeing some of the embarrassingly hateful reactions to Starmer's resignation today, I thought it was worth resharing this. The level of personal hostility directed at Keir Starmer deserves scrutiny in its own right. Not because he should be immune from criticism, but because the tone and intensity of the attacks tell us something unhealthy about the state of democratic politics. Starmer is a conventional political figure. Cautious, legalistic, incremental. He frustrates people precisely because he is managerial rather than messianic. Yet the reaction to him often goes far beyond disagreement, tipping into visceral hatred more commonly reserved for authoritarians or demagogues. Much of this hostility is disconnected from concrete policy. It is not about specific votes, proposals or outcomes, but about projection. A belief that Starmer embodies betrayal, bad faith or hidden malice. That kind of politics runs on suspicion rather than evidence. This matters because democracy depends on the assumption of good faith among opponents. You can think a leader is wrong, timid, or misguided without believing they are fundamentally illegitimate. Once politics becomes moralised to the point of demonisation, compromise is reframed as treachery and pluralism as weakness. The pattern is familiar. In fragmented, polarised systems, anger concentrates not on extremists, whose intentions are clear, but on moderates, who disappoint maximalists on all sides. The centre becomes the lightning rod precisely because it resists totalising narratives. There is also a media and online dynamic at work. Incentives reward outrage, not proportionality. Algorithms favour contempt over analysis. Over time, this creates a political culture in which relentless personal attack feels normal, even virtuous, rather than disgusting. None of this is a defence of Starmer’s decisions, instincts or record. Those should be argued over robustly as you do in a democracy. The problem is the substitution of critique with hostility and the quiet erosion of democratic norms that follows when political opponents are treated as enemies rather than rivals. A democracy cannot function if every election is framed as an existential struggle against internal evil. At some point, the target may change, but the damage to trust, restraint and culture remains.

History may end up being far kinder to Keir Starmer than the public was. Not because he will g down in history a great Prime Minister. But because he inherited a far more difficult country than many of his critics are willing to acknowledge and was judged against expectations that no Prime Minister could realistically have met. When Labour won power, there was an understandable sense of anticipation. After fourteen years of Conservative government, many voters expected visible national renewal. Stronger growth, better public services, lower living costs, more housing and a general sense that Britain would begin moving forward again. The problem was that governments do not inherit expectations. They inherit realities. And the reality Starmer inherited was a country facing stagnant productivity, weak economic growth, overstretched public services, infrastructure challenges, housing shortages and some of the lowest levels of political trust in modern British history. That doesn't absolve him of criticism. Far from it. He often struggled to communicate a compelling vision, appeared too cautious and sometimes looked more comfortable managing problems than solving them. But there is a difference between arguing a government should have done more and pretending the scale of the challenge wasn't extraordinary. One of Starmer's biggest political problems was that many voters judged him against the Britain they wanted rather than the Britain he actually inherited. People wanted Scandinavian public services and lower taxes. Higher spending and fiscal restraint. Controlled immigration and labour market flexibility. Rapid growth and political stability. Governments can balance those tensions. They cannot magically eliminate them. That is why I suspect history will ask a different question. Not whether Starmer transformed Britain overnight. But whether Britain was more stable, more functional and in better condition when he left office than when he entered it. Voters living through events focus on what hasn't improved. Historians tend to focus on where things started. And when future generations look back at the condition of Britain in 2024, they may conclude that many of Starmer's critics underestimated just how deep the problems really were. That may not make him a great Prime Minister. But it may make him a better one than many people currently believe.

Cracking!

BrooklynDad_Defiant!☮️ @mmpadellan

6 days ago

Holy sh*t, this dude @JonathanPieNews thoroughly OBLITERATED trump, and it is glorious. Definitely worth a watch.🔥🔥

481 8K 25K 557K 4K

@LifeAfloat Tis beautiful! 🤩

Six Things I See in My ‘Strongest’ 80-Year-Old Patients I am 63 now, and after three decades as an orthopedic surgeon, I have examined thousands of people in their eighties. Some arrive frail and afraid, others walk in straighter and more confident than patients half their age. They’re still skiing, still gardening, still picking up grandchildren without a second thought. The gap between those two groups is not luck, and it is rarely genetics alone. The same patterns keep showing up in those who are thriving. Here is what they have in common. The most important reasons are lower down in the list…

Wowsers!

@DarrellWakelam Incredible!

83% of Britain is white. 87% of MPs are white. 92% of police officers are white. 94% of the House of Lords is white. 85% of Britain’s richest families are white. Yet we’re supposed to believe Britain is gripped by “systemic anti-white racism”? Give it a rest. It’s a far-right grievance industry built on outrage, not evidence. If white Britons overwhelmingly dominate politics, policing, wealth and power, the conspiracy theory simply doesn’t survive contact with reality. #UKPolitics

@RadarLanark @catherinetinker To see his transformation from the early days must be very touching!

I reckon teachers have asked themselves this question this year more than any previous year

@ICT_MrP I lasted til 55. This says exactly how it is.

I absolutely love Marian’s landscapes!

marianyoung @marianyoung1

2 weeks ago

Two new Paintings today. Acrylics on canvas, 12 x 12" Inspired by my Sales yesterday; spent most of the day Painting! marianyoungart.com

keyboard_arrow_left Previous keyboard_arrow_right Next

0 5 14 294 0