Woops you just singed me there!! 
1 Like
How about FYR and Macedonia?
city states and Hellenic world?
1 Like
But it really is easy - after your âhighly successfulâ just choose any successful social system (except capitalism, obviously) anytime throughout history and anywhere in the world - for example âAncient Romeâ - and after your âdemonstrated inâ write in the location(s) - for Ancient Rome, for example, that would be Europe, Africa and Asia. You see?
Not the best quiz Iâve ever done though.
1 Like
I love Jameson Marijke!
Have you studied American literature by any chance?
Hi Geof,
Thanks for your wise words on this thread.
No I havenât studied American literature. That quote by Jameson came up in a talk I went to a while ago.
Hummmm I was hoping for something a little more âcontemporaryâ Geof - I look daft in a toga 
It never ceases to amaze me that, those who decry capitalism, are never able to come up with any successful alternatives. Hence my wildly successful âquizâ⊠
1 Like
I am just teasing you Simon - but it is true that if you measure success in terms of longevity - which is after all what we are talking about - there have been and are many non-capitalist societies with much, much longer histories.
But to be honest what people think about capitalism is pretty much beside the point now - that old left/right division around the organisation of industry was for our fathersâ and grandfathersâ generation - the whole point now is that whatever our politics we have to fundamentally change our economies and the ways of life they propagated - if we want civilisation (with any kind of economic system) to survive - this is what the wise young heads of the kids are telling us.
2 Likes
And thanks for your wisdom too Marijke!
I am jealous now though - going to any talk erudite enough to quote Jameson is one of the (few) things I miss from living very deep in the French countrysideâŠ
1 Like
I know this is too flippant Vero, but I do feel glad I got my kids out of nappies before I had to go back to cloth nappies. I remember my mum using them for my little brother - endless buckets of soiled nappies!!! Yes very selfish I deserve to have my face rubbed in several disposable nappies, used of course.
I think babies used to be out of cloth nappies far earlier, back in the dim and distant past because of the ghastliness of washing them.
I thought about but didnât use cloth nappies, I was back at work when my babies were very small (4 or 5 weeks) and disposable nappies fitted better with my childcare arrangements (what seems a good idea if you are a stay at home mother is harder to impose on someone else)- on the other hand they were out if them by 18 months which now seems to be considered âearlyâ.
I spent more time sorting out care right next to work, and being able to bring them to work, so I could feed them myself and be a good cow 
.
1 Like
Stop youâre bringing back too many memories and Iâll start âspoutingâ opinions about expressing etc Ha ha, clumsy pun there. You sound as though you were an excellent cow and I am sure still are.
1 Like
Probably lots of people think I am an absolute cow 
1 Like
No it was meant in all the best senses, beautiful animal, excellent mother, beautiful eyes, gentle nature, symbol of the countryside, very flexible tongue, friendly, and I am sure lots more.
1 Like
âEssential life-promoting gasâ I think you might be wrong there, a concentration higher than 3% CO2 in the air is fatal to humans.
âAll you folk who spout about the climate, and know relatively little, if anything, should think twiceâŠâ
Youâre so right! What did you study?
3 Likes
Obviously never worked in respiratory medicine
2 Likes
At the moment, the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere is a little over 400 ppm, or 0.04 percent - infinitely tiny, and mostly natural. The planet has enjoyed in excess of 1000 ppm, in the past and all life during those periods, thrived. Thereâs no way that the atmosphere will ever consist of 3% CO2, not unless there is an extra-terrestrial Armageddon, or similar.
Of course, what you exhale may approach 4%, so if you are THAT concerned, you could try breathing lessâŠ
" Composition. Inhaled air is by volume 78.08% nitrogen, 20.95% oxygen and small amounts include argon, carbon dioxide, neon, helium, and hydrogen. The gas exhaled is 4% to 5% by volume of carbon dioxide, about a 100 fold increase over the inhaled amountâŠ"
And CO2 IS essential to life.
So as I suggested, think twiceâŠ
âŠwe are in zero danger from CO2 - never have been, and probably never will be.
https://www.quora.com/At-what-CO2-percentage-would-our-atmosphere-become-toxic-to-humans
What you said was CO2 is an âessential life- promoting gas with which we could do with more, rather than lessâ
Please explain. More? How much more? Health authorities recommend a maximum, indoors, of 1000 ppm. All life? Really? Not necessarily people, then. Late Jurassic early Cretaceous giant dragonflies possibly âŠ
http://dr-petrole-mr-carbone.com/encore-50-ppm-equivalent-co2-pour-inverser-le-mouvement/
If you are unnecessarily concerned about CO2, which you appear to be, then as I suggested, you could regulate your own breathing, and modify the amount you expel. In that way, you will save us all from asphyxiation.
In the meantime, I donât intend to do your research for you - do it yourself.
The climate change scam would be a joke, if it wasnât so pointlessly insidious and expensive. As it is, despite SO much evidence to the contrary, the religion is still promoted by those gullible enough to believe it, or who think by indulging in it, will pressurise others to adopt their dicatorial, look-at-me-do-as-I-do mantra. The whole thing is just plain daft.
In the meantime, reflect upon how many events that the doomsayers predicted would occur if âglobal temperaturesâ exceeded two degrees. It seems they already have, and, oh - nothing happened!
2 Likes