McFaul

If yee look as young as me at 33 yel be deein areet. By putting that pic up like I realise am fair game for abuse nee one else would be daft enough to put a topless pic up. I meant Wyn looks 50s man not you Obviously I always put question marks against people who have never shown a pic of themself on here like. Biggest shock was that Ant looked like Russell Brand.

Sorry I couldn't get this out my head. It's the one song I associate with Ireland. My point is fuck Paddy's Day, it even pisses me off how many Irish bars there are in England, I bet there's nee English bars in Dublin they'd all get torched, and I must stress I'm not an Irish hater, how could I be. If you took a pint of my blood and did tests on it I'd be more Irish than Paul McGrath put it that way.

What fucks me off is to me we've done more for the world than anyone, I'll argue that till I'm blue in the face. Things like judicial systems, modern parliaments, languange, football, fair play (even though we have been cunts). We basically taught the world how to go on, and as a nation we're known for stoic fairness. Yet the Irish who fair enough had a grievance are seen as these wonderful mythical freedom fighters and especially in America they're seen as Robin Hood types who have fought bravely against the big bad wolf, and any memories of things like Warrington where kids were murdered in cold blood are brushed under the carpet. Look at Chicago when this paddy's day goes on man, it's like the toon if we ever won a trophy.

If yee look as young as me at 33 yel be deein areet. By putting that pic up like I realise am fair game for abuse nee one else would be daft enough to put a topless pic up.

What's your plans on St George's Day? Moaning about Bloody Sunday no doubt. Fuck sake Stevie wise up would ya, "what's your plans for st paddys" hardly needed that in response. Off work but doing nothing, probably fit these new headlights to the car if they arrive Well it's a load of shite, Ant you know for a fact am not Rev IP or some Johnny Mad Dog Adair type but Paddy's Day oh dear. I remember when I was in the sixth form, we all went to Durham to celebrate Paddy's Day, drinking Guinness all day. To this day I couldn't tell you why. As far as I'm concerned Irish are English, and English are Irish, daft days like this where it's imposed on us in this country creates resentment and division and I'm speaking to you as someone with more Irish blood than English believe it or not.

Was in the Sun this, and surprise surprise it was in Liverpool.

Cheeky caant. Tell you what is scary, he's only 8 years older than me, and scarier still for Alex, Gemmill and Catmag, he's only 4 years older than them. He's got nee features. Other than them geps.

What's your plans on St George's Day? Moaning about Bloody Sunday no doubt.

And so it begins and ends Paulwynphotoshops I'm all for other than when he's looking at me in a lecherous way.

Portugal's a fairly good model for renewable energy too... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portugal Isn't that preferable/safer? It's an impressive reversal of the numbers. How much power do they (Portugal) need to produce compared with Britain? Are there more logistical obstacles here than there? How's the decriminalization of weed going there? The last I saw it was a success in every area that could be quantified. The population is 1/6th, so I'd guess near that level. Not one person can or has explained why we can't put thousands of huge wind turbines, the size we've never seen before in the North Sea. There's no such thing as limitless wind power, if we have the will we can do it. Freddy Shepherd has the vision to do it, will private companies and the government have the will to do it. Regardless what arguments you put up, it's not impossible, and it's safe. It's the type of vision the Halls and the Shepherds had at NUFC, and look where we ended up. Are you happy with your freezer regularly defrosting when we have anticyclonic conditions? Apart from that there's the cost, the ugliness of them and their effect on wildlife, and the fact they're technically unreliable and need frequent replacing. You also have to manufacture them which wipes out most their carbon credentials. The effect on wildlife? What thirty miles out at sea? A few fish bumping their heads isn't going to cause an ecological disaster. Technically unreliable? Are you an expert on the new modern techniques they're developing? The ugliness of them, if you have them 30 miles offshore who's going to care apart from a few Uncle Albert types, as I'm sure you're aware you can't see anything in a straight line from your view point that is further than 22 miles away due to the shape of the world. As for the manufacturing pollution, you can't be serious? I'm no expert, but are you? If this was a cost-effective solution, why's it not already been done to a greater extent? You've completely ignored my first and most important point. They provide only an intermittent source of energy so can never be our main energy resource. I don't personally care about sea gulls getting decapitated but plenty of other people do. Regarding their ugliness, the further out you build them, the more expensive they are. The North Sea is up to 400 feet deep, how are you going to anchor them? The cost would be astronomical. I think somebody in the know on here said they were technically unreliable. Apparently at any single point in time, even with ideal wind conditions, a fair proportion are out of commission. The manufacture of them and their spare parts is of course going to effect the environment indirectly, you have to factor it in. I'll be interested if you address point one anyway, it's a fundamental flaw as far as I can tell. The future of the planet is at stake, and the government were considering FFS proposals strongly until the cut backs, they all agree something like this needs to happen in the next 20/30 years or we're fucked. The renewable energy industry is taking off, I can even see it in my industry, it's double the size it was two years ago, and in two years it will be double again, people are starting to take it seriously. At the end of the day long term it would pay for itself because our oil will be gone in 30 years, and we either find alternative energy sources or be ripped off to fuck off the likes of Russia and Libya for oil. As for it never being our main source of energy, says who, and why not? It's almost infinite. As for the North Sea being 400 foot deep, it's over 1,000 feet deep in some places, yet oil rigs manage, they're all easily solved engineering problems of which neither you nor myself fully understand anyway. Wind turbines don't produce any energy when it's not windy though? Even if I can accept other problems can be solved, how will technology ever get over that particlar problem? Rechargeable batteries? I completely agree that renwables are important but intermittent sources can only ever be part of the solution. Nuclear energy is another important piece of the equation imo, for the reasons you've stated. The North Sea aye, known for it's tranquil still conditions. You say that intermittent sources can only ever be part of the solution. Why???? Explain definitively why. Because electricity, I mean the type you use in your house or for industry, cannot be stored, it must be constantly generated. You say the North Sea is always windy but it's not. You can have days or even weeks without any, or little wind. Even too much wind stops turbines working. During which time we'd be screwed without any electricity at all - no computers, fridges, TVs, lights, electric trains, telecommunications etc. Therefore you have to have a constant source to rely on as well - a good old fashioned nuclear, gas, or coal fired station. Wind energy can never really make up more than 20% of the total in fact. Says who?

Portugal's a fairly good model for renewable energy too... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portugal Isn't that preferable/safer? It's an impressive reversal of the numbers. How much power do they (Portugal) need to produce compared with Britain? Are there more logistical obstacles here than there? How's the decriminalization of weed going there? The last I saw it was a success in every area that could be quantified. The population is 1/6th, so I'd guess near that level. Not one person can or has explained why we can't put thousands of huge wind turbines, the size we've never seen before in the North Sea. There's no such thing as limitless wind power, if we have the will we can do it. Freddy Shepherd has the vision to do it, will private companies and the government have the will to do it. Regardless what arguments you put up, it's not impossible, and it's safe. It's the type of vision the Halls and the Shepherds had at NUFC, and look where we ended up. Are you happy with your freezer regularly defrosting when we have anticyclonic conditions? Apart from that there's the cost, the ugliness of them and their effect on wildlife, and the fact they're technically unreliable and need frequent replacing. You also have to manufacture them which wipes out most their carbon credentials. The effect on wildlife? What thirty miles out at sea? A few fish bumping their heads isn't going to cause an ecological disaster. Technically unreliable? Are you an expert on the new modern techniques they're developing? The ugliness of them, if you have them 30 miles offshore who's going to care apart from a few Uncle Albert types, as I'm sure you're aware you can't see anything in a straight line from your view point that is further than 22 miles away due to the shape of the world. As for the manufacturing pollution, you can't be serious? I'm no expert, but are you? If this was a cost-effective solution, why's it not already been done to a greater extent? You've completely ignored my first and most important point. They provide only an intermittent source of energy so can never be our main energy resource. I don't personally care about sea gulls getting decapitated but plenty of other people do. Regarding their ugliness, the further out you build them, the more expensive they are. The North Sea is up to 400 feet deep, how are you going to anchor them? The cost would be astronomical. I think somebody in the know on here said they were technically unreliable. Apparently at any single point in time, even with ideal wind conditions, a fair proportion are out of commission. The manufacture of them and their spare parts is of course going to effect the environment indirectly, you have to factor it in. I'll be interested if you address point one anyway, it's a fundamental flaw as far as I can tell. The future of the planet is at stake, and the government were considering FFS proposals strongly until the cut backs, they all agree something like this needs to happen in the next 20/30 years or we're fucked. The renewable energy industry is taking off, I can even see it in my industry, it's double the size it was two years ago, and in two years it will be double again, people are starting to take it seriously. At the end of the day long term it would pay for itself because our oil will be gone in 30 years, and we either find alternative energy sources or be ripped off to fuck off the likes of Russia and Libya for oil. As for it never being our main source of energy, says who, and why not? It's almost infinite. As for the North Sea being 400 foot deep, it's over 1,000 feet deep in some places, yet oil rigs manage, they're all easily solved engineering problems of which neither you nor myself fully understand anyway. Wind turbines don't produce any energy when it's not windy though? Even if I can accept other problems can be solved, how will technology ever get over that particlar problem? Rechargeable batteries? I completely agree that renwables are important but intermittent sources can only ever be part of the solution. Nuclear energy is another important piece of the equation imo, for the reasons you've stated. The North Sea aye, known for it's tranquil still conditions. You say that intermittent sources can only ever be part of the solution. Why???? Explain definitively why.

pmsl

Are you seriously suggesting that manufacturing wind turbines causes more pollution than burning fossil fuels? If you manutacture anything at all, it will produce some pollution, but that would be so minimal when you think it's going produce a clean efficient long lasting energy source, it truly isn't worth talking about. It's one of the main arguments Greens use against nuclear technology. Well they're just attention seeking mugs who like a good protest most of them.

Portugal's a fairly good model for renewable energy too... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portugal Isn't that preferable/safer? It's an impressive reversal of the numbers. How much power do they (Portugal) need to produce compared with Britain? Are there more logistical obstacles here than there? How's the decriminalization of weed going there? The last I saw it was a success in every area that could be quantified. The population is 1/6th, so I'd guess near that level. Not one person can or has explained why we can't put thousands of huge wind turbines, the size we've never seen before in the North Sea. There's no such thing as limitless wind power, if we have the will we can do it. Freddy Shepherd has the vision to do it, will private companies and the government have the will to do it. Regardless what arguments you put up, it's not impossible, and it's safe. It's the type of vision the Halls and the Shepherds had at NUFC, and look where we ended up. Are you happy with your freezer regularly defrosting when we have anticyclonic conditions? Apart from that there's the cost, the ugliness of them and their effect on wildlife, and the fact they're technically unreliable and need frequent replacing. You also have to manufacture them which wipes out most their carbon credentials. The effect on wildlife? What thirty miles out at sea? A few fish bumping their heads isn't going to cause an ecological disaster. Technically unreliable? Are you an expert on the new modern techniques they're developing? The ugliness of them, if you have them 30 miles offshore who's going to care apart from a few Uncle Albert types, as I'm sure you're aware you can't see anything in a straight line from your view point that is further than 22 miles away due to the shape of the world. As for the manufacturing pollution, you can't be serious? I'm no expert, but are you? If this was a cost-effective solution, why's it not already been done to a greater extent? You've completely ignored my first and most important point. They provide only an intermittent source of energy so can never be our main energy resource. I don't personally care about sea gulls getting decapitated but plenty of other people do. Regarding their ugliness, the further out you build them, the more expensive they are. The North Sea is up to 400 feet deep, how are you going to anchor them? The cost would be astronomical. I think somebody in the know on here said they were technically unreliable. Apparently at any single point in time, even with ideal wind conditions, a fair proportion are out of commission. The manufacture of them and their spare parts is of course going to effect the environment indirectly, you have to factor it in. I'll be interested if you address point one anyway, it's a fundamental flaw as far as I can tell. The future of the planet is at stake, and the government were considering FFS proposals strongly until the cut backs, they all agree something like this needs to happen in the next 20/30 years or we're fucked. The renewable energy industry is taking off, I can even see it in my industry, it's double the size it was two years ago, and in two years it will be double again, people are starting to take it seriously. At the end of the day long term it would pay for itself because our oil will be gone in 30 years, and we either find alternative energy sources or be ripped off to fuck off the likes of Russia and Libya for oil. As for it never being our main source of energy, says who, and why not? It's almost infinite. As for the North Sea being 400 foot deep, it's over 1,000 feet deep in some places, yet oil rigs manage, they're all easily solved engineering problems of which neither you nor myself fully understand anyway.

Are you seriously suggesting that manufacturing wind turbines causes more pollution than burning fossil fuels? If you manutacture anything at all, it will produce some pollution, but that would be so minimal when you think it's going produce a clean efficient long lasting energy source, it truly isn't worth talking about.

Portugal's a fairly good model for renewable energy too... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portugal Isn't that preferable/safer? It's an impressive reversal of the numbers. How much power do they (Portugal) need to produce compared with Britain? Are there more logistical obstacles here than there? How's the decriminalization of weed going there? The last I saw it was a success in every area that could be quantified. The population is 1/6th, so I'd guess near that level. Not one person can or has explained why we can't put thousands of huge wind turbines, the size we've never seen before in the North Sea. There's no such thing as limitless wind power, if we have the will we can do it. Freddy Shepherd has the vision to do it, will private companies and the government have the will to do it. Regardless what arguments you put up, it's not impossible, and it's safe. It's the type of vision the Halls and the Shepherds had at NUFC, and look where we ended up. Are you happy with your freezer regularly defrosting when we have anticyclonic conditions? Apart from that there's the cost, the ugliness of them and their effect on wildlife, and the fact they're technically unreliable and need frequent replacing. You also have to manufacture them which wipes out most their carbon credentials. The effect on wildlife? What thirty miles out at sea? A few fish bumping their heads isn't going to cause an ecological disaster. Technically unreliable? Are you an expert on the new modern techniques they're developing? The ugliness of them, if you have them 30 miles offshore who's going to care apart from a few Uncle Albert types, as I'm sure you're aware you can't see anything in a straight line from your view point that is further than 22 miles away due to the shape of the world. As for the manufacturing pollution, you can't be serious?

You should change your screen name to Holmes.

Portugal's a fairly good model for renewable energy too... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portugal Isn't that preferable/safer? It's an impressive reversal of the numbers. How much power do they (Portugal) need to produce compared with Britain? Are there more logistical obstacles here than there? How's the decriminalization of weed going there? The last I saw it was a success in every area that could be quantified. The population is 1/6th, so I'd guess near that level. Not one person can or has explained why we can't put thousands of huge wind turbines, the size we've never seen before in the North Sea. There's no such thing as limitless wind power, if we have the will we can do it. Freddy Shepherd has the vision to do it, will private companies and the government have the will to do it. Regardless what arguments you put up, it's not impossible, and it's safe. It's the type of vision the Halls and the Shepherds had at NUFC, and look where we ended up.

Haha. I find Levi's are for umpa lumpa's size wise. I feel comfortable in 36 Levi's at the minute but 34 in other stuff. I feel for these fatties who are 38 or over though because you go to a clothes shop and most of the good stuff stops at 34, and loads for blokes 30inch waste 32 leg, probably be even worse for women. I'd be embarrassed. Me mate said to me recently "I'm 34 and I'm a THIRTY TWO INCH WAIST YE NAA", I was like d ye wanna medal like? The thing is with me, ye see people sayin haha you're over 15st, but honestly the way I'm built I'd look like an even bigger cunt if I was 13st.

I manage. 34 is tight, 36 is slack. If I was 5ft8 I could understand your reasoning. There are professional footballers heavier than that. Steve Ogrizovich was 16 and a half.

Been a mint day, work absolutely flying already, and I've had 2 out of 4 winners at Cheltenham (the last two).

Is he? Fuck it then? Are there any other fat bastards I can have a motivational bet with then? That Paul Wyn could lose a few pounds. Everyone else treats their bodies as temples. I treat mine like a shed but i bought two pairs of slacks after work tonight and am a confirmed 31. Try Renton. Renton would be a good one actually similar build and age, but am not sure if he'd be up for it. I'll do owt for a bet, and it would give me added motivation. First of all Chez is a cheeky cunt. Second I am a fair bit older than you, a fair bit shorter, and a fair bit less heavy. I'm currently hovering pretty much around the 14 stone mark but I'm bound to go down a bit in spring as I don't really exercise much in winter. Can't say I'm particularly arsed about losing weight though in any case, as long as I don't put any on I'm OK. My jeans are all 34 inch but are too big and I need to get a new hole cut in my belt as things stand. Finding this board's obsession with weight a bit odd tbh, it's been like Loose Women on this place recently. As mine are, tight though the cunts, so you're 5ft10 - 14st, am 6ft2 15 6 as of this morning, I think that's a fair comparison. I thought you were 31??? Well what age are you like Renton?

Look at all the guests viewing. These are people off Twitter, cos I put the link up there. Honestly I wouldn't be surprised if there's dead bodies in his walls, like Fred West. This guy NEEDS investigating, the evidence is astonishing. Like I say, if I was running a book on what's on his hard drive, there'd be some pretty sick odds on the chalk board. UTTER WRONGUN, I spoke to my mate in the police and he said there's fuck all can be done based on what we know so far.

Some lass added me on Twitter purely to say the following in PM. Disgrace of a man.

Is he? Fuck it then? Are there any other fat bastards I can have a motivational bet with then? That Paul Wyn could lose a few pounds. Everyone else treats their bodies as temples. I treat mine like a shed but i bought two pairs of slacks after work tonight and am a confirmed 31. Try Renton. Renton would be a good one actually similar build and age, but am not sure if he'd be up for it. I'll do owt for a bet, and it would give me added motivation. Like what?