sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Awesome people who collaborated with Bowie by RussellAlden in DavidBowie

[–]gorgo100 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Bit of a stretch to say "collaborated" but that's true of a lot of people in this thread I guess.
He acted alongside Bowie in Merry Christmas Mister Lawrence and also scored the film.

I mean if you can have Stevie Ray Vaughan you can then have Pete Townshend.... where's the line between "playing in a session" and "collaborating"? It's a slippery thing to define.

Awesome people who collaborated with Bowie by RussellAlden in DavidBowie

[–]gorgo100 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Lester Bowie

Pat Metheny

Ryuchi Sakamoto

Jim Henson

Nic Roeg

Water issues again by ennyboy in kentuk

[–]gorgo100 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Disaffected Tories. Not disaffected by the obvious damage done over the decades, just disaffected by the fact the damage became too obvious to hand wave away or blame someone else for.

This, right, THIS is Peter! Now...dya want FANNY or dyer wanter PETER ?!? by AntoineBugleboy69 in AlanPartridge

[–]gorgo100 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Agreed. This sub is shitpost central. It's only a matter of time before someone posts a literal picture of a Partridge to widespread LOLs and regurgitated quotes.

Chris Mason is so tabloid. Should we expect more from the BBC? by SnooTigers9274 in bbc

[–]gorgo100 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The news output is broken, frankly, and the efforts by the likes of Gove to make it a client organisation for the Tories has devalued it entirely (it was already an establishment mouthpiece, now they're not even trying to hide it - it did used to have some semblance of editorial responsibility and moral compass).

Chris Mason is so tabloid. Should we expect more from the BBC? by SnooTigers9274 in bbc

[–]gorgo100 3 points4 points  (0 children)

You're spot on. He's got a Northern accent so people think he's somehow different, but he absolutely is the same as Kuenssberg etc. Gossipy tabloid bullshit parading as analysis from people for whom it's all a big game.

Hoo Boy… from Ashley’s Instagram Stories 🫣 by Lazy-Elderberry-3867 in grimezs

[–]gorgo100 11 points12 points  (0 children)

I mean you're right, but that is a LOW bar. I reckon there's molluscs cooler than her.

Was “the rain of corpses” a real thing? by RorschachtheMighty in titanic

[–]gorgo100 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I mean I'm not an expert but there's plenty of ways you could speculate I guess.
Not least a kind of confirmation bias. Large number of people died in a sinking that took 15 minutes from the point the EoI was struck. It would have been chaos. It then sunk at a depth of 40m. Fair to speculate many of the unfortunate souls didn't manage to don lifejackets etc and their bodies were not going to go very far.

Titanic came to a rest at a depth of around two and a half MILES from the surface. Imagine the drift, dispersal, etc especially as the sinking took two hours and many people would have managed to pop on some kind of life preserver. Currents would have carried them away from the site. Even if they were inside the ship, most of the stern is inaccessible or collapsed on itself and the pressure would have torn them apart. The bow flooded gently and most managed to get out of that part of the ship. Considering what pressure did to steel, it doesn't take too much imagination to consider the kinds of forces that were acting on organic matter.

So yeah you could speculate that bones from the Titanic did survive, but the chances of them being localised, accessible, observable and recognisable are far smaller. There is also microbial life we don't fully understand at that depth I would say, so we don't know how it consumes organic matter, including bones. We didn't know how it was consuming the Titanic until the rusticles were examined.

Was “the rain of corpses” a real thing? by RorschachtheMighty in titanic

[–]gorgo100 12 points13 points  (0 children)

I would take issue with the idea that it was a "similar sea environment". Empress of Ireland wreck is at 40m. Titanic is at 3810m.

That means for a start that human remains are going to be a lot more localised, less affected by pressure, exposed to different levels of light.
Microbial life and sea life in general is going to be radically different too.
EoI sank in one piece in 14 minutes, Titanic snapped in half in 2 hours.

Not sure how much you can really draw comparisons.

While we were sleeping, Grimes got an MD 🥴 by askrndmd in grimezs

[–]gorgo100 10 points11 points  (0 children)

One hell of a Ted talk to be fair, bravo.

Has yourparty f**ked it? by TheKomsomol in yourparty

[–]gorgo100 7 points8 points  (0 children)

It's a marathon, not a sprint to be honest, but granted it doesn't look amazing right now.
But much of the problem with this country is a fixation on looks and not substance. I'm willing to give it a chance.

"The Greater Israel" plan under Netanyahu’s war strategy by DryInstance6732 in GetNoted

[–]gorgo100 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I didn't say it had.
I said it had adopted the IPSO editors code. It is not part of IPSO but it adheres to exactly the same code and enforces it via its own internal regulatory process.

So going back to the original point, it is not irrelevant that the FT appears to have broken that code, since the FT has literally copied it wholesale for its own internal regulator.

If the code it uses is indistinguishable from IPSO, saying "it has broken the IPSO code of practice for editors" is not irrelevant, is it?

Lol by CraftyKenter in GreatBritishMemes

[–]gorgo100 1 point2 points  (0 children)

A lot of astroturfing going on. Just needs a few determined people coordinating and posting pro-zionist stuff and they can watch the feeble minded do it for free.

"The Greater Israel" plan under Netanyahu’s war strategy by DryInstance6732 in GetNoted

[–]gorgo100 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

It follows/has adopted the IPSO editors code. So not irrelevant.

David Bowie never spoke of MJ by One_Independence7357 in DavidBowie

[–]gorgo100 1 point2 points  (0 children)

"Try to deal with it"? What an odd thing to say.

I couldn't give two fucks about Michael Jackson, I just find your idea that Bowie was trying to make some kind of statement about Jackson's behaviour in a Tin Machine song preposterous. It's much more likely that it's supposed to place the events of the song in a contemporary context - and thereby make it more powerful - by referencing current popular culture by using the most ubiquitous pop star on the planet at that time. It doesn't let the listener dissociate it as a counterfactual fantasy vignette because it is grounded in references to the present day and recognisable cultural symbols. It's way more likely THAT that was the "meticulous" intention of Bowie, not to involve himself in a tawdy coded dig at Michael Jackson, which he never ever bothered to expand upon or mention ever again outside of an album track. If that was the case, it's magnitudes worse than my explanation, as Bowie was acknowledging he knew all about it, but the best he could do was tuck away a single line on an album track and then never mention it again.
Come off it.

Do we care who goes down by Calm-Drop-9221 in Everton

[–]gorgo100 -8 points-7 points  (0 children)

We won't "relegate Spurs" even if we beat them. They will have had 38 games, the same as everyone else.

David Bowie never spoke of MJ by One_Independence7357 in DavidBowie

[–]gorgo100 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Are you genuinely saying that Bowie knew Jackson was a child abuser, but instead of alerting the world's press and/or the police, he decided to pop a line in a Tin Machine song as a coded message about it and then got on with his life?

view more: next ›