emil
Oasis Roadie
Posts: 194
|
Post by emil on Nov 1, 2019 13:04:28 GMT -5
Tonight. will this be the time he gets the same question about Oasis but answers there will be a reunion?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 1, 2019 14:29:07 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Derrick on Nov 1, 2019 15:39:05 GMT -5
Some funny bits there to enjoy.
|
|
|
Post by freddy838 on Nov 2, 2019 5:03:06 GMT -5
Enjoyed that. Is it just me or when he ditches the sunglasses he is less of a twat?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 2, 2019 5:35:42 GMT -5
There are clips from the interview on twitter, and Noel is now saying Liam threatened his kids. I don't know who's telling the truth or what is really going on between them, but I wish they would stop this already ffs.
|
|
|
Post by darmin on Nov 2, 2019 5:50:59 GMT -5
I think he "slightly exaggerated" that situation with the text from Liam to Anais about Sara. Otherwise with stuff like this you go to the police not a talkshow. a swedish talkshow where no one knows about this and can call him out. I can be wrong but I doubt it. Noel should work for Th S*n
|
|
|
Post by joladella on Nov 2, 2019 6:26:29 GMT -5
Some funny bits there to enjoy. "There is another one?!"
|
|
|
Post by mossy on Nov 2, 2019 7:53:09 GMT -5
What was wrong with the chairs? X
|
|
|
Post by bt95 on Nov 4, 2019 5:55:37 GMT -5
Gold shoes... Gold bracelet... Gold chain.
Jeepers.
|
|
blkc
Oasis Roadie
Posts: 105
|
Post by blkc on Nov 4, 2019 9:28:16 GMT -5
Found the chairs
|
|
|
Post by bt95 on Nov 4, 2019 10:43:32 GMT -5
Good on Brexit. But easier to call him a Tory I suppose.
|
|
|
Post by The Invisible Sun on Nov 4, 2019 11:16:10 GMT -5
How dare he excuse his own slander. Liam tried to sue him for good reason. Noel blatantly lied to make himself look like the better man. And Noel apologized for doing it in the end.
|
|
|
Post by bogaloo on Nov 4, 2019 11:46:32 GMT -5
How dare he excuse his own slander. Liam tried to sue him for good reason. Noel blatantly lied to make himself look like the better man. And Noel apologized for doing it in the end. I really don't want to be going back to this topic, but if you mean the laryngitis thing, I, as a doctor, can tell you it wasn't THAT slanderous. I can point you to some review papers regarding acute on chronic laryngitis and its causes. In fact, go back and watch Noel's 'apology' and you'll undestand that's more or less what he meant.
|
|
|
Post by thomuk2006 on Nov 4, 2019 12:22:46 GMT -5
Good on Brexit. But easier to call him a Tory I suppose. Most of what he said on Brexit made sense... but don't agree that people can't change their minds... especially when people voted based on a load of lies... like that red bus!
|
|
|
Post by bt95 on Nov 4, 2019 13:06:01 GMT -5
Good on Brexit. But easier to call him a Tory I suppose. Most of what he said on Brexit made sense... but don't agree that people can't change their minds... especially when people voted based on a load of lies... like that red bus! Without getting into it all again, both sides lied. Remain's arguments were crap. They were underprepared (yet over-funded) and arrogant. It's not that people can't change their minds. It's that you set a very strange precedent by just saying a vote doesn't count.
|
|
|
Post by Zingbot on Nov 4, 2019 13:21:35 GMT -5
How dare he excuse his own slander. Liam tried to sue him for good reason. Noel blatantly lied to make himself look like the better man. And Noel apologized for doing it in the end. I really don't want to be going back to this topic, but if you mean the laryngitis thing, I, as a doctor, can tell you it wasn't THAT slanderous. I can point you to some review papers regarding acute on chronic laryngitis and its causes. In fact, go back and watch Noel's 'apology' and you'll undestand that's more or less what he meant. How is accusing someone of having a hangover not 'that slanderous '? It's very fucking slanderous. Liam didn't have a hangover and Noel made him look bad in the media, Noel wouldn't have apologized if he thought he was legally clear to do what he did.
|
|
|
Post by bogaloo on Nov 4, 2019 13:47:15 GMT -5
I really don't want to be going back to this topic, but if you mean the laryngitis thing, I, as a doctor, can tell you it wasn't THAT slanderous. I can point you to some review papers regarding acute on chronic laryngitis and its causes. In fact, go back and watch Noel's 'apology' and you'll undestand that's more or less what he meant. How is accusing someone of having a hangover not 'that slanderous '? It's very fucking slanderous. Liam didn't have a hangover and Noel made him look bad in the media, Noel wouldn't have apologized if he thought he was legally clear to do what he did. Right, I'm taking a deep breath and explaining, again. Obviously you can disagree, but it doesn't really change my pov: From what we know, Liam couldn't sing because he had an acute laryngitis. We also know that he has chronic laryngitis due to years of smoking, dinking, bad singing technique and his thyroiditis (that no-one suspected before he started developing systemic symptoms, precisely due to all the other, more common risk factors). We know that Liam was out, dinking and smoking on some festival on the eve or maybe 2 days before the gig they were supposed to play at V. Now, obviously Noel's choice of words, if I recall correctly something along the lines of 'he claimed he had laryngitis... Whatever...' and then adding that 'he was hungover' was unfortunate, but no-one can claim that the bender Liam went on was unrelated to the acute laryngitis, as damaged and inflammed larynx are more susceptible to acute damage. It's more or less the same thing as when an epileptic patient misses something important because he's had a seizure, after dinking alcohol, and then complains about it, knowing very well that alcohol lowers the seizure threshold. This is what I meant. Now, be free to have your opinion on the subject.
|
|
|
Post by shamumaybard on Nov 4, 2019 14:13:06 GMT -5
Very honest and interesting interview, the interviewers were quite good at their choice of questions.
|
|
|
Post by captaincrankshaft on Nov 4, 2019 14:37:29 GMT -5
Yeah I liked Noel in this interview. Which is becoming rare for me these days.
|
|
|
Post by The Invisible Sun on Nov 4, 2019 15:05:23 GMT -5
Right, I'm taking a deep breath and explaining, again. Obviously you can disagree, but it doesn't really change my pov: From what we know, Liam couldn't sing because he had an acute laryngitis. We also know that he has chronic laryngitis due to years of smoking, dinking, bad singing technique and his thyroiditis (that no-one suspected before he started developing systemic symptoms, precisely due to all the other, more common risk factors). We know that Liam was out, dinking and smoking on some festival on the eve or maybe 2 days before the gig they were supposed to play at V. Now, obviously Noel's choice of words, if I recall correctly something along the lines of 'he claimed he had laryngitis... Whatever...' and then adding that 'he was hungover' was unfortunate, but no-one can claim that the bender Liam went on was unrelated to the acute laryngitis, as damaged and inflammed larynx are more susceptible to acute damage. It's more or less the same thing as when an epileptic patient misses something important because he's had a seizure, after dinking alcohol, and then complains about it, knowing very well that alcohol lowers the seizure threshold. This is what I meant. Now, be free to have your opinion on the subject. Correlation isn't causation. While it may be likely Liam's lifestyle is what triggered the flare up, you can't establish that beyond all reasonable doubt. You're assuming it's the case. And worse, shifting the burden of proof.
I'd say I'd expect more reason from someone who claims to be a doctor, but hell, I gave my last doctor the boot after he encouraged me to never get vaccinated and I learned that he told most if not all of his other patients to avoid the flu shot because of autism.
I guess medical school isn't everything.
|
|
|
Post by bogaloo on Nov 4, 2019 15:07:24 GMT -5
Most of what he said on Brexit made sense... but don't agree that people can't change their minds... especially when people voted based on a load of lies... like that red bus! Without getting into it all again, both sides lied. Remain's arguments were crap. They were underprepared (yet over-funded) and arrogant. It's not that people can't change their minds. It's that you set a very strange precedent by just saying a vote doesn't count. Not wanting to derail the thread or anything, but I find myself agreeing with you on this, a little bit more on each passing day... It's unfortunate, but it's not like polls have massively shifted either... The Tories are ahead in the polls after this whole mess, it leaves me staggered! I'm not even sure the brexit headbangers would be quiet after a confirmatory referendum (I also hate the term people's vote)
|
|
|
Post by bogaloo on Nov 4, 2019 15:20:28 GMT -5
Right, I'm taking a deep breath and explaining, again. Obviously you can disagree, but it doesn't really change my pov: From what we know, Liam couldn't sing because he had an acute laryngitis. We also know that he has chronic laryngitis due to years of smoking, dinking, bad singing technique and his thyroiditis (that no-one suspected before he started developing systemic symptoms, precisely due to all the other, more common risk factors). We know that Liam was out, dinking and smoking on some festival on the eve or maybe 2 days before the gig they were supposed to play at V. Now, obviously Noel's choice of words, if I recall correctly something along the lines of 'he claimed he had laryngitis... Whatever...' and then adding that 'he was hungover' was unfortunate, but no-one can claim that the bender Liam went on was unrelated to the acute laryngitis, as damaged and inflammed larynx are more susceptible to acute damage. It's more or less the same thing as when an epileptic patient misses something important because he's had a seizure, after dinking alcohol, and then complains about it, knowing very well that alcohol lowers the seizure threshold. This is what I meant. Now, be free to have your opinion on the subject. Correlation isn't causation. While it may be likely Liam's lifestyle is what triggered the flare up, you can't establish that beyond all reasonable doubt. You're assuming it's the case.
I'd say I'd expect more reason from someone who claims to be a doctor, but hell, I gave my last doctor the boot after he encouraged me to never get vaccinated and I learned that he told most if not all of his other patients to avoid the flu shot because of autism.
I guess medical school isn't everything.
First, I don't claim to be a doctor, I am one, and I'm happy to send you a copy of my certificate, if you have doubts. You are right, correlation isn't causation, and that is the loophole they found to sue. But don't be/play naive, and don't equate autism cases and flu vaccination with this. As in the parallel I made with the epileptic patient, when a doctor in an ER meets a patient with a known epilepsy who's consummed alcohol has had a seizure and has been taking his meds, that is assumed as the most likely cause, as it is a known and well established trigger (unlike autism and flu vaccines). Can the doctor prove it with 100% certainty- No. Are probabilities high? - yes. But anyway, nevermind, I know for a fact It's pointless to carry on replying.
|
|
|
Post by The Invisible Sun on Nov 4, 2019 15:36:45 GMT -5
Correlation isn't causation. While it may be likely Liam's lifestyle is what triggered the flare up, you can't establish that beyond all reasonable doubt. You're assuming it's the case.
I'd say I'd expect more reason from someone who claims to be a doctor, but hell, I gave my last doctor the boot after he encouraged me to never get vaccinated and I learned that he told most if not all of his other patients to avoid the flu shot because of autism.
I guess medical school isn't everything.
First, I don't claim to be a doctor, I am one, and I'm happy to send you a copy of my certificate, if you have doubts. You are right, correlation isn't causation, and that is the loophole they found to sue. But don't be/play naive, and don't equate autism cases and flu vaccination with this. As in the parallel I made with the epileptic patient, when a doctor in an ER meets a patient with a known epilepsy who's consummed alcohol has had a seizure (excluding infections and lack of compliance) that is assumed as the most likely cause, as it is a known and well established trigger (unlike autism and flu vaccines). Can the doctor prove it with 100% certainty- No. Are probabilities high? - yes. But anyway, nevermind, I know for a fact It's pointless to carry on replying. Hey now, you included the argument from authority as a way to bolster your point. If you didn't want it mentioned, questioned or challenged, don't bring it up in the first place. Just rely on the facts.
"But don't be/play naive, and don't equate autism cases and flu vaccination with this. "
I guess you misunderstood. The point is, being a doctor doesn't make the doctors opinion right. As is the case with my example. Your position as a doctor is irrelevant and does not lend weight to your opinion unless you have the evidence to support it. Thus there is no reason to include it in your argument ... Unless you're trying to add weight to your opinion.
Absolute certainty is an unreasonable expectation. Reasonable doubt on the other hand is very much obtainable. Considering that a flare up for Liam can happen with or without external triggers such as smoking and alcohol, you can't say that he is necessarily the cause. It might have just been a bad night for him. And we know he will perform through the pain. He's done it before. It must have been quite substantial for him to take off. And he seems to be troubled by Noel's words enough that he felt it was slander and went as far as to sue his own brother. I'd say that lends weight to the idea that his troubles may have been a matter of misfortune and not necessarily a direct consequence of a bender.
|
|
|
Post by thomaslivesforever on Nov 4, 2019 15:37:34 GMT -5
Most of what he said on Brexit made sense... but don't agree that people can't change their minds... especially when people voted based on a load of lies... like that red bus! Without getting into it all again, both sides lied. Remain's arguments were crap. They were underprepared (yet over-funded) and arrogant. It's not that people can't change their minds. It's that you set a very strange precedent by just saying a vote doesn't count. Under normal circumstances you’d be right. But three years down the road with the lies of both sides exposed it doesn’t seem unreasonable to ask people if it’s what they want, especially when a deal has been negotiated in that time, the details of which were unknown at the referendum.
|
|
|
Post by bogaloo on Nov 4, 2019 15:56:25 GMT -5
First, I don't claim to be a doctor, I am one, and I'm happy to send you a copy of my certificate, if you have doubts. You are right, correlation isn't causation, and that is the loophole they found to sue. But don't be/play naive, and don't equate autism cases and flu vaccination with this. As in the parallel I made with the epileptic patient, when a doctor in an ER meets a patient with a known epilepsy who's consummed alcohol has had a seizure (excluding infections and lack of compliance) that is assumed as the most likely cause, as it is a known and well established trigger (unlike autism and flu vaccines). Can the doctor prove it with 100% certainty- No. Are probabilities high? - yes. But anyway, nevermind, I know for a fact It's pointless to carry on replying.Hey now, you included the argument from authority as a way to bolster your point. If you didn't want it mentioned, questioned or challenged, don't bring it up in the first place. Just rely on the facts.
"But don't be/play naive, and don't equate autism cases and flu vaccination with this. "
I guess you misunderstood. The point is, being a doctor doesn't make the doctors opinion right. As is the case with my example. Your position as a doctor is irrelevant and does not lend weight to your opinion unless you have the evidence to support it. Thus there is no reason to include it in your argument ... Unless you're trying to add weight to your opinion.
Absolute certainty is an unreasonable expectation. Reasonable doubt on the other hand is very much obtainable. Considering that a flare up for Liam can happen with or without external triggers such as smoking and alcohol, you can't say that he is necessarily the cause. It might have just been a bad night for him. And we know he will perform through the pain. He's done it before. It must have been quite substantial for him to take off. And he seems to be troubled by Noel's words enough that he felt it was slander and went as far as to sue his own brother. I'd say that lends weight to the idea that his troubles may have been a matter of misfortune and not necessarily a direct consequence of a bender.
Well, I happen to believe that being a doctor and having a medical degree does add some authority to comment on, you know... Medical issues. I don't think it's that unreasonable. I don't fix TVs because I'm not an electrician, I don't build houses because I'm not a builder, and I don't argue with a technician that fixes boilers that the boiler should not be fixed that way, because I don't have the knowlege to do so. And you bringing up the flu vaccines argument, I'm sorry, doesn't fly well. There are things that are speculative, others that are well established and based in science and methods. You have your opinion, and I won't change it, but please don't try to make it sound utterly offesive when there are valid reasons to doubt.
|
|