https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Final_Experiment_(expediti...

"The participating flat Earthers all admitted that the midnight sun was a real phenomenon. The larger flat Earth community has largely rejected the results and accused the participants, including the flat Earthers, of having faked the expedition and of being part of a larger conspiracy to promote the spherical Earth model."

Could you expand on this please?

In 2025-26 there are an estimated 39.1 million people paying income tax - 56.0% of the population [1]. Of course, in the last census, 20.7% of the population were children [2]. About 3.1% of the population are UK students in University education [3], and about 18.6% of the population are retired [4]. I've also missed all the 18-year-olds in their final year of school, which is roughly 1.1 million or 1.6% of the population [5]. About 8.8 million, or 12.6%, are pensioners who pay income tax that I have double counted, usually due to private pensions and other sources of income [6].

Totally these numbers gives a rough estimate that suggest only about 12.6% of working age people do not pay income tax. This is in line with the government's own statistics putting those claiming Universal Credit at 10.6% of the population [7], or those economically inactive at 12.9% [8]. This is wildly different to your implication that 61% of people are too lazy to work.

Unemployment, which is roughly defined as those out of work who are actively looking for work, is at 5.2% [9], which it is worth noting is slightly below the EU and Euro area average of 5.9% and 6.2% respectively [10]. Direct comparisons are difficult to make, but it is certainly indicative of the UK falling within what is considered a healthy range.

Furthermore, take-home pay on a £100,000 salary is £68,561 [11], giving an effective income tax of 31.4% - far below your claim of 71%. True, there is the so-called "£100k tax trap" which gradually reduces your tax-free allowance above this salary. But this still gives just a 37.6% tax on £125,000, or 41.1% on £200,000. You may consider these to be high, but they are far, far below your claim of 71% income tax.

[1] https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/income-tax-liabilit...

[2] https://www.ethnicity-facts-figures.service.gov.uk/uk-popula...

[3] https://www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/latest/insights-and-analysi...

[4] https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/dwp-benefits-statis...

[5] https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/infographics-leve...

[6] https://www.ftadviser.com/content/291a4ce0-9287-4118-849b-ff...

[7] https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/dwp-benefits-statis...

[8] https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peoplenotin...

[9] https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peoplenotin...

[10] https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php...

[11] https://www.gov.uk/estimate-income-tax

Did Britain's public broadcaster decide, half a decade ago, to begin making this documentary so that they could secretly and nefariously support a US government agency long before it was embroiled in its current controversies?

Going forward, you’d want to set up some other way to sync photos you take from your phone to your other devices. I can personally recommend Synology Photos for simplicity[1], or Immich[2] for an open-source (and in my opinion, slightly better) alternative you can run on any hardware, if you’d like to set up an always-on NAS. These are “Apple Photos” or “Google Photos” equivalents that you host yourself.

Alternatively, something like Syncthing[3] is a dead-simple way to sync your photos to various other devices as and when they are online, if you’d prefer to manage your photos in an ordinary file manager.

I’d be remiss not to mention that, for any solution where you move off the cloud to a central storage location of your own, you really must make backups to keep your photos safe. The 3-2-1 rule is a standard recommendation.

[1] https://www.synology.com/en-global/dsm/feature/photos

[2] https://immich.app/

[3] https://syncthing.net/

(And I say that despite my own work and usual eagerness to tell people all about it!)

The article focuses on first-hand accounts from medics inside Iran, describing the crackdown and casualties. It also contains statements from the Iranian opposition, the UN, US and French presidents and British PM, all critical of Khamenei, with just two mentions of the regime’s official statements.

Also, I just switched to the BBC News TV broadcast. The Iran protests are the lead story: a special report with a focus on the protestors, showing videos shared by them.

Source: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cj9rengvnp9o

This is an overly simplistic view, of course, not least because it presumes good faith, but that is really my point: the economy has too many moving parts to simply say “you’re to blame for inflation because you increased your prices”.

https://arstechnica.com/ai/2025/06/anthropic-destroyed-milli...

His claims, specifically on cancer, were widely and roundly rejected by the scientific and medical community. This is not a controversial statement, either - his supporters proudly proclaim that his views are rejected by the vast majority of experts which, in my opinion, pretty much sums it up.

I highly recommend people avoid falling into this dangerous rabbit hole.

Anecdotally, I’ve heard plenty of concern (from the public) that the latter could breed resistant bacteria, but never even heard of your interpretation as a concern.