This post was deleted to add new content. It will be reposted below.

I’ll just discuss this particular topic privately and on other websites. — Mikie

That is called "burying your head in the sand". If that is what you want to do then good luck to you.

Forum rules state

Types of posters who are not welcome here:

Evangelists: Those who must convince everyone that their religion, ideology, political persuasion, or philosophical theory is the only one worth having. — Christoffer

Climate change alarmism meets this definition of evangelism.

Bungling protestors drill holes in 100 Land Rover tyres in attack on 'fossil fuel death machines'... but all vehicles damaged were electric cars... :rofl: . :rofl: . :rofl:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14427589/protestors-Land-Rover-attack-damaged-electric-cars.html

A group of clumsy woke protestors drilled holes in hundreds of SUV tyres in an attack on 'fossil fuel death machines', not realising they were actually damaging electric vehicles.

Activist group Sabotage Oil for Survival targeted the Land Rover Truro dealership in the village of Scorrier, near Redruth, while other campaigners vandalised cars across Bristol and Exeter.

The group, who are based in Cornwall, posted to social media in the early hours of Monday, February 17, boasting that they had drilled into the tyres of 100 Land Rover SUVs.

But shortly after they posted the video to X, Vertu Land Rover Truro's Head of Business, Wayne McNally, confirmed the group's major error, saying: 'You've drilled through tyres on fully electric cars!!!'

Hey Mikie. I hope that you keep your EV in a locked garage. :scream:

My view is the lie itself should be a crime, and people who lie as part of their business should go to prison and pay steep fines. — tim wood

Are you going to put flat earthers in prison and make them pay steep fines?

I’m actually really nice. If people were equally nice, there’d be no problems. — Mikie

:rofl: . :rofl: . :rofl: . :rofl: . :rofl: . :rofl: . :rofl: . :rofl: . :rofl: . :rofl: . :rofl: . :rofl: . :rofl: . :rofl: . :rofl: . :rofl: . :rofl: . :rofl: . :rofl: . :rofl:

We need a diagram. — frank

No. We need a supercomputer. :razz:

I don’t see why people who want to discuss a particular topic must inevitably be disrupted and drowned out by useless “debate,” — Mikie

The problem with this statement Mikie is who defines what is "useless".

Your opinion of what is useless is different to many other people's opinion of what is useless.

Why should your opinion have priority?

The point of a new thread is that the less specific one attracts a lot of people who want to debate climate change itself— and perhaps this distinguishes that a little in the future. — Mikie

Mikie. Could you please explain what somebody must believe in order to avoid being called a "denier"?

Or could it be a place for people who disagree with you to talk amongst themselves? — Moliere

Then why not call the thread "Agree-to-Disagree deniers" ?

This is a thread to discuss the current effects of climate change, predictions about its effects, and mitigation efforts. — Mikie

If this thread includes discussion of mitigation efforts, then it must also discuss the problems that will be caused by mitigation efforts.

China is currently considered to be the world leader in
- electric vehicles (EVs)
- solar energy
- wind power
- renewable energy

Being an alarmist, I was shocked to find this video on YouTube. In case you don't want to watch the video I will quote some of the content. Remember, China is currently considered to be the world leader in electric vehicles (EVs), solar energy, wind power, and renewable energy.

China’s Too Hot, No Power! 750,000 EV Owners Suffer, Queuing 10 Hours, Can’t Charge
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HRx6Q9f-2Is&list=WL&index=4

This is from denier number 1
When I got here I thought at least a few charges would work. There are cars plugged in with no one inside them, but the charges aren't even working. What are they doing? They're waiting for midnight
when the power comes back so they can charge without waiting in line.

This is the most anxious that I've ever felt since driving an EV. It's not that I can't find a charging station. It's not about waiting for a charger. There are chargers here, but no electricity. I've only got a little bit of battery left. With so many electric cars on the road now, do you think these power restrictions are reasonable? At the second charging station there's still a power restriction. Can we charge at all? What time will the power be back on? Midnight. It's been like this everywhere in Chengdu lately. So there's no power at all.

Recently the Sichuan meteorological Observatory has issued several high temperature warnings with temperatures exceeding 40° C across the province. The extreme heat has caused tight electricity supplies leading to power restrictions in cities like Chengdu and Chongqing. This has affected Industrial and Commercial sectors, including the use of electric vehicle charging stations. As a result 750,000 new energy vehicle owners are facing difficulties charging their cars. Many have reported that electric vehicle
charging stations in Chengdu can't be used during the day and only become available late at night.

One ride hailing driver, using the alias Zang Way, shared his experience. He hadn't been
home for two days. On one night he started queuing around 9:00 p.m. and finally managed to charge his car at around 6:00 a.m., after waiting for nearly 10 hours. Zang explained that the regulation of public charging stations in Chengdu started around August 20th. At first he wasn't aware of the situation and went to queue at 5:00 a.m. as usual but by 8:00 a.m. the charging station had run out of power. With almost no battery left he had to stop at the charging station, missing an entire day of work. Since then he's been stuck in a routine of driving during the day and queuing for charging at night. He recalled one night when more than than 60 vehicles were lined up at a public charging station, stretching nearly a kilometer. Although the station had 36 chargers, only half were working due to power restrictions. It took about an hour for each car to charge meaning the entire queue would take four to 5 hours to clear. This isn't the first time Chengdu has experienced power restrictions. In 2022 high temperatures and drought led to widespread power cuts. The situation wasn't limited to Chengdu. Many cities across Central and western China face similar power issues. In 2023 several regions in China dealt with power cuts again and new energy vehicle owners will have to keep struggling. Sichuan's frequent summer power restrictions pose a big challenge for charging infrastructure. New energy vehicles heavily rely on this infrastructure which hasn't yet fully developed in Chengdu.

This is from denier number 2
As someone who's been driving electric cars for 5 years, let me tell you that I'll never buy an electric car again. My EV has a range of 420 km in theory, but only 200 km in reality, and only 150 km on the highway. Even an EV with a 600 km range only gives you just around 260 to 270 km, and that's when there's no traffic. If you get stuck in traffic, factoring in the towing fee and the time wasted, you do the math. Don't believe the hype that electricity is cheaper than gas. That's all nonsense that China has been pushing. The electric vehicle industry is offering subsidies and incentives, yet many people still choose to buy gasoline cars. Why is that?

This way climate deniers (who definitely AREN’T climate deniers, wink wink) — Mikie

For example, I recently tried posting a thorough post about climate as an introduction, for those possibly interested — Mikie

Did you notice my comment about your "thorough post about climate as an introduction"?

In case you didn't read it, or can't remember it, I said:

Believe it or not Mikie, I agree with most of this post. — Agree-to-Disagree

Would a [climate change] denier say that?

The climate change thread isn’t a debate about whether climate change is happening, or how the scientific community is probably wrong about it because of groupthink, etc. — Mikie

I repeat for the 3rd time (Perhaps Mikie will read and accept it this time, but I am not holding my breath)

I am NOT a climate change denier.

I accept that global warming is happening. I accept that humans are responsible for most of the increase in the CO2 level above 280 ppm. And I accept that this will cause some problems.

Does that sound like "climate change denial"?

But Mikie constantly calls me a [climate change] denier. I think that Mikie needs to acknowledge that he is wrong.

Whereas my suggestion is [...] to prevent the expression of nonsense and rubbish, and ban people who persist in so doing — unenlightened

Who makes the decision about whether something is nonsense or rubbish? You seem to think that you are entitled to make that decision.

You want to be able to post anything that you want to, but you want to deny other people the same privilege. You want to delete people's posts that you disagree with or don't like. That sounds like the sort of thing that a dictator would do.

Well, that's what's known as a performative contradiction: you are emphasizing the exact point of your sentence which you should not be emphasizing — Arcane Sandwich

Okay then. :grin:

I am NOT a climate change denier.

Is that acceptable?

Imagine a thread on evolution, where creationists spam constantly. Is objecting to this spam “ideological”? — Mikie

Mikie. You are trying to depict me as a denier. But I am NOT a denier.

As I said above. I accept that global warming is happening. I accept that humans are responsible for most of the increase in the CO2 level above 280 ppm. And I accept that this will cause some problems.

Does that sound like "climate change denial"?

Please watch this YouTube video by Sabine Hossenfelder, and think about whether it applies to climate science.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=shFUDPqVmTg

Sabine Hossenfelder has a PhD in physics. She is author of the books "Lost in Math: How Beauty Leads Physics Astray" (Basic Books, 2018) and "Existential Physics: A Scientist's Guide to Life's Biggest Questions" (Viking, 2022).

I too think most of it should be deleted and trolls banned— but that’s asking a lot of moderators to constantly monitor the goings-on of a long thread. I think a better solution is to create another thread and flag posts that are off-topic (denialist bullshit) to be moved there. Thus people who feel qualified to disagree with the worldwide consensus and overwhelming evidence because they “think for themselves” (i.e., have spent several hours on YouTube) have a place to share their thoughts, however childish. And we can more easily ignore them. — Mikie

In other words, you want to make the climate change thread an "echo chamber" that preaches what you believe. That sounds extremely "unhealthy" to me.

I would prefer that we have certain standards, such that we do not discuss [...] climate change denial — unenlightened

Please define what "climate change denial" is.

Mikie constantly calls me a "denier" whenever I post something that he doesn't agree with.

I am not a climate change denier. I have told Mikie many times that I accept that global warming is happening. I accept that humans are responsible for most of the increase in the CO2 level above 280 ppm. And I accept that this will cause some problems. Does that sound like "climate change denial"?

Many of my posts are about whether the proposed "solutions" to climate change are feasible. For example, the possible problems with solar power, wind power, EVs, lithium batteries, etc.. It is important to know whether the proposed "solutions" to climate change will work, and/or cause other problems. Mikie doesn't like that. He wants to control the climate change thread so that it only reflects his views.

The solution? Nonsense should be deleted, and trolls should be banned. Shimples! — unenlightened

Who will have the role of climate change thread "police"? Who judges whether something is "climate change denial". Mikie would like to be judge, jury, and executioner.

You’re right, but I want to be nice — Mikie

YOU !!!. Want to be NICE !!!. . :rofl: . :rofl: . :rofl:

Currently — and several times over the years — the main thread gets spammed by nonsense — Mikie

Then you should stop doing this spamming of the main thread by nonsense. . :rofl: . :rofl: . :rofl:

The only argument is not whether that is happening but what can be done about it. — Wayfarer

Exactly. . :up:

I want to discuss what can be done about it.

I agree but it should be called for what it is, ‘denialism’ — Wayfarer

In that case you will have to rename the existing "climate change" thread to be "climate change evangelism".

Or you could rename the existing "climate change" thread to be "climate change - preaching to the faithful".

Why is Mikie so scared of anybody challenging his beliefs? Could it be that he can't defend his beliefs?

but this way the actual climate change thread can be reserved for discussing climate change — its effects, recent research, mitigation ideas, etc etc — Mikie

Surely climate change skepticism belongs in the climate change thread.

Otherwise the climate change thread just becomes an echo chamber for pessimism about climate change and complaints about the lack of action to reduce CO2 levels. A good discussion needs different viewpoints. Otherwise it is just preaching to the faithful.

Mikie, you want the actual climate change thread to be reserved for discussing recent research, mitigation ideas, etc. Which thread would you post in if you were skeptical about recent research or mitigation ideas?

And if he's not a denier? Would that make you a non-denier as well? — Arcane Sandwich

Yes. That is exactly the point that I am trying to make.

Believe it or not Mikie, I agree with most of this post.

If I am a denier then you are one as well.

One would think the planet would be warming, giving these two facts. So now we'd have to look to see how temperatures have fluctuated over time, and if increases in temperature correlates in any way with increases in CO2. Is there a correlation? — Mikie

Just realized that CO2 levels and Olivia Rodrigo have both increased together — in ppm and age, respectively.

Thus, let’s try to slow reduction of emissions. — Mikie

That last comment from you is very relevant to that first comment from you.

Do you understand what it means to "shoot yourself in the foot"? . :rofl:

Compare 1820 (with a CO2 level of about 284 ppm) and 2020 (with a CO2 level of about 414 ppm). An increase of about 130 ppm of CO2 in 200 years.

Would you rather live in 1820 or 2020 ? — Agree-to-Disagree

I would much rather live in 2020 with a CO2 level of about 414 ppm.

But I wish that Mikie lived in 1820. He would be happier riding a horse because horses don't normally burst into flames. . :rofl:

Just realized that CO2 levels and Olivia Rodrigo have both increased together — in ppm and age, respectively.

Thus, let’s try to slow reduction of emissions. — Mikie

Do you also believe in homeopathy Mikie? . :rofl:

Again—this is just at 429 ppm (the highest in 2 million years). — Mikie

Look at the history of global living conditions.

Compare 1820 (with a CO2 level of about 284 ppm) and 2020 (with a CO2 level of about 414 ppm). An increase of about 130 ppm of CO2 in 200 years.

Would you rather live in 1820 or 2020 ?

The CO2 level and global living conditions have increased together.

The world has become better in many ways. e.g. the following areas: (not a complete list)
- poverty
- literacy
- health
- freedom
- education
- quality of life
- technology

The world population was around 1 billion in the year 1800 and increased more than eight-fold since then. The increase of the world population should evoke more than just doom and gloom. First of all, this increase shows a tremendous achievement. It shows that humans stopped dying at the rate at which our ancestors died for many millennia before.

The Industrial Revolution unlocked a whole new energy resource: fossil fuels. Fossil energy has been a fundamental driver of the technological, social, economic, and development progress that has followed. Fossil fuels (coal, oil, gas) have, and continue to, play a dominant role in global energy systems. There are many problems that will occur if we try to shift away from fossil fuels too quickly. The change to renewable energy will continue, but it also has many risks associated with it.

An interesting YouTube video called "UnbeliEVable! Why with Governments Like This in Charge, The EV is DOOMED" by "JayEmm on Cars"

JayEmm is from the UK (and is not related to MGUY :grin: )

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lyhBUT_KXm8

It is a 32 minute video so I will just quote an interesting part. I may post other parts later.

========== begin quote ==========
I've discussed before, many times, the issues that you have if you don't have a driveway and the general expense of running an EV. In the last year or two prices for electric car charging have gone through the roof, but you already know that, this is not news to anybody.

But you see in the last couple of months there's a few friends of mine, one in particular - lovely chap called Chris, that have been on the hunt for an EV of their own and so I have been given a little bit more of an insight into this world that I know many of you already inhabit and I would appreciate greatly your feedback on.

The general gist in case you're wondering is that if you can charge at home on a driveway with good decent cheap night rate electricity your cost per mile to run a car could be as low as 2 p and there is no combustion engine vehicle out there that can or probably ever will come close to that.

The issue is that if you can't charge at home on a driveway then you are at the mercy of public charging points, and if you're in an inefficient EV your cost suddenly skyrockets to a point where you'd actually save money by driving an old V12 Mercedes. Bit nuts right. That's clearly not sustainable for an awful lot of people, but prices will go up, they will come down, and hopefully they will stabilize. But this is an area where I'd like a little bit more government intervention.

If it is true what [charging] companies are saying, that they simply cannot be a viable business without having to charge 80 P per kilowatt hour, then we've got a real problem because EVs were sold to a lot of people in the first wave under the guise of yes we know it's more expensive to buy but your total running costs are dramatically lower. Now they are more expensive to buy and more expensive to run.
========== end quote ==========

Aren’t you mad that the car that’s served you perfectly well over 8 years is really a piece of junk? — Mikie

If you bought your EV over 8 years ago then it must have been around 2016. There were not many EV models available at that time. You probably have a Nissan Leaf. Did you buy the Leaf S (which has a range of 149 miles), or the pricier SV Plus (which has a range of 212 miles)?

Because you live in your mother's basement you probably don't need any more range. 4 trips to the letterbox and back on a single charge is plenty.

How many times have you had to replace the battery pack?

How many EV fires have you had?

Can you charge your EV at home, or do you use public chargers?

Does your mother let you charge your EV near the house?

How much did you pay for your EV?

How much has your EV depreciated?

What are the insurance costs for your EV?

Do you feel smug and self-righteous because you drive an EV?

Are you aware of the environmental impacts that EVs have?

- you might be able to pride yourself on producing zero tailpipe emissions from your EV but unless you're charging from solar panels on your roof all you are doing is pushing those emissions back up the wire to the coal or gas fired power station

- not only that but to obtain all the minerals and elements for a single EV battery requires over 250 tons of Earth to be mined moved refined and assembled, all of which is powered by diesel vehicles and
machinery

- you'll be driving your EV for many many years before it even breaks even (if it ever does break even)

- but despite all of those things at least you can bask in the warm glow of knowing that the cobalt in your EVs battery has probably been mined by child slave labor in sub-Saharan Africa

Do you really think that this is going to save humans and the planet Mikie?

Kayaker swallowed by humpback whale in Chile

See video of it happening here:
https://news.sky.com/story/kayaker-survives-being-swallowed-by-humpback-whale-in-chile-13308753

It is impossible to say whether this particular event was caused by climate change.

But climate scientists doing attribution studies have shown that climate change has made "kayakers being swallowed by humpback whales" a lot more likely than it was in the past. . :scream:

Well, look at the bright side, this Thread hasn't degenerated into a debate about the shape of the Earth — Arcane Sandwich

Big Geophysics, that’s a little fishy. The level of consensus that the earth is spherical is suspect. It’s about the funding. I look at the data myself, and make up my own mind. I’ve concluded that all the scientists are wrong: the earth is flat. But I’m not a flat earther. — Mikie

You obviously haven't read much of this thread. :grin:

people need to grow the fuck up before it's too late.
— Arcane Sandwich

Indeed. — Mikie

What do you mean by that Mikie?

That people should stop calling other people names?

And start commenting on what is said rather than who said it?

I sincerely believe that renewable energy is the political topic of conversation today, in 2025 — Arcane Sandwich

One of the problems with your statement is that many people are not interested in having a conversation or discussion. The evangelists (like Mikie) are only interested in preaching, and they are not interested in listening.

Mikie always calls me a "denier" whenever I say something that he doesn't like or agree with. I don't deny that global warming and climate change are happening. Mikie won't discuss what I am saying, he just tries to shut me up by insulting me. It doesn't work, and it makes me think that nothing that Mikie says is worth listening to.

I would like to be able to have adult discussions without name calling. But they don't happen very often.

that was your takeaway from the paper? (telling) — jorndoe

What was your takeaway from the paper?

You suck. — frank

Thank you for admitting that you are wrong. Not many people are honest enough to do that. . :up:

All of those are just quoting The Sun. — frank

Really Frank? Am I going to have to spoon-feed you like I spoon-feed Mikie?

The Sun, and most of the others, are quoting from a report put out by The Coalition on Secure Technology in conjunction with the China Strategic Risks Institute (CSRI). The report is called "Collision Course: Under-pricing Chinese EVs risks in the UK". This has been widely picked up in publications today such as CityAM, the Telegraph, and presumably The Sun.

https://cim-coalition.co.uk/collision-course-under-pricing-chinese-ev-risks-in-the-uk

It warns that the Government should consider banning Chinese electric vehicle manufacturers from securing government contracts over national security and data privacy concerns.

It says suppliers suspected of having ties to China’s military-industrial complex pose a key risk due to the potential for built-in wireless components to be “weaponised”, which could even be used to gridlock British streets.

It comes as the UK government is rapidly procuring EVs for the public sector and confirmed last year that some models used by the Ministry of Defence (MoD) had been supplied by MG, which is owned by China’s SAIC Motor.

You can download the full report from a link near the bottom of the webpage. The full report is 36 pages long so I will just quote a little bit of it.

As it stands, around 25% of the ministerial fleet of cars are already ultra-low emission vehicles, with a target for all central government cars and vans to be EVs by 2027 . As with the Government’s EV producer quota system it looks likely that the greatest beneficiary will be Chinese EV producers who can afford to underbid their competitors.

The Ministry of Defence confirmed in September 2023 that its department uses electric vehicles and hybrids produced by MG, which is owned by SAIC Motor. This is unsurprising on cost grounds given the dire state of public finances.

Aside from the threat to the UK’s manufacturing industry, the UK public remains largely unaware of the dependency, disruption, and data security risks Chinese EVs pose via Chinese manufactured Cellular Internet of Things Modules (CIMs) within them.
● Dependency Risk: Chinese EV producers winning UK government procurement
contracts and providing EVs to the police, the armed forces, government departments,
and local authorities, will create dependency which could be exploited by the Chinese
Communist Party (CCP) to pressure the UK Government to change its policies towards
the PRC.
● Disruption Risk: If relations between the UK and the PRC were to deteriorate, CIMs in
Chinese EVs could enable the PRC to disable vehicles and thus cause significant
disruption to the UK Government, the police force, the military, and the UK’s trade supply
chain. Whilst the likelihood of the CCP disrupting the UK Government and society
through sabotaging EVs is low in the current circumstances, responsible governments
should plan for the worst and minimise national security risks in advance.
● Data Security Risk: EVs report geolocation and performance data in real-time. This
would allow the PRC to plot the movement of government and defence vehicles.
Geolocation detail is far greater than can be obtained from monitoring mobile phones.
Put together with other information, this could yield useful intelligence. For example, by
syncing a mobile phone with a car’s audio system, manufacturers can gain access to
personal data. If CIMs contained backdoors – such as those found in the products of
Chinese technology companies Huawei and HikVision – the amount of data which could
be extracted could be considerable.

I think that story is bs, and the only source your provided was The Sun. :meh: — frank

The Sun is not the only source. Are all of the following sources bs?

https://www.gbnews.com/lifestyle/cars/drivers-fears-electric-vehicles-spying-mod
Ministry of Defence is thought to have instructed staff to stop speaking in Chinese manufactured electric vehicles

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14366019/MoD-told-not-talk-electric-cars-Chinese-spy.html
MoD top brass are told not to talk in electric cars - in case Chinese 'spy' manufacturers eavesdrop on top-secret information

https://www.express.co.uk/life-style/cars/2010767/ministry-of-defence-electric-cars-china
Defence chiefs ordered to stop talking in electric cars over China spy fears

https://www.cityam.com/chinese-ev-makers-should-be-barred-from-uk-public-contracts-over-data-privacy-fears-campaigners-warn
Ministers should consider banning Chinese electric vehicle (EV) manufacturers from securing government contracts over national security and data privacy concerns, a new report has warned.

https://www.electrive.com/2025/02/06/uk-warns-government-employees-of-spying-cars
Top officials in the UK government's Ministry of Defense have been warned to keep quiet while in their cars as the Chinese government could be listening in, trying to gain access to classified information, according to media reports.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/09/16/chinese-evs-in-britain-could-be-weaponised-think-tank-warns
Experts warn vehicles with Chinese-made components could transmit data back to Beijing
Chinese electric vehicles being driven in Britain could be “weaponised” and should be banned from government use, a report has warned.
Modules within Chinese-made electric vehicles could transmit sensitive data back to the country or even be remotely controlled, the China Strategic Risks Institute (CSRI) warned.
The think tank called for an end to Chinese carmakers being able to win government contracts. Last year it emerged that the Ministry of Defence used electric cars made by Chinese-owned MG.
Whitehall departments are buying up electric cars in an attempt to decarbonise their fleets. The report said the vehicles present a potentially greater security risk than petrol-powered vehicles because they are more likely to be equipped with internet-connected modules capable of collecting data and controlling the car’s functions.

https://www.reuters.com/article/technology/tesla-cars-banned-from-chinas-military-complexes-on-security-concerns-sources-idUSKBN2BB18R/
Britain’s unusual stance on Chinese electric vehicles
Unlike America or Europe, Britain is welcoming the cheap cars—for now
(Reuters) - The Chinese military has banned Tesla cars from entering its complexes, citing security concerns over cameras installed on the vehicles, two people who have seen notices of the directive told Reuters.
The move is the latest sign of China's growing scrutiny of the U.S. electric carmaker amid tensions with Washington. Analysts said it resembled Washington's measures against Chinese telecoms firm Huawei citing national security.

https://cim-coalition.co.uk/collision-course-under-pricing-chinese-ev-risks-in-the-uk
It warns that the Government should consider banning Chinese electric vehicle manufacturers from securing government contracts over national security and data privacy concerns.
It says suppliers suspected of having ties to China’s military-industrial complex pose a key risk due to the potential for built-in wireless components to be “weaponised”, which could even be used to gridlock British streets.
It comes as the UK government is rapidly procuring EVs for the public sector and confirmed last year that some models used by the Ministry of Defence (MoD) had been supplied by MG, which is owned by China’s SAIC Motor.

https://fortune.com/2024/09/17/china-evs-csri-europe-electric-vehicles-cybersecurity-risk
Chinese electric vehicles could be ‘weaponized’ and should be banned from government use, report warns

Does The Sun print anything but bs? — frank

You are beginning to sound a lot like Mikie.

If the story is not true then somebody (e.g. the UK Ministry of Defense) would expose it as a lie.

If you accept (1), (2), and (3), but don't accept (4), then that would mean that the UK Ministry of Defense is not worried if "top secret" information ends up in Chinese hands.

Is that what you believe?