Brilliant!!! Wish more people would call Matthew out when he's being an insufferable, rude c@ck!!!

Last caller had him pegged - "Pathetic"!

Tomorrow it's Corbyn lookeylikey/thinkylikey Michael Rosen. If ever he needs a stunt double....

' you're being pathetic' said the last caller. Spot on.

Uber corbynista and free speech blocker Rosen on tomorrow. With him and yas expect socialist nirvana or hell.

At least we have Kev to look forward to.

Now wheres that vodka......

Tweets accusing Yasmin of racism? Pish says Matthew and Yasmin, conveniently forgetting that she admitted on this very show to being racist. Stalin would be glowing with pride at that rewriting of history - Well done Comrade Wright.

Now Rod liddle and Yas on the panel would be dynamite, never going to happen though. Not only Stalin but Goebbels would have been proud of wrighty as well.

New top gear a box ticking exercise par excellence, gotta love it.

Fifteen minutes in and no mention of comrade corbyn, is the panel unwell.

Corbyn's actually on the panel so no need to talk about him!

...

Women hit men more casually than the other way around. But we don't talk about that because it doesn't fit the PC societal agenda.

Yes Yas its all the fault of men.

What did Yasmin say on the show yesterday? 😨

Not yesterday:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SNuA_0-vuow

Arr right thanks.

Anybody know what the ratings are for this show and whether or not their holding steady?

With The Independent set for closure, does this mean Yasmin will be out of a job?

Amol may have to come back to the microphone gig again..

The man hate continues apace with Yas.

Letch, give her a 'lady' mag and then you will see letching.

Right now Matthew is sidetracking away from the story that Yasmin is trying to read out from the papers about an employee getting fired by her NHS boss for resisting his sexual advances. He's going off on a tangent about how much she got in compensation, which is not the main point of the story.

If this was a caller doing that he'd be having a go at them or just cut them off for not sticking to the topic.

YAB doesn't mind inequality as long as it's in her favour. Paid more than some men on the panel? That's fine...

What a nice balance of political views we have on the panel today.
I suppose this is a proud achievement of equality, everyone's the same so equality has been reached.

So, no female presenters on the old TG and yet they never had a discussion about that. Now there is one in the new line-up, they criticise them for it!!

Kinda like this thread.

The old TG had a massive female audience so presumably they liked watching an all-male presenting team tit about in cars. Why is the automatic assumption that women want to watch women?

Top Gear is a lads show. That's just the way it is.

Loose Women is a women's show. That's also just the way it is.

Want a show about cars which is more from a women's perspective, or a more balanced gender perspective? Then just make a show for it. No need to try and change Top Gear into something else. Because if you did then you may as well call it something different and have that as the brand new car show.

Dan Wright and Lowri next week.

So following MW's ignorant stance that "the Theory of Evolution is just a theory" (agreeing with someone else to be exact), we have more nonsense spouted on his national TV show.

He asks if the recent breakthrough regarding observing gravitational waves might mean Einstein's "theory" will become a "law". Just as the everyday meaning of theory is not the same as the scientific meaning. The same goes when using the term "law", and the two do not exist in a hierarchy.

Quoting from the first article linked later... "scientific laws simply explain how things behave"... "Theories generally provide mechanisms that explain the things we observe"... "If a theory is any good, it explains a law"... "theories do not develop into laws".

I really wish MW would take 10 minutes to do even a bit of research before talking to so many people when it results in misinformation. It makes you wonder if this only happens with science.

This "relatively" short article explains it well and the last section includes quite a nuanced section relating to the the previous "just a theory" issue.
http://web.missouri.edu/~hanuscind/8...1theorylaw.pdf

This is another shorter webpage with similar details... http://science.kennesaw.edu/~rmatson/3380theory.html

I enjoyed the bit that I watched today, with Michael Rosen being very amusing.

I suggest that anybody who thinks he looks even remotely like Corbyn needs to get a cataract check.