Scottish Independence Model Is Dead

[bluto]

Oi!

[oaksoft]

I wholeheartedly agree that they're British. I don't want Brits to be heavily engaged there, currently.

I DO choose life.

That's why I think it might be nice if the representatives of the people who are likely to lose it, (often young Scots), would be there to argue against the likelihood of their voters being sent to a stupid war.

Salmond is paid MORE to do that job. He needs to earn his keep.

But I guess you don't care, oaky.

As in the referendum nonsense, it has always been about "emotions" to you. To your mind, facts are chiels that winnae sway the feeling in yer water.

you guess i dont care?

taking up mind reading?

[bluto]

you guess i dont care?

taking up mind reading?

No.

If you take up REAL reading just as far as the following sentence, you'll read that my assumption is predicated upon your past assertions.

It was fact based. A thing of which genuine scientists approve.

[oaksoft]

I can answer questions on this subjects - not saying that I would get the answers right, but I would answer. . Has the first one got anything to do with magnetism? It seems to ring a bell - just like Quasimodo.

not exclusively although it can find application there.

a hamiltonian is an energy operator which acts on a wavefunction. the wavefunction mathematically describes anything which is wavelike.

a phenomenological hamiltonian is one which is constructed from empirical observation from experiment rather than being derived in an ab initio manner.

i apologise for dumbing this down.

the second one is a theory which is based on normalisation groups which treats perturbations on a system as having a localised impact allowing you to only be required to model a small part of an extended system. it finds use in the determination of impurities in things like crystal structures etc.

both of these are heavily mathematical in construction.

and you thought this forum was just for football eh? lol

Edited November 26, 2015 by oaksoft

[oaksoft]

No.

If you take up REAL reading just as far as the following sentence, you'll read that my assumption is predicated upon your past assertions.

It was fact based. A thing of which genuine scientists approve.

an assertion is not a fact. it is a hypothesis if you will, which invites critique from other LEARNED people.

if you are going to take the piss out of a scientist you could at least try and understand how science actually works.

you are not as smart as you think you are.

i, on the other hand, have no such worries.

pish and tish bluto.

pish and indeed tish.

[bluto]

an assertion is not a fact. it is a hypothesis if you will, which invites critique from other LEARNED people.

if you are going to take the piss out of a scientist you could at least try and understand how science actually works.

you are not as smart as you think you are.

i, on the other hand, have no such worries.

pish and tish bluto.

pish and indeed tish.

It was your assertions...

Your statements of fact -the fact you would vote YES, no matter what all available facts dictated to be the sensible, rational reaction to Scotland going solo, at that juncture.

If you're going to bandy words with a wordsmith, try and understand how language really works.

On topic, there's a brilliant pish-taking article by Robert Shrimsley on the FT website this morning about why Cameron is right (NOT!) to send bombers to Syria.

I can't copy and paste, I think it requires you signing in, but I'll try to post a link....

ETA:

--

Robert Shrimsley

--

The questions over extending air raids answered in 43 key points

Read the full article at: http://on.ft.com/1lLZSDu

Sent from my iPad

Here's a link that should work... NO. IT DOESN'T.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/4d31c8bc-941c-11e5-b190-291e94b77c8f.html#axzz3scNtiSNw

Edited November 27, 2015 by bluto

[oaksoft]

It was your assertions...

Your statements of fact -the fact you would vote YES, no matter what all available facts dictated to be the sensible, rational reaction to Scotland going solo, at that juncture.

If you're going to bandy words with a wordsmith, try and understand how language really works.

On topic, there's a brilliant pish-taking article by Robert Shrimsley on the FT website this morning about why Cameron is right (NOT!) to send bombers to Syria.

I can't copy and paste, I think it requires you signing in, but I'll try to post a link....

ETA:

--

Robert Shrimsley

--The questions over extending air raids answered in 43 key points

Read the full article at: http://on.ft.com/1lLZSDu

Sent from my iPad

Here's a link that should work...http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/4d31c8bc-941c-11e5-b190-291e94b77c8f.html#axzz3scNtiSNw

yeah you are still wrong. Me saying that I am going to do something does not make it factual until i have actually done it.

its subtle but it isnt the same thing.

on the topic of syria, we should not be going in there without support from virtually everyone in the region plus all the major nations.

your link is still asking me for a login.

Edited November 27, 2015 by oaksoft

[bluto]

yeah you are still wrong. Me saying that I am going to do something does not make it factual until i have actually done it.

its subtle but it isnt the same thing.

Oaky, oaky, OK...

It's NOT subtle - that was precisely my point.

You made assertions, then followed through (You DID vote Yes, didn't you?) thus rendering your assertion as fact.

on the topic of syria, we should not be going in there without support from virtually everyone in the region plus all the major nations.

your link is still asking me for a login.

Ach, I feared that.

Sorry.

It's a guide to the logic underpinning what seems to be an idiot's rationale for bombing Syria. IE Cameron's.

In one way it's lovely to have the FT slagging the stupidity of our government's planned murderous (and ineffectual ) designs... On the other hand, I wish Corbyn was better equipped to do so, to do HIS job... though the other papers and tabloids would just contradict anything/whatever he said.

Oaky, if you work at the bit of UWS in Paisley, why not pop into the library and read it, there?

I'm presuming there's still that facility? Not been cut, has it?

Edited November 27, 2015 by bluto

[RickMcD]

yeah you are still wrong. Me saying that I am going to do something does not make it factual until i have actually done it.

its subtle but it isnt the same thing.

on the topic of syria, we should not be going in there without support from virtually everyone in the region plus all the major nations.

your link is still asking me for a login.

How can a rocket scientist deliver such hellish punctuation?

[oaksoft]

How can a rocket scientist deliver such hellish punctuation?

Far too busy working on more important and exciting things.

When you go to a football match do you spend the 90 minutes obsessing over the quality of the pointing on the bricks?

Plus I sometimes post from an ipad which is a PITA for stuff like that.

Edited November 27, 2015 by oaksoft

[oaksoft]

Oaky, oaky, OK...

It's NOT subtle - that was precisely my point.

You made assertions, then followed through (You DID vote Yes, didn't you?) thus rendering your assertion as fact.

Ach, I feared that.

Sorry.

It's a guide to the logic underpinning what seems to be an idiot's rationale for bombing Syria. IE Cameron's.

In one way it's lovely to have the FT slagging the stupidity of our government's planned murderous (and ineffectual ) designs... On the other hand, I wish Corbyn was better equipped to do so, to do HIS job... though the other papers and tabloids would just contradict anything/whatever he said.

Oaky, if you work at the bit of UWS in Paisley, why not pop into the library and read it, there?

I'm presuming there's still that facility? Not been cut, has it?

I don't work at UWS.

[bluto]

I don't work at UWS.

Sorry.

I should have guessed.

Didn't know the Reid Kerr was still going...

[oaksoft]

Sorry.

I should have guessed.

Didn't know the Reid Kerr was still going...

I don't live or work anywhere near Paisley.

[bluto]

The good auld toon's got more going for it, than I'd realised...

[cambiebud]

I look at independence, like my football team. If St Mirren merged with one of the bigot brothers they would be in theory, a partnership. True, we would play in Glasgow in red, white and blue, or green and white, but we would have influence. Always outvoted by our bigger partner. I would rather watch amateur football in Paisley, in the Lowland League, than be part of that. Same with my country. The call for independence will always be there, and, in my opinion is inevitable. No matter what childish arguments Mr Dickson and his ilk make.

[oaksoft]

Sorry.

I should have guessed.

Didn't know the Reid Kerr was still going...

oooo putting down reid kerr.

didnt know u were a snob bluto.

[oaksoft]

The good auld toon's got more going for it, than I'd realised...

youre obviously excluding reid kerr from that given your snobby pish above.

deary me. i thought you were a saltoftheearth chap. turns out you are more middle class than me.

you could be faking it though. talking down a college. blimey.

[bluto]

Hmmm.

Weird rationale.

I think you may be good enough to be employed somewhere and you reckon that I'm denigrating it?

Don't think so poorly of yourself.

[bluto]

Its well worth the watching ;)

Keep your eye on Lady Lane.... As Disraeli said.

[oaksoft]

Hmmm.

Weird rationale.

I think you may be good enough to be employed somewhere and you reckon that I'm denigrating it?

Yeah yeah yeah, that's EXACTLY what you were doing.

You're a snob bluto.

Accept it.

Embrace it.

Breath in the air of supremacy over others.

Puff your chest out.

Shoulders back.

Look down on the riff raff.

Done that?

NOW you know what it's like to be me for a few seconds.

Great isn't it?

[oaksoft]

Oaky, did you say that you were off work this week?

No. Why?

[Stuart Dickson]

SNP top candidate for North Lanarkshire is outed as a homophobe

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/equality-campaigners-question-snp-candidates-6923014

The Natsis have no class.

[BuddieinEK]

SNP top candidate for North Lanarkshire is outed as a homophobe

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/equality-campaigners-question-snp-candidates-6923014

The Natsis have no class.

Are you saying that regardless of whether it is right or wrong in your or the public eye, that she is not entitled to a personal opinion or that having one will affect her ability to do the job if elected?

Another thing... "phobe" alludes to fear... why is having a personal opinion on a matter worthy of labelling her as in fear?

Just asking!

[Stuart Dickson]

Are you saying that regardless of whether it is right or wrong in your or the public eye, that she is not entitled to a personal opinion or that having one will affect her ability to do the job if elected?

Another thing... "phobe" alludes to fear... why is having a personal opinion on a matter worthy of labelling her as in fear?

The views she's quoted with certainly sounds phobic to me Brian. They are identical to the views taken by Christians who are fearful that same sex marriage will reap some godly vengeance.

As for her ability to do the job, well here is where I have a major issue with the electoral format in the Scottish Parliament. in the Westminster elections we get to vote for a person who then represents us as our local MP. If we don't like them or we don't share their views on matters like equal marriage we can choose not to be represented by them. However in the Scottish Parliament we may reject a candidate that holds personal views that the electorate find repugnant and yet still see them elected to represent us anyway through the list system.

It's good that the Daily Record have published this story and outed her as homophobic IMO especially as she now appears to be someone without the courage of her convictions. She's been challenged on her views and she's declined to comment, and the party have issued a response on her behalf claiming the exact opposite of what she has previously written. That is as duplicitous and as hypocritical as her views were homophobic.

[Stuart Dickson]

More bad news for those favouring left wing politics that backed the SNP as it turns out their formula to increase GP resources in the poorest area's has been found to be badly flawed. Studies done by Glasgow and Dundee Universities found that GP Funding in Scotland was still heavily weighted towards more affluent area's meaning there were 2,000 more GP appointments available in better off areas.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-34957653

The SNP just can't get anything right.....