Born Hunter
-
Content Count
17,865 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
31
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Articles
Gun Dealer's and Fieldsports Shop's
Reloading Room
Blogs
Calendar
Store
Classifieds
Everything posted by Born Hunter
-
Sweet! Cheers, that's helped my blood pressure. You're right, the music isn't actually there. It's just available to you, like when you download an app and then delete it.
-
Just Become A Grandad Again For The Second Time
Born Hunter replied to j j m's topic in General Talk
Congratulations! -
Exactly, so, to travel CLOCKWISE you will not have to cross the motorway, you'll just join it. Whereas to travel ANTICLOCKWISE you will have to cross the motorway first via a bridge.
-
Thank f**k you were infantry and not in charge of a tank division!
-
I'm not even sure what to say at this point. Socks, just have a look on a map and see if you can figure it out. If you join the left going traffic entering the M25 you're going clockwise, rightgoing is anticlockwise.
-
I really don't like f***ing U2 and now I have to scroll through their SHITE when browsing my songs. Trivial, yes, but it's my f***ing phone and I don't expect Apple to be permanently customising it on my behalf!
-
Not being funny fella but the vulcan nuclear force used to be based less than 20 miles from where I was raised. And those fuckers carried warheads that can be measured in the megaton yields not kiloton. So don't make out the rest of the union hasn't lived with that when it was necessary!
-
The total MoD assets are alleged to be worth 100 billion pounds. Of which the Scots would probably be eligible to around 8 billions worth as they represent 8% of the UK population. That'd all be pending negotiations though. The 15'000 personel figure isn't what they are due, it's what the SNP have said would be the likely size of the SDF.
-
Thanks for that BH hardly something you would want to risk loosing! One thing to bear in mind is that a secure Scotland is in UK interests. For the first time in 300 years a foreign state will have a land border with mainland UK, that basically gives any threats to the UK a backdoor to attack us! But having an already established military and intelligence services, and a VERY effective ones at that, if the UK government want to play hardball with a debt shirking Scotland I don't see why they couldn't.... ? Also worth bearing in mind Scotlands entire defence force will consist of only 15'
-
What assets go where, unless already written out under international law, will be determined by break up negotiations. But if the Scottish don't take any of the national debt in response to no currency union then I can't see why the UK Gov would give them any of our other assets, including military hardware. The Scottish would have to start from scratch. The same goes for intelligence services. And that's not something you can take lightly!
-
...and ironically you are telling us these wonderful treats via the world wide Web using a computer... English inventions! LOL
-
Just seen you've added that bit, so i'll respond specificly to that here... If we could observe a theory, it'd stop being a theory and become a fact. That's why I say that evolution, the mechanism of which organic populations change their genetics to adapt to an environment, IS fact. Evolution IS genetic adaptation of an organic population, even on the species level. The Theory of Evolution and Common Descent has not been observed, it started before we were able to observe. That's inconvenient and unsatisfying, as are all theories to explain what we observe, but that doesn't make scien
-
You talk like theres so much riding on it ...its just a natter on a subject of interest on the internet mate......" risk missrepresenting it " stone the crows if its that important to you i promise i wont dare question you with anything ever again ! You can question me as much as you wish, if you treat the answer to one question as the answer to another though we'll struggle to achieve any sort of understanding of the other persons view and the whole thing becomes frustrating. It's my view that the missrepresentation of science is a key factor in people discrediting it and treati
-
If that's how you want to term it, but then that implies god created us doesn't it? LOL My view would be it is actively controlling your evolution. Whether that's right or wrong is a different argument.
-
I don't think it's an easy decision at all mate. All said and done, it's a personal opinion. There's always a risk with things that are less than absolute....... just depends how great you consider that risk and whether it's worth taking. I'm sat here at my desk with the same background I've had for 4 years, the Union Flag..... it means alot to me and it's completely out of my control.
-
As a species we're fine, technology has only influenced us for a minute time scale. If you believe in evolution then you'll believe that 50-100 years is piss in the ocean on an evolutionary timescale. If our environment was changed by the loss of all science and tech we'd be back in a 'natural' (I hate that word) environment and be playing by the old set of selection rules again. People would be being selected by non technologically influenced factors as opposed to technologically influenced ones..... evolution goes on! .........as it is doing now. In 100k years thing may be very different
-
It's not just ASDA, but to answer, I don't know why everyone else isn't chirping up. Maybe they've all come to different conclusions on the best course of action, whether to risk speaking up or to risk keeping quiet.... To my mind it's obvious why those that have have only just spoken up..... why get involved and risk boycotting or other retalitory action untill the risk of YES is quite serious? You've proved yourself that by speaking they have risked negative feeling towards them, something I feel is unfair. They may have spoken to Cameron, we don't know that, but it makes sense to only s
-
Evolution theory doesn't predict de-evolution as such to my interpretation. We continue to evolve as all living life does. The only difference is that we have changed our environment with the use of technology. Different genetic factors are now selected as 'fittest'. It's a unique situation where technology forms part of our environment and where as a species we have control to change our environment and so our evolution. Perhaps not intelligently or in a planned fashion though. Our survival will probably become more dependant on managing our environment to suit our genetics as opposed to adap
-
And I'll say again Lab, I don't think badly of you for still wanting indepedence in spite of the potential for bad shit to happen, there's always going to be risk. But I do think you're a little daft for not wanting to hear the threats and hating on those that give them to you. The bussinessmen that have spoken up may hope to sway a vote with what they have said but they have not misslead you or lied, they're giving you harsh realities. It's not scaremongering if it's a genuine threat.
-
You make it sound like they've said they'll have to put their prices up simply because they want to? They haven't said that at all, they've said that a YES vote will most probably lead to increased running costs which will have to be passed on to the customer. So yes, I would consider someone who boycotted those stores a little pathetic and spiteful for shooting the messenger of reality. These boycotters are choosing to boycot the stores because of a price increase which was a direct result of a change in politics, something out of the hands of the stores. It would be like boycotting a timber
-
Don't kid yourself, only the hardcore spiteful nationalists are going to boycot all the bussinesses that have stated the truthful reality. It's pathetic to have the attitude of shooting the messenger because you don't like the message. Numerous Chairmen and CEOs of multi million/billion pound bussinesses all made the wrong decision to tell the hard truth? LOL. Lab, I don't think worse of you for being happy to take that risk. But I do think it's a little strange you would rather be ignorant to these people's opinions on what will be felt by the man on the street in terms of economic ch
-
In my opinion they have weighed up the risk of speaking up and 'looking bad' against the risks of actually having to deal with independence and decided that they had better speak up and be as diplomatic as possible when doing so. You might call that stupid, I call it risk management.....
-
On point 2 Lab; Sir Charlie Mayfield, the head of the John Lewis Partnership, which also includes the Waitrose group of supermarkets, said it was “most probable” retailers would be forced to charge higher prices north of the Border. He warned Radio Four's Today programme there were “economic consequences” to a Yes vote because of the higher cost of trading in parts of Scotland. If you've taken the 'price change' to mean a potential drop you've missed the point.
-
That fateful day when I googled 'hunting with lurchers'........................ I've never been the same since.
-
I think things are being slightly missrepresented on this point. What I believe people are trying to say is that with Scotlands small population and socialist attitudes the plan on independence has quite openly been stated to open Scottish borders to huge numbers of immigrant labour. It's text book socialism, which you lot seem to love. That's not scaremongering either, I'm pretty sure that is the policy of the YES camp. Which I hear you say isn't very different to the UKs policy right now yeah? However, the reason you've gotten away lightly on the immigration front so far is because being par
