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
-
Not had the opportunity to watch it but being absolutely honest paralympic type games aren't really of great interest to me. Servicemen however are... They have a spirit that just can't be broke.
-
Just to point out, the man is no physicist, he's a philosopher with a background in biology and he's anything but 'top' having made no significant contribution to any area of science. It's an interesting video from a philosophical stand point though. Just wanted to make his credibility clear.
-
"I can't understand why anyone would want to kill animals for fun, and anybody who does, I think, is psychopathic"
-
ofcourse i do and i could quote experts saying different i.e most recent a former uk ambassador to the nuclear based defence alliance countrys around scotland might not agree, with cuts, the raf has no martitime patrol aircraft and the navy have conventional oceon going vessels based in scotland. good to know the oil and waters at well watched, remember when all those russian ships entered scottish waters, 24 hours it took to scramble ships.. not the first time either Our military is not what it was due to left wing fannies but our territory is very well protected. It may have taken us 2
-
You don't seem to grasp it Joe, nato is principally a nuclear alliance. All the members support the combined nuclear deterent. Scotland will have taken action that reduces nato nuclear capability. The whole idea flies in the face of what nato is about. You want nato protection but will not offer Britain the capability to maintain its nato responsibilities. You want to intentionally hinder nato capability but still be under their official protection? The only thing you have to offer is your geographical location which I don't see as' key' with the UK, Norway and Iceland being members.
-
I don't believe you will get invaded either. You currently have no conflict with another state and no foreseeable reason for one. There's no current reason for you to need a powerful military capable of expeditionary/nuclear/offensive etc action. However, that sort of military is an insurance policy, you never foresee such threats. 3/28 may be nuclear armed but all 28 support that. Why will Scotland get in without showing similar support for the core reason for nato. Furthermore why will Scotland get in after intentionally hampering nato capability.
-
Why would they get invaded? They're no threat? If they made a military alliance with Russia however that would be taken very seriously. Which is what you were implying.
-
how many countries are in nato and how many have nukes, scotland will be in nato mate, our position is one key reason Three nato countries maintain independent nuclear fleets. You won't be in nato because Scotland won't allow forward deployed nukes on their soil. That's against nato terms. The yanks have more influence than anybody and they greatly value the royal navy's ability both conventional and nuclear. Scotland want to heavily restrict that and that'll not go down well with anybody. Your location is strategically strong but with the UK, Norway and Iceland it makes it much less of a ne
-
I don't know whether trident replacement can happen without faslane, the MOD don't believe anywhere outside of Scotland in the UK can home the vanguard fleet. As for building warships, it's MOD policy that they're all built on sovereign territory. So forget that, I don't care what has been agreed already, it won't happen. The British take defence very f***ing seriously and BAE will tow the line on that.
-
how many countries are in nato and how many have nukes, scotland will be in nato mate, our position is one key reason Three nato countries maintain independent nuclear fleets. You won't be in nato because Scotland won't allow forward deployed nukes on their soil. That's against nato terms. The yanks have more influence than anybody and they greatly value the royal navy's ability both conventional and nuclear. Scotland want to heavily restrict that and that'll not go down well with anybody. Your location is strategically strong but with the UK, Norway and Iceland it makes it much less of a n
-
I assume by "need or use" you're referring to Trident among others. You might not need it to do business but if you want a military alliance with NATO you sure as hell need it. It's a nuclear alliance ffs. It terrifies me how defence is treated like a luxury and not a fundamental necessity. Left wing f***ing hippies! LOL
-
Sorry mate, I think you misunderstood. The behaviour change I was referring to was my assumption for what gnasher said when he said "That's adaptation not evolution." was about the lizards, not the E.Coli. As for the second part: But would it be from a random mutation? But that would then depend on the instances of the mutation within the population as to whether it's evolution. Personally, I've not read the Origin of Species in ages, and I think I'd need to reread that before getting deeper into the debate. There are some parts I can remember and some I cannot. My trick to sounding
-
Isn't there a tribe somewhere that live on stilt houses in the sea and rely on the sea for nearly everything and havnt they developed the ability to walk on the ocean floor and hold their breaths for extremely long periods ...... Quite possibly mate. And to me that's a not insignificant piece of evidence. However to claim it as observed evolution we'd have to scientifically compare them to their ancestors, who rather inconveniently died out generations ago. Otherwise someone will tell me that they were created that way. It's certainly a prediction from Darwins theory though mate.
-
Remmybolt, are the new strains of ecoli not genetically different to the originals then? It's not a behavioural change, it's the ability to grow on citric acid which was not possible in the original strain. Natural selection by the definition of the process leads to a change in genetics. The new strains of ecoli are genetically different from the originals. It can hardly be claimed as evolution otherwise. (Edit; Just realised you were talking about tomos example) If you subject a population of humans to a largely amphibious life and they learn to swim, that's not evolution. If after a X g
-
You're twisting things now. The theory of evolution and common descent is not what I was telling you was a fact. I wasn't arguing that it was a fact. So why even raise that? There's reems of evidence to support that theory but I'm not going down that road, I'm not willing to waste my time with that or risk missrepresenting it as I'm not a biologist. Read a well credited book written by an evolutionary biologist because so far I suspect all your thoughts on it have been derived from creationist rubbishing of the subject. I did as you asked and gave you factual observations of evolution whic
-
A lab experiment first perfromed in 1880 which subjected an isolated strain of E.coli to heat (a change in environment) in an effort to force an adaptation to a new environment has resulted in new strains to develop, one of which has the ability to grow on citric acid. The original strain did not have this ability. Along a similar line, bacteria has evolved antibiotic resistance. This is proof that population gene pools adapt to environmental changes. That is evolution. You can't just expect to throw a dog into the sea and watch it grow fins and gills, that's not evolution. I'll ch
-
A lab experiment first perfromed in 1880 which subjected an isolated strain of E.coli to heat (a change in environment) in an effort to force an adaptation to a new environment has resulted in new strains to develop, one of which has the ability to grow on citric acid. The original strain did not have this ability. Along a similar line, bacteria has evolved antibiotic resistance. This is proof that population gene pools adapt to environmental changes. That is evolution. You can't just expect to throw a dog into the sea and watch it grow fins and gills, that's not evolution. I'll ch
-
A lab experiment first perfromed in 1880 which subjected an isolated strain of E.coli to heat (a change in environment) in an effort to force an adaptation to a new environment has resulted in new strains to develop, one of which has the ability to grow on citric acid. The original strain did not have this ability. Along a similar line, bacteria has evolved antibiotic resistance. This is proof that population gene pools adapt to environmental changes. That is evolution. You can't just expect to throw a dog into the sea and watch it grow fins and gills, that's not evolution. I'll ch
-
I'm burnt out on it, maybe another day.
-
Gods just one of those subjects you have to be in the mood for.... For someone to say there is nothing that could convince you to believe in God is ignorant and narrow minded. I'm an atheist, I don't believe there is anything supernatural about the Universe, I've made my stance clear on that based on countless hours of thought and everything my senses have recorded in my life. That's not ignorance or agnosticism, it's evidence and logic based faith in atheism. I can present that argument but I'll not enter an argument with the intention of proving my beliefs right. That'd be the height of idio
-
I didn't mean to imply you specifically were trying to prove you're right. You're smart enough to know you can't and we've had that discussion before. It was just a general observation. I hate it when thiests and athiests use science to argue their corner when all it does is lead to science being ridiculed. Science is the persuit of truth and knowledge, it's not out to prove or disprove God. It's true I use science to earn my living but that doesn't make me biased to one answer or another. If you loose objectivity and scientific curosity then you loose anything resembling science. You can'
-
Hop over to the God thread. I'm having a rant you might enjoy. No chance.... been there, done that, sick to death of the ignorant. All that thread has done is fire up two sides and as usual science gets mocked and attacked as a result and so ignorance breeds more ignorance.
-
Nobody is begging anybody to stay, if they make their decision to leave then I'll want them gone. Fact is, that decision hasn't been made yet...... ah that's like them couples that "were working at it , and then if she decides to leave me for that swarthy European I'll let her go " lol . In the words of Gloria Gaynor , at first I was afraid I was petrified kept think of how I couldn't survive without you by my side . I can't remember the rest of the lyrics but ya get my meaning lol You talk like all English want to keep Scotlands membership in this Union and all Scottish want to leave.
-
RemmyBolt, how many times I have tried to tell theists that the big bang theory allows for a god and creation I don't know. Love your last sentence! "We are all entitled to our own opinions. We are not entitled to our own facts!"
-
But evolution has been witnessed, speciation has been observed in nature and in laboratory experiments! It's an undeniable FACT that biological populations adapt their genetics to better suit their environment. That has been witnessed, that is evolution! The theory of common descent, that all life on Earth has evolved from a common ancestor has not been witnessed and yet it has MUCH supporting evidence. To say that the beliefe that god created us all in our current form has no less evidence than theory of common descent I find ridiculous in light of what science has discovered. I could ree
