Jump to content

John Allan

Social Media Member
  • Content Count

    40
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. Wiki? Not sure. Both Strasbourg and the European commission do http://en.strasbourg-europe.eu/member-states,44987,en.html here you will see the map of the "Member states", entitled "Member States of the European Union and the Council of Europe", and all official EU commission directives sent to members are directed to and at "Member States". Just do a search on Member States on the EU website, you will see what I mean. But call them anything you like Its a pretty mute point to me.
  2. In the 1960/70s? Absolutely. Most economists on both side of the Brexit debate agree that becoming a member state strengthened the UK economy and avoided progressive economic decline, the reason we were given the title of the "sick man of Europe" in the 60s and 70s. But as noted, time will tell on how are economy will look after 2019. I'm pretty optimistic that the UK economy is strong enough 40 years later, but I suppose we will see over the next few years.
  3. >>You personally might well vote in representatives to make decisions which they feel will benefit >>people and nation, I tend to vote for candidates on what they put in their or their party's >>manifesto. Good. I'm pretty certain everyone does. My post answered a point, (in the third and not first person) on the democratic process. Though MP's make hundreds of decisions for you each year that are outside of a given parties manifesto, well over 300 a year and this doesn't include those in Holyrood. You can see them all here for the coming year https://services.parliament.uk/b
  4. Difficult to answer? How democratic, just like Westminster. Vote SNP. Do you mean diplomatic? Not sure a static comment can be democratic. While I wouldn't vote SNP, I agree with you. If you feel another party could change what you want, then vote for that representative.
  5. What should a politician do if they believe the referendumn decision was not in the best interest of the country, and/or the public were given false information upon which to make their descision? That is difficult to answer as no one knows at this point whether or not it is in the best interest of the country. Clearly remain voters do not, and leave voters do, both depending on their respective agendas. Politicians should have predicted and then stopped the concept of a referendum before it was promised if they felt it was in the best interest, and then it would not have become an issue.
  6. Democracy is a principle of equality upheld my elected representatives. This means we vote representatives to make decisions which they feel will benefit us as a people and a nation, and we should vote against them as representatives if we feel those principles are not met or upheld. Democracy does not mean that every decision is put through an electoral process. That would be absolute mayhem. We did have a referendum in 1975 on whether to join the common market (EU) and agreed to the Treaty of Rome based on that. The result was almost a flip-side of what we had with Brexit. Scotland and N.
  7. I loved bonfire night when I was young, but then I got old and I stopped liking it as much, though I did enjoy taking my own bairns to firework displays before they grew up. Traditionally it was an effigy of the pope that was burnt and not old Guido. Mind you, there is some irony that a mainly English celebration remembers the saving of a Scottish King
  8. Depends where you want to live. If you're happy on the outer Islands (Yell/Unst/Fetlar/Whalsay) you would get a place very quickly. Though jobs on the Islands are thin on the ground. In Lerwick, you could be waiting a few months. Alternatively, you move out of town but on the bus route, North or South of Lerwick. Private rental prices can be high. Not as high as they were in the boom years of the Oil. But all the same, some folk are still charging some ridiculous prices for flats. A bed(sit) in Lerwick will be anything from £450-£500 a month, yet outside of Town, you can get a house from £5
  9. I guess if they came across an unknown element then they will report on it. Unlikely though for the reasons already given. The thermometer? It seems it was invented in 1714 and used Mercury. I wiki'd that though When they break it all down into "known chemical natural elements", what do they do with the unknown ones? What did they use to make thermometres before they discovered Gallium?
  10. You're not wrong. I think it had something to do with the area being close to a supernova which was high in phosphorus. Meteorites carried this to nearby planets. Earth was lucky to be in that area. Cardiff University wrote something about it. https://www.cardiff.ac.uk/news/view/1143956-absent-phosphorus-questions-possible-life-on-other-planetsbut I've not read the whole article.
  11. Well scientists and astronomers use spectroscopy on any light source from the Universe, planet, star or another galaxy and they then break this light source down into known chemical natural elements. They can tell all sorts of things from this, but what they are looking at next in the newer generation of this (they need more powerful equipment), is for "unnatural" chemicals, those which must have been created by a third party (i.e. a life form). There is some pretty amazing science going on at the moment. Earth punches well above it's weight. It's just a shame it is in such an inaccessible an
  12. There have been an estimated five billion species on the planet since the first mix of elements first came together to create life on Earth!!! In the rest of the Solar System, there has not been one single example and there probably won't be. This planet, and all the life forms on it, are frankly amazing. While the Solar system is small, it contains all the known elements that will be found elsewhere in the Universe, yet it is the parameters of this planet which has created this wonderful world. I have no reasonable response to the concept of "It's life Jim, but not as we know it", but I hop
  13. Yes I agree, there are many synthetic elements that might be discovered, like 115. But they are synthetic and would not exist without a scientist involved. You are probably correct, W&F. Planet Earth probably does have some of every known element that exists within our universe. I would suggest however that they are only the known elements. That can possibly be said at present but it is likely that we have not yet identified all elements on earth. Ununpentium, atomic number 115, was discovered by some Swedish scientists in 2013. Haven't yet found out yet if Ununpentium exists anywh
  14. The Earth has all the known elements that exist in the Universe. From these elements life has been created and developed. So any life in the Universe would also be made of the same elements and would have the same restrictions for existence, and would need similar environmental conditions. This is not to say that there would not be different looking lifeforms if these conditions did exist. But the limitation of the required elements is the reason we don't have flaming Venusian lifeforms running around the Universe, or green skinned maidens from mars crying out "show me more of this Earth thin
×
×
  • Create New...