|
I live museums that have that kind of stuff.
Been to Smithsonian several times and that's an amazing experience.
New version: WinHeist Version 2.1.0 Beta
Have you ever just looked at someone and knew the wheel was turning but the hamster was dead?
Trying to understand the behavior of some people is like trying to smell the color 9.
I'm not crazy, my reality is just different than yours!
|
|
|
|
|
I went to live and work near Munich back in 1990 and spent the first six months visiting the Deutsches Museum almost every weekend and spent hours looking around - and getting sore feet. They had these vibrating pads you could stand on for a while to ease the foot pain! I still feel I only touched on a small part of what there was to see. Amazing!
Now I live in Baltimore and go down to DC to visit the various Smithsonian museums and galleries as often as I can.
- I would love to change the world, but they won’t give me the source code.
|
|
|
|
|
What is it all about and can they be serious?
I always thought of Britain as an entity made up of various countries, and Scotland as one of them has had is fair share of shaping and forming Britain. It has contributed hugely to Englands history, giving it kings, queens, and democracy to a large degree, scientists, engineers, leaders and politicians. I don't see how there can be any ill will towards England, even if nominally it was a conquering force at first, it certainly hasn't been since!
So whats the beef if any?
Or is it just money, do they want al the oil revenue for themselves and is it enough even if they achieve it?
One result is a Labour govt will never be elected again to London; Scotland is a big labour voter.
Anyone else have any insight on this because I see it as a half baked piece of unjustified lunacy.
|
|
|
|
|
Munchies_Matt wrote: I see it as a half baked piece of unjustified lunacy.
Never have I seen a more accurate description of Scotland and her people!
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
A couple of small corrections. Scottish independence will have no effect on the countries that make up Great Britain. They will still be part of GB. What they are looking for independence from is the United Kingdom.
|
|
|
|
|
Don't let facts get in the way!
|
|
|
|
|
Where did I once mention Great Britain?
Read my clarification to Pete.
|
|
|
|
|
You mentioned Britain twice in your original post.
|
|
|
|
|
Read my clarification to Pete.
|
|
|
|
|
You start talking about British and Britishness in there, which is not the same thing. Your reference to Britain in your first message was incorrect, as Pete pointed out.
|
|
|
|
|
Well done, you found something to criticise on the internet. You must feel much better now.
|
|
|
|
|
That's just the response I was expecting.
|
|
|
|
|
That must make you feel even better than!
|
|
|
|
|
GB is a geographical term relating to a greater population of Brythonic Celts as opposed to the smaller population in france.
However none of this has anything to do with Scottish independence. The term 'British' is not the same as GB, its a collective term for the inhabitants of the UK, even if technically incorrect, and represents those people abroad: The British Empire, British stiff upper lip, British way of life, etc. Scotland made up a large part of that and had a huge input into it. Britishness and the UK is as much theirs as it is England's!
|
|
|
|
|
Munchies_Matt wrote: However none of this has anything to do with Scottish independence. Of course it has. It has huge implications on the role of independence and is part of the reason that things are so muddied over here. For instance, Scotland would still have the Queen as head of state, even if they took independence because of this.
|
|
|
|
|
OK, you are talking about cross purposes. I am talking about Britishness, not GB.
Hang on, so you are saying Scotland wants to leave the UK but keep the Queen as head of state? So it becomes a kind of 'big channel islands'?
AND they want to keep the pound?
What sort of independence is that?
Dear oh Christ, I thought at least the Scots were serious!
|
|
|
|
|
Munchies_Matt wrote: Hang on, so you are saying Scotland wants to leave the UK but keep the Queen as head of state? So it becomes a kind of 'big channel islands'? Yup. I believe it's referred to as "having your cake and eating it".
|
|
|
|
|
Looking a prat more like!
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: "having your cake haggis? and eating it".
... Clootie Dumpling, deep fried Mars bar ...
Life is like a s**t sandwich; the more bread you have, the less s**t you eat.
|
|
|
|
|
Munchies_Matt wrote: GB is a geographical term relating to a greater population of Brythonic Celts as opposed to the smaller population in france. No it isn't.
Britons who fled the British isles (whether they were descended from Celtic invaders or not) named the part of France they landed in with the same name of the place they had just fled, so one became known as "Big Britain", and the other just as "Britain".
It had nothing to do with the Celts, except that some of those who fled the British Isles could trace their families back to Celtic invaders.
Munchies_Matt wrote: The term 'British' is not the same as GB, its a collective term for the inhabitants of the UK, even if technically incorrect, and represents those people abroad: The British Empire, British stiff upper lip, British way of life, etc. What on Earth are you prattling on about?
"British" is an adjective meaning "something to do with Britain (the big one)", so the only way that it's "not the same as GB" is that GB is a noun, and British is an adjective (that has bugger all to do with "collective terms", whatever the Hell you mean by that).
I suggest that you Google on how not to be rude to people and how to admit having made mistakes.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Munchies_Matt wrote: You should try some education, you might find it helps. I'm afraid that my four years of formal education and thirty years of private research (much of which is published) trumps your five minutes with Google.
You claimed that "GB is a geographical term relating to a greater population of Brythonic Celts".
That is absolutely wrong, and you are either lazy, stupid, or naive for thinking it. Google deeper.
Or don't. I'm not interested in getting into this on a dev board.
The rest of your comments that I replied to simply prove that your knowledge of English grammar is abysmal.
Your latest comments simply add to the proof that the first few results from Google should not be used as the basis of an academic work.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Mark_Wallace wrote: You claimed that "GB is a geographical term relating to a greater population
of Brythonic Celts". That is absolutely wrong
No I am not. Look at the evidence I provided. Brittany is small britain, great Britain is its counter part. Two populations of Briton, Breton, breizh, Brythonic celt... chose your name, they all mean the same... one big, one small.
Those are the facts, you can accept them or not, see if I care.
|
|
|
|
|
When you grow up, you may find that you will learn the capacity to admit when you have made silly errors.
Your life will be much more difficult until you do.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|