dimreepr

Why? Change is inevitable, whether by design or not, the outcome of which is almost always unknowable.

It seems to work for me and mine, not perfectly I admit, but well enough that we don’t face a daily struggle to merely survive.

I certainly don’t rule out the Scots benefiting and maybe England would also benefit, who knows what the future will bring. But without prescience the future would seem better served without changing what seems to work now. Having said that, the contraction of empire, given history, seems dependent on size; the bigger the empire the smaller it’s eventual contraction.

Indeed, they could use deep fried mars bars. The only real winner in a yes vote would be the SNP, which seems to me, to be the real agenda.

The idea of justice and revenge, it seems to me, is inextricably linked; in such a way that it blinds us to the possibility that neither is necessary to our advancement, in terms of, understanding our fellow humans. Sure there are those that seek to gain advantage over the rest of us because a genetic abnormality allows them to not feel and suffer, psychologically, the way the rest of us do (sociopaths and the like). Might that advantage, through understanding, be mitigated and countered; that maybe leads to a more enlightened future? Just a thought.

But if my death were by accident, say a road traffic accident, how is that a punishment? I would have suffered no more or less than if I had done nothing?

Suppose I kill your father, does my death mean justice has been done? But what if my death was merely an accident? Does that mean justice has been done or is something further needed?

We can’t control ‘big natural fires’ now; why would you think our understanding of fire hasn't an intention?

They have yet to change.

The Stone Age didn’t end because they ran out of stones; what we know now will either be lost or will change. Pen and paper used to be sticks and clay; nothing last’s everything changes.

Indeed it is, and yet another reason for Hamas/Palestine not to trust Israel, and so the cycle continues; aggression is passive and active, both of which just drives a wedge into trust and/or forgiveness. The price of which is peace.

The only practical solution at this moment in time is this. I don’t think any meteorologists understand weather well enough to predict what would happen in small scale artificial systems.

It’s an impossible question to answer with any certainty. Ten oz is right, in that, there are many more possible reasons why the link between fire; and the spark of understanding that lead to the manufacture of fire. My guess given the advantages, in which, post fires certain flora and fauna were easier to eat and digest. Sparks, in the right conditions, naturally causes fires, the observation of which created that understanding.

A Buddhist would say there is no good or bad news, just news; similarly, there is no good or bad change, just change. All we can do is adapt to whatever the news/change is, be it good or bad and live now in whatever contentment we can find. If the news/change is a problem and it has a solution, then solve it; if it doesn’t then sit back and accept the outcome for it has no solution.

It’s all too easy sitting on the outside looking in, to judge the actions of others, be it Hamas or Israel; forgetting they are humans just like the rest of us, that being born into either culture we too would feel aggrieved and want retribution from those we feel are responsible. Is it any wonder it’s so difficult to change a grievance to acceptance, revenge to forgiveness or mistrust to trust?

Leaders of Hamas are haves relative to me and many Palestinians. Why shouldn't I apply the first law of Dimreepr to them? Well I guess that answers my question.

Exactly: +1 seems such a small reward for such a profound insight.

I think you can rest assured that’s one thing that won’t be disrupted.

I, as an Englishman, think an independent Scotland would diminish both Scotland and the rest of the UK. As this is an international community I’m hoping for a more dispassionate perspective, how do you think independence would affect the world, if at all?

It was really just a secondary rambling that I felt should be written down. But how you imagined I meant Hamas as the ‘haves’ is completely beyond my comprehension. Are you serious or is this just a mild case of trolling?

Maybe my advocating non violence and peace is a bad policy but given the resulting bloodbath and suffering that violence brings, maybe it should be given a chance. This conflict is just another example of the haves verses the have not’s. The haves are so afraid of losing everything; they are willing to do almost anything to keep their opulence, including murder and genocide. Sure the have not’s want a little of what the haves have but mostly they just want to wake up tomorrow without fear of persecution and death. Why is sharing, such a human trait, diminished so badly through wealth?

Our current population would fit, all be it, snugly onto the Isle of Man. How long before that snug fit, given your wish, is the Earth?

Have you even read any of my posts in this thread? You seem to have avoided my implicit question BTW.

They think they are.