I'm 75% Muslim, apparently. It's quite a good de-mystifying survey, but it avoids some of the rather basic questions like "Do you think there is a god of any kind?" It's more of a test of whether you share a range of general attitudes with Muslims.
Universal national swing (excluding Scotland) was the closest method to predicting seat numbers in the 2010 election. I can t see any reason why the Lib Dems could substantially out perform UNS particularly with the new factor that they would have been ,for the first time actually have been in power as part of an unpopular coalition and will likely have swings against them from Labour Conservatives, the SNP and UKIP.
I'm 75% Muslim, apparently. It's quite a good de-mystifying survey, but it avoids some of the rather basic questions like "Do you think there is a god of any kind?" It's more of a test of whether you share a range of general attitudes with Muslims.
Quite wrong, Nick. According to Islam you are either 100% muslim or you are nothing. In fact a 75% muslim is considered an apostate and again, according to shiria law, you can be beheaded for that crime. How's your neck these days?
If evidence emerged that the Big Bang theory is false then science would discard the theory and seek a new one. That's the difference between faith and science. Faith decides what the answers are and then seeks evidence to fit it, science looks at the evidence and then decides what conclusion is logical.
Eastleigh definitely injects a big unknown. The LDs have held it once on similar polling to what they have now, so maybe they'll hold more than we think. On the other hand, they can't send every campaigner to one seat come 2015, so maybe they won't repeat it nationwide. As for Eastleigh itself, I think it comes down to if Farage runs there.
David Herdson avers that the LDs have a higher activist base than UKIP but I was given to understand that the purples are catching up rather rapidly with Clegg's party in terms of membership numbers.
James Forsyth mentioned that a third of the LD membership live in London.
(I think this was in a 'View from 22' podcast during the Eastleigh by-election.)
If evidence emerged that the Big Bang theory is false then science would discard the theory and seek a new one. That's the difference between faith and science. Faith decides what the answers are and then seeks evidence to fit it, science looks at the evidence and then decides what conclusion is logical.
I think you'll find religion has a habit of junking orthodoxy and coming up with a new view, it's why we get schisms and sects. As for science looking for the evidence well maybe, but it has to fill the gaps with hypotheses since otherwise it will struggle. Universe or multiverse who knows ?
Mr. Brooke, I'm well aware of the schismatic tendency of religion, but they tend not to split up due to new evidence but due to philosophical differences (ie whether Jesus was perfect because he was God, or imperfect because he was man).
Scientific discussion of what we can't be sure of yet leads to gathering of evidence and experimentation to prove, one way or the other, if a theory holds water. What evidence would persuade a Muslim that Mohammed was not a prophet?
Mr. Brooke, I'm well aware of the schismatic tendency of religion, but they tend not to split up due to new evidence but due to philosophical differences (ie whether Jesus was perfect because he was God, or imperfect because he was man).
Scientific discussion of what we can't be sure of yet leads to gathering of evidence and experimentation to prove, one way or the other, if a theory holds water. What evidence would persuade a Muslim that Mohammed was not a prophet?
They do split because of new evidence usually someone claiming they have had a vision or a message, that's pretty much the basis of Mormonism. As for discussion scientists can be as fanatical as any religion, two world wars were powered by social Darwinism and the current AGW ruckus isn't exactly a cool-headed review. i see parallels in science and religion both have their high priests and false prophets.
I was in Eastleigh on the day of the by-election and asked a UKIP activist whether they had any chance of winning. They replied "very unlikely". So it seems they did better than even they were expecting.
{Note: Chandler's Ford is in the Winchester constituency despite being within Eastleigh borough}.
We're balancing first-time incumbency bonus, and the rarity of by-election holds being overturned, against the possibility the Tories get behind UKIP, despite it not being in their strategic interest to elect the first UKIP MP.
It will be one of the most fascinating contests in 2015...
Whilst I share your loathing of Social Darwinism I have a hard time believing that was the root cause of the Archduke's assassination, or played a role in Germany's fear France would try and retake Alsace and Lorraine.
I do, however, agree that some scientists can be fanatical. But science itself is a system of evidence, scepticism and critical thinking. Faith is about credulity, coming to conclusions without needing any evidence.
Brighton Pavilion Labour have selected. Look back in the comments
And the runner up in BOS selection have already left the party....because they are choosing too many white candidates for local elections in Southwark.
Battarsea have chosen. Will Martindale is the winner.
We have the full list of nominations to get a clue on who were the frontrunners:
Balham & Northcote – Samantha Heath & Will Martindale Fairfield – Samantha Heath & Sean McKee (NB: Sean McKee withdrew subsequent to the nomination meeting, but prior to long-listing) Latchmere - Sheila Boswell & Sundar Thavapalasundaram Queenstown - Samantha Heath & Will Martindale Shaftesbury – Sheila Boswell, Chris Summers & Sundar Thavapalasundaram St. Mary’s Park – Samantha Heath & Will Martindale
Affiliated organisations made the following nominations.
Co-Operative Party: Sheila Boswell Communication Workers Union: No nomination received Unite (Kingston-upon-Thames): Sheila Boswell Unite (South Thames): Sheila Boswell USDAW: No nomination received
Whilst I share your loathing of Social Darwinism I have a hard time believing that was the root cause of the Archduke's assassination, or played a role in Germany's fear France would try and retake Alsace and Lorraine.
I do, however, agree that some scientists can be fanatical. But science itself is a system of evidence, scepticism and critical thinking. Faith is about credulity, coming to conclusions without needing any evidence.
in religious terms it is.
The background of social Darwinism was pretty well established in Europe in the early C20, with most of the major european nations believing they were the epitome of mankind, France with its mission civiiatrice, Germany with its belief in it's own destiny and we were hardly immune. Darwinism was pretty much the basis for a lot of nationalist movements on why they were superior and contributed to the reasons for war.
As for your view on science, there are also a lot of religious people who would say what fanatics do has nothing to do with true religion.
Twitter Lord Ashcroft @LordAshcroft 3m Do most Unite members support big donations to Labour? Do most see Miliband as the best PM? My #UnitePoll out on Tuesday
I think the big guns in Brighton focused on Kemptown and Hove. Those are two seats that should be higher on the agenda for local Labour members (as they represent a swing of 2 rather than 1 in relation to the Tories). But the report quoted an impressive number of members locally, wasnt happy to hear that.
Southwark Labour always seems to have more shenanigans than average when it comes to selections for the Council.
William James proved (and I mean 'proved' as in 'did some experiments to prove it' rather than 'had a vision') that so-called visions could be induced by taking drugs.
The Romans also believed they were supreme, and the Greeks looked down upon barbarians. Today, there's American exceptionalism, and I would be amazed if the Chinese didn't have a very high opinion of their country and countrymen, given their rapid economic growth.
On the other hand, Communist Russia, which apparently believed all were equal, killed more people in the various Terrors than were lost in the Holocaust. [Although both lag behind the 38m or so who died due to Mao's agricultural policies].
Your science/fanaticism comparison is flawed, because science definitely revolves around evidence used to support or contradict theories which are based upon reasoned observation. Whether fanatic or delightful, all religious people necessarily believe in things for which there is no evidence. It's called faith precisely for that reason. If there were proof of God or Mohammed being a prophet, or the Flying Spaghetti Monster (may you be touched by His Noodley Appendage) then everyone would 'believe', only it wouldn't be belief anymore, merely acknowledgement of a scientifically proven fact or a scientifically credible theory.
William James proved (and I mean 'proved' as in 'did some experiments to prove it' rather than 'had a vision') that so-called visions could be induced by taking drugs.
The Romans also believed they were supreme, and the Greeks looked down upon barbarians. Today, there's American exceptionalism, and I would be amazed if the Chinese didn't have a very high opinion of their country and countrymen, given their rapid economic growth.
On the other hand, Communist Russia, which apparently believed all were equal, killed more people in the various Terrors than were lost in the Holocaust. [Although both lag behind the 38m or so who died due to Mao's agricultural policies].
Your science/fanaticism comparison is flawed, because science definitely revolves around evidence used to support or contradict theories which are based upon reasoned observation. Whether fanatic or delightful, all religious people necessarily believe in things for which there is no evidence. It's called faith precisely for that reason. If there were proof of God or Mohammed being a prophet, or the Flying Spaghetti Monster (may you be touched by His Noodley Appendage) then everyone would 'believe', only it wouldn't be belief anymore, merely acknowledgement of a scientifically proven fact or a scientifically credible theory.
well you're clearly on the scientific certainty side of the argument Mr D, I remain more open minded. I see very little difference between scientific certainty and those who have religious certainty, you'll shift neither in their arguments, yet both ultimately are as open to challenge as each other and both have the open hole that they are populated by humans who have an axe to grind and seek success in their chosen field. And again your definition of evidence is self-serving it might just be that you haven't worked out to measure it yet in the same way as social Darwinism was discredited by DNA when the measurement changed. we could all yet be floating through a multiverse on the back of a giant turtle ;-)
Oh, indeed, Mr. Brooke. I'm an atheist, and always have been. The absence of evidence always made me wonder, even at primary school, why others believed. I'm not a Dawkins sort, if others wish to believe then (providing they don't seek to limit my own freedom of action) that's entirely up to them.
Anyway, I've enjoyed our little debate, but I'm off for the time being.
Against the Tories there is less swing, but still a LD to Tory swing of 4% since the election so any LD majority of 8% or less is vulnerable. Of course, were the Tories to eat into the UKIP score and get back to level-pegging with Labour or even approach a majority, scores of LD seats could go. Last week, poll showed virtually all LD rural seats in Scotland falling to the SNP, except Orkney. Indeed, a poll earlier this year showed a LD to SNP swing of 14% meaning any LD seat with a majority of 28% or less over the SNP is at risk, including Caithness and Inverness http://www.newsnetscotland.com/index.php/scottish-news/in-brief/6511-poll-of-polls-shows-snp-ahead-of-labour-for-westminster
Rod - Safe? Lewes too will probably go Tory as the Tories now control the council, as could Portsmouth South given Hancock's recent problems. Kingston could even go, Davey only won it by 56 in 1997 when the Tory v LD gap was much smaller than now, as could Carshalton which was Tory until 1997. Cambridge will probably go back to Labour as will Bristol West and Cardiff Central too. Caithness and Inverness could well go SNP. Of the seats you give I would say only Southport and Southwark were 'safe' and Labour will likely put up a good performance against Hughes!
I know, any one or more of those things could happen, but the title of the thread is incumbency, and that is the LDs secret weapon!
Are we completely ruling out any LD gain? If so, it would - with the exception of 1970 - be the first time since 1955 that they would not score a gain...
The best chance of an SLD gain would be Edinburgh South. In other words, no chance at all.
Shoddy journalism. Quintana was never going to finish 5 minutes clear.
BBC Sport @BBCSport 5m Cycling: @chrisfroome all but seals overall victory in the #TourdeFrance, despite being beaten by Nairo Quintana in the penultimate stage
Shoddy journalism. Quintana was never going to finish 5 minutes clear.
BBC Sport @BBCSport 5m Cycling: @chrisfroome all but seals overall victory in the #TourdeFrance, despite being beaten by Nairo Quintana in the penultimate stage
why do they waste their time tweeting?
anyway, hurrah for Quintana! he's my favourite this tour. feel a little sorry for contador (surprisingly). wonder if he can come back next year and do something. maybe next yr will be full on froome vs quintana... nobody else really seems close
David Herdson avers that the LDs have a higher activist base than UKIP but I was given to understand that the purples are catching up rather rapidly with Clegg's party in terms of membership numbers.
James Forsyth mentioned that a third of the LD membership live in London. (I think this was in a 'View from 22' podcast during the Eastleigh by-election.)
1/3 the members but only 1/10 of their seats are in London. Of the 6 seats, 5 will have full challenges. So little chance of re-deploying activists outside London.
Many of the questions are highly contentious. Apparently my views that women should not be covered and that there should be freedom of religion and freedom of speech are muslim views.
So it seems the Saudis and Iranians are not muslims.
The fact that I think that many of Mohammeds teachings are a direct contradiction of Jesus teachings seems not to rule me out. Colour me more than a bit sceptical!
I'm 75% Muslim, apparently. It's quite a good de-mystifying survey, but it avoids some of the rather basic questions like "Do you think there is a god of any kind?" It's more of a test of whether you share a range of general attitudes with Muslims.
Quite wrong, Nick. According to Islam you are either 100% muslim or you are nothing. In fact a 75% muslim is considered an apostate and again, according to shiria law, you can be beheaded for that crime. How's your neck these days?
I just got a new kitten. I think I'll name him "Prayer," because he just sits there and doesn't do anything or go anywhere. Retweeted by Richard Dawkins ":
The BBC are just embarrassing when it comes to road cycling. Eurosport are the best and even the Phil and Paul show are just sooo much better. Bertie has just never been the same since he came back from his ban.
Shoddy journalism. Quintana was never going to finish 5 minutes clear.
BBC Sport @BBCSport 5m Cycling: @chrisfroome all but seals overall victory in the #TourdeFrance, despite being beaten by Nairo Quintana in the penultimate stage
why do they waste their time tweeting?
anyway, hurrah for Quintana! he's my favourite this tour. feel a little sorry for contador (surprisingly). wonder if he can come back next year and do something. maybe next yr will be full on froome vs quintana... nobody else really seems close
Against the Tories there is less swing, but still a LD to Tory swing of 4% since the election so any LD majority of 8% or less is vulnerable. Of course, were the Tories to eat into the UKIP score and get back to level-pegging with Labour or even approach a majority, scores of LD seats could go. Last week, poll showed virtually all LD rural seats in Scotland falling to the SNP, except Orkney. Indeed, a poll earlier this year showed a LD to SNP swing of 14% meaning any LD seat with a majority of 28% or less over the SNP is at risk, including Caithness and Inverness http://www.newsnetscotland.com/index.php/scottish-news/in-brief/6511-poll-of-polls-shows-snp-ahead-of-labour-for-westminster
That is not a poll, it is a poll of polls.
No it is not a poll of polls but a poll of sub samples of polls !!
Comments
Mr. Palmer, I must disagree.
"15. Would you like a belief system which clearly states how it proves itself?"
That rather implies Islam does so. No religion can. A system of evidence and proof is science, not faith.
BREAKING: Helen Thomas, a pioneer for women in journalism, has died.
If evidence emerged that the Big Bang theory is false then science would discard the theory and seek a new one. That's the difference between faith and science. Faith decides what the answers are and then seeks evidence to fit it, science looks at the evidence and then decides what conclusion is logical.
(I think this was in a 'View from 22' podcast during the Eastleigh by-election.)
Scientific discussion of what we can't be sure of yet leads to gathering of evidence and experimentation to prove, one way or the other, if a theory holds water. What evidence would persuade a Muslim that Mohammed was not a prophet?
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0At91c3wX1Wu5dEtSTDNlVzhGcWl3RF9iMUd3aGJmWnc#gid=0
{Note: Chandler's Ford is in the Winchester constituency despite being within Eastleigh borough}.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cycling/23388877
It will be one of the most fascinating contests in 2015...
A fight between Stephen Hawking and the Pope.
Whilst I share your loathing of Social Darwinism I have a hard time believing that was the root cause of the Archduke's assassination, or played a role in Germany's fear France would try and retake Alsace and Lorraine.
I do, however, agree that some scientists can be fanatical. But science itself is a system of evidence, scepticism and critical thinking. Faith is about credulity, coming to conclusions without needing any evidence.
Brighton Pavilion Labour have selected. Look back in the comments
And the runner up in BOS selection have already left the party....because they are choosing too many white candidates for local elections in Southwark.
They lead by 404 at tea and it would take a miracle for Australia to win from here.
Battarsea have chosen. Will Martindale is the winner.
We have the full list of nominations to get a clue on who were the frontrunners:
Balham & Northcote – Samantha Heath & Will Martindale
Fairfield – Samantha Heath & Sean McKee (NB: Sean McKee withdrew subsequent to the nomination meeting, but prior to long-listing)
Latchmere - Sheila Boswell & Sundar Thavapalasundaram
Queenstown - Samantha Heath & Will Martindale
Shaftesbury – Sheila Boswell, Chris Summers & Sundar Thavapalasundaram
St. Mary’s Park – Samantha Heath & Will Martindale
Affiliated organisations made the following nominations.
Co-Operative Party: Sheila Boswell
Communication Workers Union: No nomination received
Unite (Kingston-upon-Thames): Sheila Boswell
Unite (South Thames): Sheila Boswell
USDAW: No nomination received
The background of social Darwinism was pretty well established in Europe in the early C20, with most of the major european nations believing they were the epitome of mankind, France with its mission civiiatrice, Germany with its belief in it's own destiny and we were hardly immune. Darwinism was pretty much the basis for a lot of nationalist movements on why they were superior and contributed to the reasons for war.
As for your view on science, there are also a lot of religious people who would say what fanatics do has nothing to do with true religion.
Lord Ashcroft @LordAshcroft 3m
Do most Unite members support big donations to Labour? Do most see Miliband as the best PM? My #UnitePoll out on Tuesday
I think the big guns in Brighton focused on Kemptown and Hove. Those are two seats that should be higher on the agenda for local Labour members (as they represent a swing of 2 rather than 1 in relation to the Tories). But the report quoted an impressive number of members locally, wasnt happy to hear that.
Southwark Labour always seems to have more shenanigans than average when it comes to selections for the Council.
William James proved (and I mean 'proved' as in 'did some experiments to prove it' rather than 'had a vision') that so-called visions could be induced by taking drugs.
The Romans also believed they were supreme, and the Greeks looked down upon barbarians. Today, there's American exceptionalism, and I would be amazed if the Chinese didn't have a very high opinion of their country and countrymen, given their rapid economic growth.
On the other hand, Communist Russia, which apparently believed all were equal, killed more people in the various Terrors than were lost in the Holocaust. [Although both lag behind the 38m or so who died due to Mao's agricultural policies].
Your science/fanaticism comparison is flawed, because science definitely revolves around evidence used to support or contradict theories which are based upon reasoned observation. Whether fanatic or delightful, all religious people necessarily believe in things for which there is no evidence. It's called faith precisely for that reason. If there were proof of God or Mohammed being a prophet, or the Flying Spaghetti Monster (may you be touched by His Noodley Appendage) then everyone would 'believe', only it wouldn't be belief anymore, merely acknowledgement of a scientifically proven fact or a scientifically credible theory.
Swings from Lab to Con in 2010:
Erewash: 10.5%
Broxtowe: 2.6%
https://twitter.com/ollielavery/status/358601424554323968/photo/1
Incidentally, she's 4 days younger than the Duchess of Cambridge.
2010
Members
Pavillion 694
Hove 428
Kempton 363
I guess Pavilion is the typical demographics of people who likes to join a political party!
Anyway, I've enjoyed our little debate, but I'm off for the time being.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=T17VzztS60M
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uzPJSuAQnbE&
http://www.catsmith.co.uk/
She worked for Bob Marshall Andrews, Katy Clark and Jeremy Corbyn!
Dangerous...she will surely feature in Tory attacks
Labour are really going for it as regards selecting youthful, female and/or ethnic minority candidates.
Interesting — I thought that selection was scheduled for 26th July but obviously not.
BBC Sport @BBCSport 5m
Cycling: @chrisfroome all but seals overall victory in the #TourdeFrance, despite being beaten by Nairo Quintana in the penultimate stage
She graduated from Lancaster University in 2006. Finished 6th form in 2003.
why do they waste their time tweeting?
anyway, hurrah for Quintana! he's my favourite this tour. feel a little sorry for contador (surprisingly). wonder if he can come back next year and do something. maybe next yr will be full on froome vs quintana... nobody else really seems close
Many of the questions are highly contentious. Apparently my views that women should not be covered and that there should be freedom of religion and freedom of speech are muslim views.
So it seems the Saudis and Iranians are not muslims.
The fact that I think that many of Mohammeds teachings are a direct contradiction of Jesus teachings seems not to rule me out. Colour me more than a bit sceptical!
I just got a new kitten. I think I'll name him "Prayer," because he just sits there and doesn't do anything or go anywhere.
Retweeted by Richard Dawkins ":
https://twitter.com/RichardDawkins
Eurosport are the best and even the Phil and Paul show are just sooo much better.
Bertie has just never been the same since he came back from his ban.