Frank's cousin

Biting... Good summary and agree with most but....

Aye but it would be a pretty bare forum...

Dont worry Scotty, there is still time for it to decend into teh depths of farce, just that all the usual suspect are currently occupied with Ramirez, Lowe and Wigan attendance - if they sot this, I'm done for...

...aye but winning makes a mockery of their lack of 'competitiveness'....

Said no in vain hope that is with most things I will be proven wrong

That is a great quetsion, and I am not sure I have the intellect to do justice to an answer! One of Dawkins better books (IMHO) is 'Unweaving the Rainbow' in which he writes the defence against those who believe science in its attempts to explain everything, destroys the power and mysticism of beauty and art etc - His main thrust is that science in offering explanation provides even greater wonder at the the beauty of it all - for example does knowing how the translucent shimmering of a butterflys wing is creted, rmove any of its innate beauty? no, when you understand the complexities of the biochemistry involved, the evolution of it, the evolutionary pressures and natural selection that led to it you cant help but feel even greater wonder. Same with music, whether you understand how a brain creates or receives and interprets does not devalue the art, merely makes you think how amazing we actually are... and so I come...finally to your question... ... I dont want to say anything that could be interpreted as a spoiler... because how you respond to the emotive power of this music is part of the wonder that is the evolved human being - that you are able to lose yourself in it and have it provide such depth of feeling is a remarkable thing - and the scientific explanation should NOT detract form that - to me as a scientist the explanation actually makes it even more amazing. I dont think I am alone in hypothsizing that the human mind has evolved to be extremely receptive and demanding of a 'spiritual' leadership - and therefore it would be a natural logical step for this need to be triggered by the exceptional high art that you describe - written as it was by those in which these emotions were core during composition - so its natural that what inspired and was felt by the composer triggers the same response in others - something deeply moving that we dont necessari;ly want to explain away, or that we can. Yes I am moved by certian pieces and awestruck by them, (sorry, sruggling to express what I mean her in words - see intellect comment above;)) but not sure I experience the power of religion - more a sense of wonder that a) I am capbale of responding in such an emotional way and b) that another human being was able to stir such emotion through music or other art - in a way science takes no part and does not need to in these circumstances - maybe its just that me witnessing the fact that humans are capable of such things is 'relgion' enough? who knows sorry if I lack the prose to express this. For all our scientifc understanding, teh reamarkable thing is there is more we cant not explain than we know - and our curious brain does not like 'holes' or gaps in knowledge - it is constantly trying to fill these gaps from birth to death with hard wired thoughts, memories and knowledge, so I will happily hypothesise as others have done that this lack of understanding makes us susceptable to the spiritual need - for all the chaos this can cause and the fact it leaves us open to exploitation, it also enables us to experience the awesome emotive or spiritual elements you speak of - and that cant be a bad thing. NB. The above is not fact but a hypothesis based on the the science we do know - so it has a solid foundation, but we are at the end of my knowledge on this subject. As I said - thing is we are amazing - the fact that a human child is capable of genuinely being happier GIVING a present than receiving one is a remarkable aspect ouf our evolution

...seems odd, would not have though bank guarrantees would be an issue.... maybe we are skint and doing a pompey

A little disengenous considering he owned shares already in secure retirement that were then converted to SLH shares - in addition Secure Retirment had around 3mil I believe in cash which was brought into the club - see this is the sort of total ****** misinformation atht some spout and it persists in urban myth reguretated whenever anyone merely points out a positive amongst the mistakes - See thats the difference betwen the so called Lowe luvvies and the Lowe haters - the Luvvies have never denied that Lowe made big mistakes, especially aroudn footballing decisions - yet the haters simply put their heads in the sand whenever anything positive is mentioned and try and deny or spread falsehoods...

Hypo, you are in danger of doing an Alps there mate - I know the tone was a bit more 'robust' than others but sarcasm can be a useful if rather blunt tool. There are thos ewho will make a case for religion/belief systems and faith that we currently have being teh ones that 'survived' afterall going back, the only reason why we dont still have a sun worshiping religion etc is because the Egyptian civilisation and those of the aztecs etc died out and their gods went with them - I guess (and I am no anthropologist) there are perhaps 100's not 1000's of gods and systems that have disappeared as a result of the civilisations that practiced them having gone - so one could argue that thos ewho do still place a lot of faith in one are relics - if there were not so far many I cant blame the 'ramming down your throught' brigade since its part of the doctrine to spread the word - but I guess it also means there is justification for those speaking out against it... if we are offering a platform, it should be available to both sides? And despite being laced with cynicism, that last point is well made - do we feel that its right that things like honour killings and female circumcision, justified and ingrained in law of certain states are justifiable on cultural and religeous grounds - let alone the fanatical behaviour of some. Or how about parents of JW kids who refuse them blood transfusions that could save their lives? Thankfully, the law allows doctors of the under 16s to ignore this stupidity, unless they are classified as Gullick competent and make their own choice... which is even more disturbing if they chose no blood.... but thats another issue Of course the majority of believers are normal rational people and many do a lot of good things within their community - but these are simply good people and I am sure the vast majority of those folk would still do the same thigs even if they had not belief in God - I give time and money to charity, help neighbours out etc, yet not because I have been told its good by god, but because its good full stop.

We are all human, we all make mistakes - but is the historic bitternesss and vitriol really necessary over what was football club chairman? Loss of perspective, often fuelled by ignorance and speculation seems disproportionate to me. I will accept all the issues and mistakes made, but not the accustations of 'criminality' - even the stuff about greed is somewhat misplaced - lowe could have gotten a far better return on the shares he owned sticking it in something safer than a football club - jeez he''s not the first to get anamoured by football, the glamour, the passion etc - How many of us here had we won the 150mil euro millions and bought the club would find it fricken difficult not to make snap decisons when the results go badly - or want more involvement in transfer decisions? and Judging by the posting history of those often most vitriolic, I suspect the mistakes you would have made would be potentially alot worse. Its no easy business and as with all things sport, even the best intentions and on paper decsions have a habit of disintigrating into chaos. Lowe did Good, Lowe did bad end of really - its past, but we can learn form it - if nothing else that its an impossible task trying to keep 30000+ fans happy all of the time

Was talking speifically about the Islamic, Christian and Jewish version - who all do worship the same God...yet he seems to now have several 'personalities' as a result of these divergent faiths - which of course is one of my biggest questions: All those of faith believe their way is the right way - that its deeply personal and defines who they are - which is a fair enough statement - however, when you consider that the vast majority of those with faith dont find it later in lfe (although admitedly some do) but have it 'installed' as they grow up, the type of faith they have is not dictated to by anything otherthan where their birth occured and to what their parents believe - born in India, mostly Hindu or Seikh, Israel, Jewish, Chriatian or Muslim, Iran, Muslim etc - Now given that most faith suggest they are right etc...although more recently some have become more 'blurred' on this issue, the reality is they cant all be right - If the Christian view is the right one, then thay implies that the Jews got it wrong and missed their messiah - if tehy are right then it undermines the very pillar of christianity and of course both of these would consider Hindus as worshipping a 'false god' ? Its the paradox that if you believe in one, you cant believe in the others and whilst they all say they respect each other (mostly), can you really respect other religions if your faith demands they dont exist? I think its human nature to want to believe in something. With our brains being what they are we simply dont like to accept that there is no 'Purpose' to it all. Yet for me the 'purpose' is how we feel about the great things we can do, in our 3 score and 10, watch children grow up, the acts of kindness, the amazing art, music etc we can create - all of which leaves a legacy and is remembered after we are long gone - to me that does not seem like a purposeless existance and I do not need any devine being to make complete etc.

Can you please point me in the direction of where NC says challenging for the title this season? I thought it was aspirational as and when we get a balance of home grown talent and new signings myself

Have fecked another working day - will be late one now.... arse

Presidente Cortese shaping deals come Bologna - Ramirez house sales driving talkings but over outcomes tomorrows - Fans saints making fightings eating working times with Turkish boys prospect of creaming following beatings Cortese presidente if Ramierz follows through. Cortese niente sigings Ramirez other players baffoon talking angry turkish boys come Wednesday - 'doomed I tell you'

This has for some time been the most perplexing - how they have the bare-arsed cheek to demand they be competitive (which translates as MORE competitive than the clubs destined for relegation so we can survive or even get promoted - we are special surely you can see that?) and then the even greater cheek to expect local businesses who tehy have already shafter twice to stump up more cahs to pay these players wages - which is interesting as in some ways its no different form what led to 2 admins in the first place - getting local businesses and charities and the tax man to pay player wages they could not otherwise afford to be more competitive... yet still their fans and that **** Allen fail to grasp this svery simple concept - truely breathtaking in their ignorance

Sorry Hypo... we need to clear this up to avoid confusion/misinterpretation etc - which usually leads to us all falling out Think you need to be mopre specific about whether practicing 'christian teaching' includes a strong faith or not - I am sure there are plenty of folk who say they are Christians in attitude and value, but no longer when pushed believe in God Many still call themselves christian yet have not faith... which is odd but a legacy of our past Others have Faith/belief in a devine being, yet worship at no church - is that waht you are saying? If so fair enough as most of the institutional communal worship stuff is enough to try the patience of a saint (see what I did there) Seriously, first up need to differentiate between follows of a faith and followers of a religion - afterall Jews, Christians (all 20,000 branches included), and Muslims all believe in the same god so in theory have faith in the same god, but obviously belong to very different 'organizations' So are you a christian believer in God, or merely a non-believer who practices christian values - in whcich case you could in tehory call yourself a Christian (following teh principles of JC's teachings, but not believe in god? Guess that's what most would call Humanist! Now I is confused

Well he did only have 6% of the shares and as we saw when Wilde and Crouch arrived, if someone had wanted it they could have bought it. The problem with a PLC was that how do you attract 'investment' - unless all shareholders put in cash equivilent to their shareholding, it would mean a dilution of someones holding - and for what purpose if not totally smitten to blow money? Any outsider would want equity for a cash injection and that would mean a huge chunk going to shareholders rather than the club, unless shareholders were prepared to dilute their equity for nothing - I remember Lowe's 20mil and they can be chairman quote - which was never truely understood or interpreted correctly - I believe what he meant was if someone cam in with 20 mil as a cash gift, they could be chairman and he would step aside - but there was no mention of any of the shareholders relinquishing their stake - in addition if someone came in and bought 20 mil of shares (about 60% of the clubs value at the time) they would be in a position to take charge anyway - but this would not have meant any cash for the squad, unless they pumped in some more... many misinterpreted this as Lowe saying ' give me 20 mil and you can take my share and be chairman' - easy to see why they might have thought this as Lowe did not explain it at all well (not for the first time), but as a result some felt he wanted 20 mil to leave and called him a greedy fecker because of it - another myth Lowe brough on himself...

Uhm... not so sure about this, can you really say you are a 'x' if you dont practice the church or Prayer hing - or is it merely a remnant of how we have been brought up, a reluctance to let go completely of the doctrine? Kind of hedging your bets?

so 60k needed + the HMRC bit + would they ned to pay corp tax on this cash injection... or do they not account for HMRC? Surely this fine upstanding club pay the tax man at least? Oh... I was forgetting, as Appy seems to about the brave kids who could easily bolster hhis 17 up to 20 ;-)

I think the questions are always going to stimulate a dbate, and find it refreshing that the opinionson this thread are passionate and given with good grace and respect - I respect yours and those of the others - if nothing else it restores my 'faith' in that fact that there are some fans on this board prepared to enage on these sort of things and not just worry about Ramirez (although I keep having to jump on that thread in case we get an update! )

Couple of points - Science does shift as you say, but the point was made to illustrate that science is open to chnage based on new ideas and evidence - something that cant be said about religion. What is taught in schools is determined by law in this country - at home by parents - and whilst it is their right, they will naturally follow their own 'ideolgy' - that was the issue, young children dont get a choice, but its a lottery of life, be they Jewis, Islamic, Christian or atheist parents - My daughter is taught religion in school and they still have a 'Christian' approach - so she gets that from school, I talk about the alternative view - as she gets older she will have a change to form her own opinion, but for the time being she gets a balanced view. A single view especially when heavily reinforced as in some overtly religious families, is IMHO not fair on thhe child. The values thing IS important because the implication is that without 'christian' teaching, the values would not be taught. Again my point is that you do NOT need one to get the other. Hypo. Please not I doid not say ALL those with faith have been 'indoctrinated' - but that many with faith have it because it was taught as the only 'true' way as kids. I am sorry but I dont buy this constant 'Belittling, or putting dow' someones faith - that seems the standard rhetoric which is designed to appeal to a sense of injustice or emotive way of saying its wrong to question those with faith somehow. I odnt beive it is - any more so than those with faith want to demonstrate tehir concern for my godlessness or convert me to the way of X Y or Z Yes I am questioning those with faith - I want to understand what it is that drives their need for it - whether its fromm childhood or 'new found' - We live in a society where such philosophical debate should be encouraged, not considered wrong - and any faith that struggles when challenged is no real faith anyway. Dawkins has engaged in rigorous debate with religious thinkers in a respectful way to understand these issues etc. cant see anything wrong with that?

Agreed - but do think the over -interference in the playing side was over played

Would also add to that point about Christian values - so called because Jesus preached them (as a Jew) - what many forget is that thsoe values were already evident in many in his society - not all for sure, but there would have been many that showed kindness, compassion, integrity, honesty etc - these values were not invented by religion but by a necesssity to order society - Jesus a philospher from Galilee merely preached them... yet now the two have become synonomous - and to me that is wrong. I wont deny that some religeons do a good job of teaching these values, but you dont need christianity to teach them.

You stated you admired those with faith - fair enough, but I was merely suggesting that many of those that have do so because it was 'indoctrinated' as children - which I find difficult to admire

I know many see/saw me as some sort of Lowe apologist... I am not and am happy to admit his numourous failings, but I was also irritaed by the constant mythology - anyone could access the full accounts if they wanted to detailed accounts as was necessary for any PLC - and the idiocy of rumours about pocketing cash and all money going to shareholders was total bollo x - yesthere were dividends a necssaary evil of a PLC otherwise folk sell their shares and the value of the company falls to a point where raising capital becomes impossible - maintaining the shareprice through dividends and buy backs was a necessary part of ensuring we got finance on manageable and favourable terms fo things like the stadium and the dividends were never above 800k and many seasons we did not provide any. Lets not forget the none of teh shareholders incluidng the historic ones such as the Corbetts ever turned their divs down to 'reinvest' in the first team either - and I dont blame them. It was this sort of BS I had issue with, not with critique of his arrogance or ego (which probably did stand in the way of some investment oportunity for sure) .... and we still see it today - mis informed accusation of monies form sales funding shareholder dividends.... Zzzzzzz