Zombie

last time I had a tooth injection for a filling the evil bastard dentist waved the foot long needle in front of me - dripping ominously - and cheerily remarked "I've only had one of these snap on me once"

he was interviewed on TV. I was not impressed - struck me as a selfish uncaring git. Your advice is, of course, essential for all LGBT, rustle. But I was thinking not just the law but how it's applied and also local attitudes. Russia for example. As far as I'm aware gay sex is not illegal there - but... Russian attitudes to LGBT are shocking, including violence. And the law in India has recently gone back decades, making gay sex illegal, which does not sit well with a country that is busy promoting itself as a safe and desirable travel destination. Would there be any support if we had a pinned thread to share not just the legal position in other countries but also personal experiences?

nicely written - very poignant But wouldn't it be sad if Nick felt the same about you - and neither you nor he ever said anything, each thinking "I know it's all in my head"?

Like you say, you won't stop all or likely most of those kids ending up on the streets. But there'll be some that will be inspired by you to see how education can change their life and to grab it. That's a wonderful thing, so good for you

good point - maybe we should have an advisory thread about safe and unsafe LGBT travel destinations?

You thought everyone who was on the Hindenburg was dead, right? Wrong One of the passengers is still alive and the last surviving crewmember, Werner Franz, died only last month - here's his story from the Daily Telegraph obit: As a 14-year-old cabin boy, Werner Franz was the youngest member of the Hindenburg’s 60-strong crew when the hydrogen-filled Zeppelin caught fire and crashed at Lakehurst, New Jersey, on May 6 1937. Of the 97 people on board, 36 passengers and crew and one person on the ground were killed when the airship crashed in an enormous fireball. Named after the German president who appointed Hitler chancellor in 1933, the Hindenburg airship was a spectacular — and expensive — form of transport that could cross the Atlantic westbound in less than three days, at a time when even the swiftest ocean liners could take up to a week or more. Having made its maiden voyage more than a year earlier, the Hindenburg had made 62 safe flights before its destruction. Werner had made four round-trip transatlantic crossings, to both North and South America, and had become familiar with the airship’s internal network of narrow wooden passageways that connected bow to stern, a distance of more than 800ft — almost the length of the Titanic. He had been clearing the dinner dishes in the officer’s mess when, at 7.25pm, he heard a thud and felt the airship shake. The Hindenburg lurched, and its nose began tilting upwards. “Directly overhead there were flames,” Werner Franz remembered. One memorable photograph of the disaster shows the airship buckling as a fireball rises from its back. Near the nose of the ship, what looks like a spray of water escaping was actually a torrent from the Hindenburg’s ruptured water tanks. Werner Franz believed that getting drenched when they burst protected him from the flames and heat and may have saved his life. “At first I was shocked, but the water brought me back,” he recalled at a commemoration ceremony in 2004. Gripping both sides of a picture window as the airship sank towards the ground, he kicked open a service hatch used to load provisions, swung his feet out and jumped. He can be seen in newsreel footage of the disaster, leaping the few feet to the ground, and running for his life. “I was doing it instinctively. I didn’t think,” he said. His timing could hardly have been better. The airship was just low enough to allow Franz to land on a canvas ballast bag, which cushioned his fall, but high enough for him to dash beneath the port side of the airship before it collapsed on the ground in a burning mass. Having jumped clear of the Hindenburg, Franz ran for his life away from the blazing wreckage, as the flames were driven in his direction by the wind. As a result he escaped with singed eyebrows and soaking wet clothes; otherwise he had barely a scratch. Werner Franz was born in Frankfurt on May 22 1922. As a 14 year-old he landed his job on the Hindenburg quite by chance. His brother worked in a hotel where the passengers gathered before boarding the airship, and when the Zeppelin Company asked the hotel for a boy to serve the officers, Werner was chosen. The experience was an eye-opener for a boy from a humble background. His job was to make beds, set tables, wash dishes and clean uniforms, but for a brief few months he saw the world in a way usually enjoyed only by the airship’s affluent passengers. As well as huge picture windows affording breathtaking views, the Hindenburg offered passengers gourmet German and French cuisine to the musical accompaniment of an aluminium baby grand piano. Although Werner worked a 14-hour day serving the officers’ meals and attending to their cabins, he was allowed to take breaks during which he could enjoy the spectacular panorama below. He would often visit the mechanics who manned the engines or the riggers who worked at the top of the airship. On the day of the disaster, he climbed up to his favourite small window for a bird’s-eye view of New York City, gazing over Manhattan’s “ocean of buildings far and wide” as the Hindenburg circled overhead, waiting for local thunderstorms to abate at Lakehurst. But as the fireball exploded, Franz was busy on the mess deck and not at his preferred observation point further forward, where other crewmen waiting to prepare the ship for landing were incinerated by flames bursting through the nose. The day after the disaster, as a US Navy search team picked through the smoking wreckage, Werner Franz asked them to look for his pocket-watch, a present from his grandfather. It was found amid the debris, a mangled scrap of blackened metal but still ticking. Although sabotage was initially suspected, no convincing evidence of a plot to destroy the airship was ever found. A build-up of static electricity that ignited a hydrogen leak is now believed to be a possible explanation for the disaster. During the Second World War, Franz served as a radio operator and instructor in the Luftwaffe. After the war he worked as a precision engineer for the German postal service and was also a skating coach. Werner Franz, who considered his few months’ service aboard the Hindenburg as the happiest time of his life, is survived by his wife, Annerose, and several children. At least one other survivor of the disaster, Werner Doehner, then eight years old and who was thrown out of the stricken airship by his mother, is thought to be still living. Werner Franz, born May 22 1922, died August 13 2014 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/obituaries/11122050/Werner-Franz-obituary.html

"It's not easy to pass Ebola person to person." Yeah, that's pretty much what my brother was told by the UK Foreign Office back in August before he went to Liberia but the reality seems different as these recent posts on a health site point out: I would like to point to the CDC transmission risk assessment for ebola (http://www.cdc.gov/vhf/ebola/hcp/case-definition.html). Examples: High risk: Direct skin contact with .. blood or body fluids [and that includes vomit and saliva, possibly sweat also] Low risk: having direct brief contact (e.g., shaking hands) with an EVD patient. To me that sounds like transmission in normal life is very real. The rate of infection in health care workers is unprecedented (more than 240 cases in health care workers compared to about 1500 in non health care workers, source: WHO). I am sure these health care workers used everything available to them to protect themselves. Personally I do not know of any other dangerous disease that has such a high rate of transmission from patient to caregiver (and I have great respect for the people doing this difficult job). The case count of the current outbreak shows exponential growth with a doubling period of 34.8 days (Science, DOI: 10.1126/science.1259657) Taken together these are all hallmarks of a highly contagious disease that is spreading aggressively. Here are some scenarios to consider: Saliva-- Ebola is transmitted through saliva. A cough or sneeze produces an aerosol of droplets. Wouldn't that be considered a body fluids transfer? Supposedly aerosols from a cough or sneeze can be transmitted up to 6 feet. A good open mouth sneeze will expel a lot of saliva. If a person sneezes into his/her hand, then handles a door knob, etc. Wouldn't that transmit the virus? Sweat—Ebola is transmitted through sweat. A sweaty hand that holds onto a railing or door knob could easily be picked up by the next person in line. That could be followed by the hand-to-face routine that occurs frequently in people. Rubbing the eyes, etc. Snot—Wouldn't Ebola be in snot also? Someone who wipes his nose with his/her hand and then touches a door knob, etc. I don’t think these are unrealistic scenarios.

Sooo, you gonna work this up into a GA story...?

Better trust all, and be deceived And weep that trust and that deceiving, Than doubt one heart that, if believed, Had blessed one's life with true believing. Frances Anne Kemble

nice tail

happy birthday big guy

As I understand it mutation is the starting point for evolutionary change but whether that change will be advantageous or not is neatly summed up in the title of Darwin's book "...the origin of species BY NATURAL SELECTION". Nature, as ever, "decides" This is an interesting link: http://www.nature.com/scitable/knowledge/library/mutations-are-the-raw-materials-of-evolution-17395346

what they said! poor croc always getting into scrapes

poor wolfie Hope you fully recover soon btw I did warn you about the rubbish brakes and steering - clean forgot about seat belts not even being on the options list...

Happy birthday!

I'm late too Daddy Hope you had a great day!

letter in today's Daily Telegraph to Agony Uncle Graham Norton Dear Graham I have this cat called Flo, but nobody likes her. When you try to stroke her she flinches and runs away, and when you do actually get to stroke her she is all needy. We also have a creepy cat called James - he scares all our other cats, and he burps a lot. So I was wondering if you could tell us how to get rid of them, because Mum says that if we get rid of them we can get a kitten. Love from Bronwen (aged 8) Cornwall your reply?

The final result for all 32 councils is No - 2,001,926 55.3% Yes - 1,617,989 44.7% Some interesting factoids - the turnout was 85% - lowering the voting age to 16 probably boosted the Yes vote (change is exciting and more appealing when you're young ) - the 2 Sept YouGov poll predicting a Yes win was a shock - it's likely to have spurred No supporters, who may not have bothered voting because previous polls consistently showed a No win, to get off their butts and hence the record % voting - it's also likely these included a good chunk of women who generally seem to find politics a turnoff BUT who (and this is a deeply sexist remark ) are also more risk averse and therefore were probably unwilling to accept the significant Yes risks that were highlighted during the campaign But it's not over. The UK will never be the same again. Change is a comin' ...

well, she'll still be Head of State for Scotland whatever the vote, just as she is of Australia, Canada and New Zealand - so I guess she'll still be welcome, and they'll probably waive the visa requirement

well I'm very sorry if I've caused your keyboard to shortcircuit from your liquid ejecta but yes, irrespective of his record in a Labour Government, Gordon Brown has been a very "effective and credible presenter" of the Better Together Campaign... for the Scots . Because the Scots are the only audience that matter. How he is perceived South of the border is immaterial. As for HMQ, it was a very clever remark because, as you rightly point out, it could be interpreted either way. Except... we do know her personal view. And that is not from her "private views" which, as you say, newspapers have been reporting all week, it is from her public statements. In 1977 during her Silver Jubilee she made a public speech making a direct reference to those who had “aspirations” of devolved national assemblies, and warned them of the consequences of breaking up the United Kingdom: “I number Kings and Queens of England and of Scotland and of Princes of Wales among my ancestors,” she declared, “and so I can readily understand these aspirations. But I cannot forget that I was crowned Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and of Northern Ireland. Perhaps this Jubilee is a time to remind ourselves of the benefits which union has conferred, at home and in our international dealings, on the inhabitants of all parts of the United Kingdom.” That's pretty damn clear. And in fact she did not act, as you say, "completely constitutionally in the definition given by Walter Bagshot that she has the right to "Advise, encourage and warn", because Mr Bagehot - not to be confused with the attractive Tory stronghold in Surrey - actually stated that the monarch has "the right to be consulted, the right to encourage, the right to warn" but - crucially - this only applies to her ministers via regular audiences with the Prime Minister. It does not extend to making statements to the general public that she knows will be widely reported. So, yes, this is one of the rare occasions when she's engaged in politicking. But very subtly. What would you expect from a wily old bird who's known every Prime Minister back to Winston Churchill and who probably understands British politics better than both Houses of Parliament combined

I'd not heard that but it's interesting - Scotland, England and Wales are pretty much in step as regards LGBT rights so I don't know why there should be a bias in respect of Yes or No. Northern Ireland is another matter because of the hard line religious positions of Catholic and Protestant which dominate that country. I can't see the Scotland vote having any impact on Northern Ireland politics because the divide is already deeply embedded and the "peace process" was put in place to keep the two sides together with devolved power-sharing through the Northern Ireland Assembly from 2007. An independence referendum in Northern Ireland is impossible because the whole country would then go straight back to the tribal / terrorist warfare which crippled the country for decades until the peace process.

Sadly much of Salmond's and the SNP's presentation has been directed at stoking up nationalist fervour, combined with provoking anti-English sentiment - which has never been far below the surface for many Scots - by demonising Cameron and implying that he and the "remote Westminster ruling elite" are the permanent embodiment of a Tory-aligned, bullying England scheming and plotting to steal Scotland's resources and impoverish its people. The clue's in the name: Scottish Nationalist Party