Swe euro vote?

[old.Tohtori]

Originally posted by old.job
First saw a timemachine?
Methinks Tohts parents played with his mind at a young age

"what are you putting the washing in mummy?"

"It's a time machine dear, we send the clothes back to before they got dirty"

How did you get the plans of my "Wash Em While You Eat" restaurant?

Actually you should know by now that Teh Icefloat is equipped with a load of useless crap, like the ion drive, anticancer purifier and the timemachine.

 

[ImLestat]

Originally posted by old.job
If you built a time machine and went back 10 mins, you would have seen yourself come back 10 mins before you got in it.
And then 10 mins later you would get in(you'd have to or what just happened couldn't of) and another 'you' would appear.
This would happen infinitly and instantly, so straight way there would be an infinite number of you.

This would actually only work if the 2nd version of you (that went back in time) stepped into the machine instead of the original you (I'm btw using "you" as a substitute for the reader, not just the person I was quoting ). But then you would have an infinite loop. However, if you go back in time and step into the machine instead of the original you then you wouldn't ever have stepped into the machine the first time, and then you of course have a paradox. If the first version of you was still allowed to step into the machine there wouldn't be any time loop, because the 2nd version that went back in time is there to continue living your life.

There's been a lot of assumptions regarding timetravel if it at all was possible. One thing would be that the time-space continuum or what to call it would have some self-preserving rules which you in no way can circumvent. Say that you go back in time to kill your own father before you were born. That would indeed cause a paradox in which you would never be born and hence never be able to kill your own father. Now to prevent this paradox from happening there could be two laws to prevent it.
1. You just aren't allowed to do it. For example you might have an accident so that you die to prevent the paradox from happening.
2. The universe have some way of "repairing" the damage done. For example, if you kill your father, your mother might instead fall in love with another man, very similar to the father you were supposed to have. Or say that you killed him as a baby, but that someone left another baby at his parents doorstep right after and named him after your father.

This is just without even considering that timetravel could actually be working as a sort of dimensiontravel instead, where you travel between alternate realities instead of actually in time, although it may be perceived as such. Watch Back to the future for instance. If there is such a thing then it would actually be possible to travel 10 minutes back in time, without actually seeing yourself appearing 10 minutes before you left.

Well, just a few thoughts. Uhm what did this have to do with euro again?

 

[old.Ramas]

:spin:

 

[shanks]

Originally posted by dr_doctor
Nerf the result.

It sucks and shows that swedes should play Mincers since they lack the guts to enter the Union in full.

I voted YES with a lot of !!!!! afterwords.

You mean the guts to stay out. Cus frankly takes more guts to say no to the damn thing then go with the horde and join.

I was not certain before the campaign what I was going to vote, but thanks to Göran going over the swedish people several times, and his party throwing dirt on all no voters calling them ignorant if not plain stupid and in the last week even questioning if we should have a vote when he saw that the No side was winning. I blame Göran Persson and Derric for the result.

And the vote is very regional too, the two cities with most trade ofcourse had a yes mayority, problem is that sweden is a large country and most regions would probably not gain from it hence the result.

And I admit I grined good when Gerhard Schröder commented on it, yeah im sure you would like us to join, someone has to save your shitty economy. :x

 

[shanks]

The, "we need the euro for economical stability in case of war" argument rocks since sweden hasnt been involved in a war in two hundred years.

 

[cadiva]

Originally posted by clearbrook
Hehe guess you not English then, AFAIK you still have not managed to kick out the Normans, who pwned the English in 1066!

Well actually the Normans who invaded pwned the Anglo/Saxons who had invaded about 500 years previously

The English as such are what resulted from the natural integration of Normans with Anglo/Saxons/Jutes.
The Anglo/Saxons/Jutes having, of course, come from various parts of the old central European regions of Gaul and the old Germanic states, and by the Vikings from Scandinavia who raided about 200 years later than the Anglo-Saxons and 200 years before the Norman Conquest - the vast majority of the eastern side of Northern England was invaded and settled by Vikings.

Probably, although also debatable, the only native 'English' people are the few remaining descendents of the Celtic tribes in the northern parts of Britiain (Yorkshire, Northumberland, Cumbria, parts of Wales, the highland areas of Scotland).
These Celts are the result of the merging of cultures between the Roman invaders and the original tribal settlers of Britain.

It's a fascinating period of history and one for which there is plenty of debate and argument about just who did what, where and when, but in regards to the subject of this post, personally I think this diverse history of invasion and settlement is exactly what makes a lot of the residents of the United Kingdom want to keep our distance from Europe.

As an island nation we have an island mentality and being part of a 'federal' Europe doesn't excite me in the slightest

 

[old.Tohtori]

Originally posted by cadiva
The English as such are what resulted from the natural integration of Normans with Anglo/Saxons/Jutes.
The Anglo/Saxons/Jutes having, of course, come from various parts of the old central European regions of Gaul and the old Germanic states, and by the Vikings from Scandinavia who raided about 200 years later than the Anglo-Saxons and 200 years before the Norman Conquest - the vast majority of the eastern side of Northern England was invaded and settled by Vikings.

So what you're saying that the english were born because everyone got around humping anyone at any given time and the modern britain is a mix and match of finest nuts(no pun intented)

 

[Keogh]

The Normans were not the biggest infulence on England. That was the Scandanavians. If you split England in 2 from say London across to centeral England/Wales border the DNA of most people who originate North of that line contains one hell of a lot of Viking DNA and south of that line the DNA contains a minimal amount if any.

Of course with people moving around the country I mean true Northerners and true Southerners.

Me, even though I'm a Southerner, my mum and dad were both from the North East, Middlesbrough and Newcastle so I'm probably decended from the Vikings. Maybe that's why the cold doesn't bother me too much or maybe thats because my dad was too fucking tight with the central heating when I was a kid so it was always cold in our house in the winter. Ah well we can't always be perfect

 

[-RG-Jaond]

Voted Yes but didnt help

 

[old.Normengast]

Originally posted by old.Tohtori
I don't

I am in no way related to that country. Checked from the family Dos-tree.

And proud of it!

Sorry to bust your bubble but in early european history the mainland got massively invaded by goths (which were the later swedes, coming from Gotland) so in one way or another, most of the european ppl have swedish roots. Skål!

 

[old.Normengast]

Originally posted by Keogh
The Normans were not the biggest infulence on England. That was the Scandanavians. If you split England in 2 from say London across to centeral England/Wales border the DNA of most people who originate North of that line contains one hell of a lot of Viking DNA and south of that line the DNA contains a minimal amount if any.

The original vikings were danish. And scandinavians=normans.
It all boils down to the first syllable, so whether they were swedes or norse, they came from the north. And afaik the biggest part of UK being terrorized by vikings was the eastern part by the Danes.

 

[old.Tohtori]

Originally posted by ning
you know, every european have plenty of relatives in US.

That was what i was referring to Normengast

So no bubblebusting there

 

[Gewny]

Originally posted by old.Normengast
The original vikings were danish. And scandinavians=normans.
It all boils down to the first syllable, so whether they were swedes or norse, they came from the north. And afaik the biggest part of UK being terrorized by vikings was the eastern part by the Danes.

The Danish vikings was the first to get united, they were the ones that terrorised thr Brits and the French mostly. (even if thy seem to have been far south enugh to visit Rome

The Norwegian vikings found Island and Greenland, they also found and settled on New Foundland (Vinland, some say some say not). But they were driven out from there by the native Indians.

The Swedish vikings traveled to the East, some say that a ppl (3 brothers I think) that settled along the rivers there was called Rus in the last name, and from that the name Russia came. They traveld so far as to Constatinopel and tried to attack it, ofc the failed (Constantinopel was the largest city of that time) but later the became Hirdmen (protected the Emperors life).

But the vikings was relly not interested it keeping there old religon and habits, not most of em atleast. They got wifes from the region the settled in and mostly in only one or 2 generation most of the language and the relegion dissapeared. At least most scientist thinks this nowdays.

And now to the question, what the heck has this to do with the Swedsih euro election ?

 

[ning]

Originally posted by Gewny
The Danish vikings was the first to get united, they were the ones that terrorised thr Brits and the French mostly. (even if thy seem to have been far south enugh to visit Rome

What do you call French, Brits, Danish? French, Brits and Danish didn't exist at that moment ! You see the past europe with the borders of today ! That's completly wrong. There were Vickings and not *Swidish,Danish or Norv.* Vickings.

 

[Gewny]

actually the danish pretty early had somwhat connection to the name Dane

example the tax that the English king had to pay was called "Danelagen" or something close.

So Ning most of the european countrys has roots atleast to the Roman age (that fyi was before the viking age).

Example the romans named parts Germania Somthing (like Germania Infiria and Germania Superia)

The borders what not as today (like the Svearna, from where Sweden got its name was only a small part of todays sweden)

Ill bet evry ppl from french to germans can trace the names of there country at least back to the viking age.

 

[Gewny]

look at this map :

http://www.dalton.org/groups/Rome/RMap.html

its BEFORE the viking age...


Ohh and btw I found Hibernia (for real )

http://www.ucalgary.ca/~vandersp/Courses/maps/detaila.html

 

[ning]

Originally posted by Gewny
look at this map :

http://www.dalton.org/groups/Rome/RMap.html

its BEFORE the viking age...

If you see France, Germany or Spain on this map, I'll pay you a beer

 

[Addlcove]

Originally posted by Gewny
some say that a ppl (3 brothers I think) that settled along the rivers there was called Rus in the last name, and from that the name Russia came.

actually Rus is the word for Stranger in the Old-Nordic language (the language which ALL nordic people at the time where speaking) hence the name Russia (Strange Land)

oh and the earliest PROVEN king of the Danes where "Gorm den Gamle" (gorm the old) who died in the winter of 958-959.

his sons did during his reign conquer parts of england, mainly the Northumbria area as far east as Scarborough and york.

Ifølge Ulsterannalerne plyndrede en søn af Ailche i årene 921-927 på syd, vest og nordkysten af Irland. I en note står at Ailche også var kendt under navnet Tamar eller Gomo Gamle.

Gorm har sikkert , under sit ophold i Sydengland fra 892 til 896, besøgt sin faders fætre der var konger i Dublin. Her blev han kaldt Gorm Enski (Engelskmand), hvad Irerne skrev som Ailche.

loosely translated

during 921-927 the ulster annals says a son of Ailche robbed south west and norhtern coast of ireland.
Ailche was also known as Gomo Gamle.

the theory is that "Gorm den Gamle" during his visit in southern england in 892-896 to his fathers cousins (the kings of dublin), during the visit he was called Gorm Enski (Englishman) which the Irish wrote as Ailche.



all of this just to prove one thing, danes wtfpwns the british

 

[ning]

Originally posted by cadiva
Well actually the Normans who invaded pwned the Anglo/Saxons who had invaded about 500 years previously

Viking Normans
http://viking.no/e/maps/ekart-frankrike.htm

Scandinavian French Normandy (For uneducated people, Normandy is where allied went during WWII)
http://viking.no/e/france/place_name_map.html

 

[Addlcove]

oh I forgot to add, basicly with vikings either raiding or trading their way down south it is hard to see who has viking blood and not in england/northern france

 

[Addlcove]

Originally posted by cadiva
The English as such are what resulted from the natural integration of Normans with Anglo/Saxons/Jutes.
The Anglo/Saxons/Jutes having, of course, come from various parts of the old central European regions of Gaul and the old Germanic states, and by the Vikings from Scandinavia who raided about 200 years later than the Anglo-Saxons and 200 years before the Norman Conquest - the vast majority of the eastern side of Northern England was invaded and settled by Vikings.

Jutes ... and part of Denmark has been named Jutland for centuries..

 

[Gewny]

Originally posted by ning
If you see France, Germany or Spain on this map, I'll pay you a beer

If u press on where spain should be u see : Hispania
thats fairly close to spain in many languages

If u press on france u will se Gallia, thats not closely related (as far as I know) to the name France. However the borders are not far off.

If u press on where Britain should be u see : Britannia
Not far off in my eyes. (ofc during viking age many of these countrys was spilt apart to smaller ones due to diffrent wars, but the ppl remain and the genaral areas...

ofc I aint saying that todays swedes are vikings, but what the "swedish" vikings did are part of there history, just like what the Danish vikings did is part of the Danish ppl history, just like what Brittish did during there Emperial time is part of the British history...

We are europeans, with more than 1000 years of history around, be proud of it...

 

[ning]

Originally posted by Gewny

We are europeans, with more than 1000 years of history around, be proud of it...

That's what I said in the page 2 of this thread

I don't know if I'm the child of a vicking, a brits, a german, a roman, or a french. The only thing I'm sure is that I'm European ... and my money is EURO (to come back to the topic )