GappySmeg

Not the same, and you know it. the EU Commission hold the power and makes the rules. You get no votes, no say. They're unaccountable, and unelectable. That's not really accurate though is it. The Commission is APPOINTED by the Council, in the exact same way our Lords are appointed by our Commons. They have a term (just like our Lords) after which they have to be re-appointed or ditched by whatever elected Council (or Commons) are in place at that time. It's a time-honoured and well-established shape for a democratic 2-house system, used the world over. How does that make what I said not accurate? You've just agreed that the decision making system is APPOINTED, not voted. That the system of decision making...the place where the real power is, is APPOINTED, not democratically elected. Because, it's not true to say you "no say", as you put it... it's a gross over-simplification. No democracy is perfect, its always a compromise... people have been trying to find the best compromise since the ancient Greeks. The EU democratic system is every bit as democratic (or un-democratic, depending on your viewpoint) as the UK system. How? You tell me how a Politburo style committe of decision makers, that you do not elect, you cannot dismiss, have no influence over, that meet in secret is the same as a Parliamentary democracy with elected representatives of the people, that all meet in one place, discuss the bills publically and openly and vote on whether an bill is a good one or a bad one, before they're allowed to make it law You tell me how the hell those two systems are the same Think you're confused... I'm likening our Lords to the EU Commission, and our Commons to the EU Council (in terms of electability at least, if thats a word). We do not elect our Lords, they are appointed, by those that we've elected, in the same way as EU Commissioners are appointed by the Councillors we've elected. Both sets of appointed houses (UK Lords and EU Commissioners) have a lifespan, after which they are re-appointed by the elected houses... it's really not that difficult to understand. As for "meeting in secret", not sure where that one comes from at all! Are you just referring to not being able to see them on Parliamentary Channel?!?!?!

Not the same, and you know it. the EU Commission hold the power and makes the rules. You get no votes, no say. They're unaccountable, and unelectable. That's not really accurate though is it. The Commission is APPOINTED by the Council, in the exact same way our Lords are appointed by our Commons. They have a term (just like our Lords) after which they have to be re-appointed or ditched by whatever elected Council (or Commons) are in place at that time. It's a time-honoured and well-established shape for a democratic 2-house system, used the world over. How does that make what I said not accurate? You've just agreed that the decision making system is APPOINTED, not voted. That the system of decision making...the place where the real power is, is APPOINTED, not democratically elected. Because, it's not true to say you "no say", as you put it... it's a gross over-simplification. No democracy is perfect, its always a compromise... people have been trying to find the best compromise since the ancient Greeks. The EU democratic system is every bit as democratic (or un-democratic, depending on your viewpoint) as the UK system.

Not the same, and you know it. the EU Commission hold the power and makes the rules. You get no votes, no say. They're unaccountable, and unelectable. That's not really accurate though is it. The Commission is APPOINTED by the Council, in the exact same way our Lords are appointed by our Commons. They have a term (just like our Lords) after which they have to be re-appointed or ditched by whatever elected Council (or Commons) are in place at that time. It's a time-honoured and well-established shape for a democratic 2-house system, used the world over.

Please don't vote based on the personnel involved... politicians in this country can be voted out every 4-or-so years, and they often don't even last that long... whereas a vote to leave is to all intents and purposes, permanent. (Remain less so, as we could force another referendum in the future... coz this one has been soooooo much fun )

Thats fantastic!

Yep, I've found this quite interesting too. Everyone I work with (generally 40 y/o, university educated, don't read newspapers) are voting Remain. Everyone I play skittles with (generally 60+ y/o, successful albeit non-professional careers) are voting Leave. The scientist in me would love to dig in to that, and unearth the reasons why.

Absolute stitch up , it's a picture that was on the front page of all the mainstream press but just because Farage uses it it's racist...two faced baffoons Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk It's worth noting that many in the leave camp have also condemned the poster and I doesn't matter to me who came up with it it's simply racist filth. Pete Spineless.....a lot of leave are now just back peddling to save there own hides no commitment Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk A huge banner appeared on a roundabout near me at the weekend... basically it's an image from WW2, looks like a platoon storming up the beach at D-Day. The text reads "We didn't fight off the Germans, so you could let them run our country!"... or words to that effect. What a totally piece-of-s**t, tasteless, crass, work of complete wa***rs!!!

Yesterday I set about removing my airbox, maf, throttle body and upper plenum to fit the 2006 velocity stack, and a plenum spacer... and a thorough clean while I'm in there. My MAF was sat on my workbench, and got knocked off by a Rube Goldberg-esque chain of events... landing from 3 foot onto a concrete floor... can't be good for it! If it's now broken, after refitting, how will I know? What are the tell-tale signs of a broken MAF?

No they couldn't have... the legislation they introduced prohibiting movements of people contravened EU eligibility criteria. I'm not for 1 second suggesting they're wrong to do that, just trying to put the full picture out there.

Symantics... what i meant was the EU, shall we say "stalled" their application. Not sure of the term, but ultimately decided the Swiss couldn't join.

Just for perspective, you do have to remember that the Swiss have been planning to drop their application for some time. The EU annulled their application to join quite a few years back as they no longer met the membership criteria... which as you can imagine seriously upset them!!!

I have to say, as someone with a scientific background, everyone regardless of side seems to be suffering from extreme "selection bias". This is the natural tendency of the brain to prioritise information that reinforces pre-conceived ideas, whilst dismissing those that go against our pre-conceived ideas. Scientists (good ones!) study this effect and learn to overcome, to ensure they are objective about their findings. People of BOTH persuasions are increasingly guilty of this, and all it means is there decision is NOT going to be based on the best available facts. In fact, people of sound intelligent mind are beginning to believe ANY old bull that supports the decision they've already made. People... do your research. When presented with an article, question it. Does it quote it's sources? If not, that's highly questionable! If it does, go check out those sources. A great example (it's a pro-leave article, but I simply don't have the time to post an article of each persuasion, so forgive the seeming one-sidedness) is this: http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/06/15/germans-largest-bank-says-massive-uk-grown-brexit-bbc-remainers-silent/ On the face of it, good news for pro-leavers... but delve into the article and although they've quoted their sources/references quite well, there is no link to the Deutsche Bank article which the whole article hinges off. Why? Well, when you eventually find the Deutsche Bank article, it is NOT saying there will be massive UK growth at all... quite the opposite. It is actually an industry "memo" to investment bankers, explaining how they might be able to make some money out of the post-Brexit carnage! Stating that as stocks across the EU plummet, the UK historically tends to plummet at a slower rate... therefore the UK might represent a temporary financial safe-haven whilst the post-Brexit market crash plays out. That really is not the same as "Massive UK Growth". Point I'm making is, regardless of your political persuasion, stop believing the bull!

Whilst you may be right about Gates, the fact is that the UK-EU relationship has been of big interest to academics for some years now which has resulted in thousands of academic papers being published on the subject, mainly regarding the economics of the relationship. The overwhelming majority of these papers and theses conclude that the UK is economically better of in the EU and that being in the EU makes the UK a more profitable place to do your business.

I don't think I've read that. There's certainly been plenty of speculation about what kind of trade deals we'd get. The most likely outcome seems to be something like Norway, which basically means free trade but have to abide by the rules of the EU, so like I said nothing much would change. It wouldn't make sense for the EU to refuse any kind of trade deal. As you say, we would be bound by pretty much the same constraints as now (assuming the EU would give us that deal!)...... but without any say WHATSOEVER on the future terms of those constraints. How anyone can think that is a good place to be, I do not know.

That's the point... almost every single independant observer says we haven't got a cat in hells chance of getting similar trade agreements! Damn right... I think we've embarrassed ourselves in front of the whole world!

Well if it helps sway you, think of this: leaving is a one-way street, there is no coming back (not on anytime soon at least, and not on anywhere near the terms we enjoy now)... so choose to leave, and we cannot change our mind. Whereas choose to stay, and we have the luxury of changing our mind in the future if the EU fails to reform.

Unfortunately, those I've spoken to seem to have bought in to every piece of bull-flop going, namely: - the EU system is un-democratic as it's members are not elected - the system is run by an un-elected "elite" - every law the UK proposes has been rejected (often citing this "72" figure, that was proved to be made-up several months ago) Both sides are guilty of this bull-crap... it's quite sickening really.

I believe that the results of the vote are only recorded if the legislation is passed, which would make that figure inaccurate. Edit: and also mean it's impossible to find out which way we voted on the things that were voted out. Annoyingly I can't find the source for that now. Maybe someone knowledgable in these matters can confirm / refute. It is correct that voting figures are only collated and disseminated for legislation that has been PASSED. This little paragraph from an article from by Kings College London contains some figures, which seem to be the true voting figures: What we do know, though, from official EU voting records is that the British government has voted ‘No’ to EU proposals on 56 occasions, abstained 70 times, and voted ‘Yes’ to legislative proposals 2,466 times since 1999. In other words, UK ministers were on the “winning side†95% of the time, abstained 3% of the time, and were on the losing side 2%. Just pointing out how many times the UK government ‘lost’ is hence a misleading picture of what has happened.

Why not join the group buy: http://www.350z-uk.com/topic/108925-h-dev-plenum-spacer-group-buy/ Best price you're likely to see!

Never heard of it... can you explain?

I'm in!

Just needs a swooshing red led strip in that bonnet scoop... a modern take on Knight Rider

True, but only a couple of that 200bhp is due to the "ram air effect"... to the extent that most manufacturers don't even bother quoting it. There was a time when the leaflets would quote things like "155bhp, 160 with Ram Air"... but it's so minimal, subject to conditions, and obviously speed (you ain't going to be getting that extra 5hp at legal speeds!!!!!)

Nice one... TVR is one of those that every petrolhead should own at some point!

As the generation that grew up with Gran Turismo start reaching mid-life crisis, and start looking for a sports car that re-ignites their youth, there's an outside chance the GT4 will command very good money... but I wouldn't bank on it... and permanently defacing a car is always going to hurt the resale, whether its a GT4 or a bog-standard DE. So don't worry about it, cut away!