Wikipedia more reliable than the BBC... S'funny. As is lolsticka. Ah Bugsy, I dig your ouvre.

Frank, the BBC is always left-orientated, no matter who is in government. You are right that BBC is worth watching. Their comedy shows are world-class.

Jack

You're so inoculated against the truth.

You assert X to be the case and then, when compelling evidence shows X not to be the case, you assert Y to be the case.

Then, when compelling evidence shows Y not to be the case, you assert Z to be the case.

Then when you are shown with compelling evidence that Z is not the case, you go back to position X. Haven't you got anything else to do? ...I have, I'm sorry I wasted my time Jack. 'Bye.

Interesting how this thread's evolved. I think that the conversation about the relative epistemological merits of Wikipedia vis a vis the BBC raises all sorts of interesting questions.

I like Wikipedia. As a well educated person, I find it invaluable as a first online port of call if I want to get the general gist of a subject with which I'm not familiar. However, because I've been educated to assess and validate information I'm very aware that Wikipedia is by no means authoritative. For this reason it's essential to cross-reference and validate any claims to facticity contained in Wikipedia entries, preferably by reference to primary sources.

Wikipedia cannot be authoritative because it literally has no 'authors', unlike traditional encyclopediae. I've noticed that there is an increasing tendency for less educated Internet citizens to regard information derived from Wikipedia as reliable, and to regard such information as true without further analysis or investigation. Worse still, this version of knowledge invites its own creation by users whose anonymity may facilitate the exponential propagation of ignorance, i.e. of 'dumbing down' the populace.

What worries me about Wikipedia is that it produces its own version of 'truth' that, because of the scale if Internet communication, becomes widely disseminated. It's scary enough that some of the boofheads here take such information to be true sui generis, but quite horrifying that such people can also participate in the construction of what passes for 'truth'.

Frank,

>> Is the sgean dhu a symbol of a Scots religious tradition? Or part of any authentic tradition?

Its interesting that you hold yourself out as an arbiter of what is, or isn’t, part of an authentic tradition.The issue at hand is weapons in our schools, no matter how you want to dress it up. No religious or cultural considerations are important enough that we should discard such a simple, common sense law.

>> Which is the more lethal in the hands of violent student, a ceremonial student kirpan or a chisel? Surely the chisel

Mate have you had a look at a Kirpan. They are often described as swords and many have significant blade length. Your contention that a chisel is more dangerous is just ridiculous. Kirpans are supposed to be used in active prevention of violence. So they are actually designed to be a capable WEAPON. You cannot say that about a chisel.

Your contention that the design isn’t important, only the potential for misuse, your completely neglecting the fact that a weapon designed to cut or stab a human being has a greater potential for misuse than a chisel.

Melodratic or not I would like to see you refute my contention that multiculturalism is a flawed gift from the baby boomer generation. It’s just as easy for me to suggest that your understanding of cultural interaction is shallow and politically correct.

You may not have social/cultural practices that you would like guests to abide by in your home but I bet you’d wouldn’t complain if you went somewhere “ethnic” that did. Yet you are happy to deny us that same right in our communities.

No doubt there are many laws where exceptions could be made to accommodate a minority. Our children’s safety at school should NOT be one of those instances.

I posed the question about Kirpans to my GP who happens to be Indian
(Hindu - not Sikh). However she was adamantly against Kirpans being carried by schoolchildren.

When I asked her why? Her reply was that children should not be made to be 'different' especially at school, where they will get picked on.

She also informed me that the Sikhs were the 'warriors' of India.
They were soldiers, and were famous for their fighting skills.
That the Kirpan initially was used as a weapon.