EU Referendum, another TV appearance

Last Wednesday, I was asked again to speak to a CBC journalist, on the EU referendum, I did so, but in the end, they didn't use so much of what I said. I'm okay with this, as last week, this was not something I had much to say on. I mean I had my reasons for voting the way I did, but they were pretty uninteresting I thought.

The report can still be seen here.

So I gave this interview, then we went off down to New York for a long weekend (but that's for another post) so didn't have time to post this here. I was also asked to do an early morning thing somewhere for the morning after, but since we were in NY, I declined.  I also figured, that'd, pretty much be the ed of it, as I thought the British people too conservative to change, so figured it may be close, but in the end, nothing would change. Ok, so maybe I was wrong in that assumption. Maybe a little.

It seems that, yes indeed as I suggested, there was a difference in how Scotland and England voted, and that is having huge repercussions. It may be too close to the actual event to make a diagnosis or  dissection of what happened (although this article probably nails it pretty close), this is something we will be debating for years, but we are certainly living in interesting times!

I will leave you with one more link, to a friend of mine who voted leave, and not for the reasons that we are hearing from the UKIP side of the debate.  I think it is important to read this post on his reasoning, so that we can move forward in this mew world order.

The only thing I would like to add, is that as a scientist, if I ever tried to publish 49.1% and 51.9% as a significant result, I would be given my head to play with!