While I'm not sure I agree about it being government money, your comment about internet access opens another option beyond the standard DVB systems - the internet. We already have BBC iPlayer, ITV/UTV/STV player, 4oD and demand Five, as well as services such as tvcatchup.com (more info here), so upgrading users' internet (and possibly proving a low-end HTPC for access) may well be the most financially viable solution.

As far as I am aware the only "cable company" over here is Virgin Media, who only service a limited area of the country (apparently it's available to 65% of households), most of which is confined to cities (and often there are areas of those cities where it is unavailable too). (Map of coverage) It's not even available in every city; I'm pretty sure that its not available anywhere in Aberdeen, which is the 27th most populous city in the UK (population ~200k), and I doubt its alone. Being in a sparely populated area and next to a motorway (the closest thing we have to freeways) is certainly not the only reason for not having cable access.

Satellite coverage on the other hand is pretty much 100%, line-of-sight issues notwithstanding. Trees aren't the only issues though. If someone lives in rented accommodation they may not be allowed to put up a dish, and even if they own it they may not have a south-east-facing area to mount a dish.

Certainly, I doubt there will be (m)any households that can't get satellite signals because of the LTE transmission, since satellite is transmitted at ~10-12 GHz while LTE is transmitted at 800, 1800 and 2600 MHz in Europe. Sure, the signal sent through the coax cable is within that range at ~970 MHz - 2 GHz, but if the LTE is strong enough to interfere with the cabling, fibre-optic connections are available and would likely be cheaper than getting fibre-optic cable TV installed in any of the non-covered areas.

Well, since you said "God" (presumably referring to some form of Yahweh) rather than "a god", then it is possible to prove the negative. Assuming it is the biblical version that you are referring to, the Bible makes claims about "God", which can in turn be proven or disproven (if it is another version of "God" then the same applies to the holy book in which it is described, or at least all of the ones I have come across). As such a belief that God (i.e. the deity as described in the book) does not exist (rather than just a non-specific deity) is perfectly justified scientifically, and in fact required (evidence suggests that trait A is false, therefore being with trait A does not exist). Active belief that a non-specific deity does not exist is, as you said, unscientific, but once you start adding testable traits or attributing acts to them or whatever, disbelief becomes necessary once one of those attributes is shown to be false/logically inconsistent with other assigned traits. This of course does not preclude the possibility that the entity exists but has been misrepresented, to which the scientific stance should remain "show me some evidence that it exists", but that's more or less the same position as taken towards totally non-specific deities anyway (since that's what it'd be).

I assume you are referring to English history education - Scotland has a totally separate curriculum and set of qualifications from England, so I don't think that statement applies. I'm not sure how things differ in Wales and N.I. (I think Wales generally falls in line with England with regard to education). Certainly, prior to Standard Grade level (equivalent of GCSE) we learn about things like the Scottish wars of independence (which seems to fall into the same patriotism category that you mentioned, but with regard to Scotland) and the Victorians certainly popped up quite a bit (certainly things like the suffragettes were covered too, although that may have crossed over into Modern Studies). At Standard Grade level (which I didn't do, opting instead for Geography, so take everything I say with a pinch of salt) the World Wars are discussed, but along with those come the reunification of Germany and Weimar Germany, since they are kinda important topics to understand if you are to have any context for the wars.

Sure, the boiling point of water has little bearing on air temperature, weather etc, but the freezing point absolutely does. So what if you don't wear you gloves or zip up your jacket at 0C/32F. Being the freezing point of water, temps around 0C are good indicators of things such as "will the roads be slippery" or "will it snow". Regardless of that though, "human comfort levels" are entirely subjective and vary from person to person, so are not a good basis for a temp scale. Even if they didn't vary, the scale that is used to measure it is largely irrelevant as long as the person using it is familiar enough with it to judge things from it. On a personal note, I can't really stand temperatures much above 25C, and currently my room is 15C and I'm quite comfortable.

You also seem to be assuming that (other than for scientists, engineers etc) temperature scales are only used for judging the weather/air temperature. They are not. Cookery is a fine example; using a scale based on "human comfort" makes little sense for cooking, and I'd argue it makes significantly less sense than using water's boiling/freezing point to judge weather/air temperature.

Apples and Oranges. Net neutrality is about regulation of those that deliver the internet (i.e. ISPs) so as to prevent them from, for example, blocking or throttling sites/content from particular providers or that use particular protocols as it suits them. SOPA is about regulating what goes on ON the internet which is entirely separate. Net neutrality is about competition, while SOPA is about content control.

Hmm, it would seem that I'm misinformed then (or perhaps simply out of date).

I'm not sure what you consider mainstream, but I'm fairly sure Carphone Warehouse only sell unlocked phones (i.e. they don't sell any that are locked).* Certainly it's the norm for phones to be locked when bought on contract from the networks (carriers), but unlocked phones aren't as uncommon/difficult to get hold of as one might think.

*I may be mixing it up with Phones 4 U, not that it really matters, the point still stands regardless of which it is - I'd consider both to be fairly mainstream retailers.

Cheers for that! I don't suppose you know why they list both the UK and Scotland in the times/locations list do you?

While it may not apply across the board, it is certainly possible that they don't want to give said brands free advertising, or don't want to be seen to be endorsing a particular company/brand/idea.