I met Alec Salmond in the CO OP last night stocking up with cakes... anyway.
As for wee Nicki - Referendums are a reserved matter for Westminster. What is missing in the Nationalist argument are social effects of separation from a union that began to happen when King James VI of Scotland became King James I of Britain, then the act of Union 1707. The FUBAR of trying to separate from the EU has in three years shown how just four decades of union is proving painful. Thus attempting to disengage over four centuries of integration is going to be far harder. History has shown in recent years the nationalistic conflicts that have arisen in places like the Balkans and ex-Soviet Union are a potential outcome.
Recent polls indicate a lack of appetite for more political conflicts. But the SNP cannot leave it alone. There may well be a fear in Nationalists that if they don't win a referendum soon, they could suddenly sink back to last century levels support wise.
With the current Conservative government, there is a real potential for them to overturn the Sewell convention permanently as they have done with the EU withdrawl bill. Theresa May is psychologically unable to 'listen' to the opinions of others and her probable replacements don't seem to understand 'England' doesn't have an Empire anymore.
As for myself, I would fully support a Federal Scotland (and Northern Ireland, Wales, England and London), but not Scotland as an independent nation state.

Last time round I had no skin in the game. I know from a few people in the oil industry north of the border that some of the Independence propaganda totally misrepresented the future of North Sea oil but beyond that I didn't really take much interest. I chuckled when the Independence campaign were attacked on the basis that Scotland might lose their place in the EU through independence and the reply came back that they might lose it by staying if the Brexit vote went the wrong way. No one I knew at the time took that counter argument seriously. However since the initial argument was a significant campaigning point and has now been reversed I see a strong argument to revisit the question. In the new context they might also have to consider if they have room for 48% of the rest of the UK.

Surgeon? I thought her name was far fishier, like her politics.
Seriously, if the UK remainers get a second referendum, then fair play, precedent, and logic all dictate Scotland shoild get a second independence referendum.

I don't have strong feelings about Scottish independence except that I am in favour of any group which sees themselves as a nation being independent if a majority want to be. I thought her biggest problem at the moment was that there isn't a majority for independence. If she calls indyref 2 and loses, what then? That's how I fel about a second brexit referendum, too. If remainers manage to call a second vote and leave wins again, what are they going to do - call a third? When i was in politics, the leader of my group frequently reminded us that you don't ask a question in public unless you know what the answer is going to be!

Sounds reasonable. Scotland wants to stay in Europe and independence from the fools in Westminster would be their best chance.

Just putting Pressure on Mrs May. She does need it. Destroying the Union would be a big step

Absolutely brilliant. If the UK brexits I'm immediatly aiming to move north and wait for my Scottish EU passport. After that I'm moving to France where my EX ran off with my young son due to brexit. Too late for us as she has a new fella but I will be close to my son, he will know his Dad.

Hmmm... bit of a constitutional dilemma, as Westminster has to approve any referendum. As a bit of a soft southern leftie, I dread the thought of Scotland leaving and increasing the strength of the Tory gerrymander in England.