It's school science education. Not university level study.
You teach the current ideas of science - you even teach the old stuff that we know is wrong but still works for the domains you are interested in.
For example, I was taught that F=ma in my high school science class, even though we've known for 90 years that that's simply not true.
High school science is not about doing cutting edge research, it's about learning the basics of science. Hence you teach what the scientific community as a whole currently accepts.
You teach that the sun is powered by fusion that occurs due gravity, you don't teach that the sun is an iron ball supernova remnant even though some people argue it is ( http://www.ballofiron.com/ ), you don't teach that the sun is an externally powered anode in a galactic circuit even though some people argue it is ( http://www.electric-cosmos.org/sun.htm ). You don't "teach the controversy" and leave it up to the students to decide which theory they like the best. Sure the widely accepted understanding could be wrong, but the place for arguing that is not the high school science class taught by a teacher almost certainly not specialized in that particular field.
Einstein didn't try to have his theory taught in high school science classes as a short cut instead of convincing other actual scientists to accept it.
I take "I've had nothing to eat today" to mean the person hasn't eaten. No I wouldn't chortle about those small organisms since in we don't call that eating.
Whereas "I don't commit crime" I would take to mean "I don't break any criminal laws", possible "I don't break any laws that classify as felonies". Which I would have though everyone would take as the meaning.
To the majority of people in the US smoking marijuana as a "crime that doesn't matter", yet I'm pretty sure you go to prison for that in a bunch of places in the US. I certainly wouldn't say "I don't commit crime" if I used marijuana (without say a permissions note from a doctor in a state that has such a thing - though the Federal Government still calls that a crime).
I'm not taking things liteally. You are just being obtuse.
In fact the very post being discussed said "all felonies" which covers a while bunch of things that your ridiculous definition does not.
Beause marraige isn't just a religious institution. It's a civil institution as well. Plenty of people who aren't religious get married.
There are lots of things assoiated with marriage - from paying taxes to receiving benefits to being able to jointly enter bankruptcy to being able to direct medical decisions involving your comatose/unconscious spouse, etc.
I'm sure "the left" would be just fine with leaving marraige to the church if all references to it were also removed from the non-church parts of society. However, being married has a lot of non-religious consequences in our current legal system.
Radon remediation is all about getting the radon out of the building. Providing ventilation and airflow is every so slightly different than trying to extract something from concrete...
Radon (and the chain it decays to) is alpha and beta as well - so getting it outside so you won't be breathing it in as much is fine. With gamma (the next step in the chain, a couple of minutes after cesium beta decays is a gamma producer) not so much since it doesn't really care about the walls...
We've recently added wireless access points to our Family Life Center, but the committee chair isn't comfortable with allowing unrestricted access to our network
Why would you not solve the problem before doing that first bit?
I'm pretty sure their are jurisdictions were publishing something anonymously is illegal.
For example your post annoyed me and: """ Whoever -...
makes a telephone call or utilizes a telecommunications device, whether or not conversation or communication ensues, without disclosing his identity and with intent to annoy, abuse, threaten, or harass any person at the called number or who receives the communications;...
shall be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than two years, or both. """ 47 U.S.C. Â 223(a)(1)(C)
Now sure "intent to annoy" means something entirely different - but do you really know every single law that applies to you in enough detail to know you have never broken one?
Occasionally science is wrong, but the vast majority of the time it isn't.
I don't think so.
Take just one current theory: relativity.
Special was published in 1905 and general in 1916. Call it 1920 for widespread acceptance. So assuming relativity is in fact correct science has been correct for 90 years. Whereas Newton's laws of motion where published in 1687, so we had about 230 years of it. Science has already been wrong for a longer time than it is right. But we had other theories before Newton, all the way back to Aristotle in ~350BC. So call it 2300 years of being wrong versus 90 years of being right (and of course chances are someone will work out that relativity is "wrong" and needs some major tweaks/wholesale replacement at some point in the future).
Every other field is the same - structure of the atom, biology, etc, etc.
Science is almost always wrong. But it gets less wrong over time
The only way it issues a new dark age is if the US resorts to its military to get out of the problem. Otherwise we just have a huge ass depression until the world realizes that not having a huge drain on resources involved actually is better after all.
And military spending isn't the actual problem. SS isn't the actual problem either. Health care spending is the problem. All the US has to do is get health care costs down to those of any other wealthy country on a per capita basis and the entire budget problem goes away.
Note that Florida was a voting machine. Use paper and pencils and you have no such issues (sure the odd person who fills the thing in incorrectly, but do you really want their vote to matter anyway?)
It doesn't point a particle beams skyward - it's EM.
And you may be surprised to know that the ionisphere is in the direction we call "up". If you want to do something involving it you better be pointing your stuff skyward.
If you don't have the money you don't have a choice. Well if you ignore the "print it" option, since the consequences of that are as bad as just honestly defaulting.
Change the laws: copyright on music expires after 20 days. ISP have to block websites hosting infringing copies of music 3 weeks after being given written notice of the specific file/url/whatever to block. Of course once the copyright expires the block is no longer required (since it isn't infringing anymore).
I think the issue is how does this water creature develop fire and metal smelting in the first place (you know bronze and iron age level) - once they have technology working around it is easy, the tricky bit would be developing that technology in the first place.
Almost as big as touching the same doorknob as someone else. Or the same hand rail. Or, dear God, standing next to them while they breathe. Or even using the same non-touch-screen phone.
A helmet while biking makes sense. It's not exactly a huge hassle and there is that small chance it'll prevent serious injury.
Of course if the choice is between ride a bike without a helmet and don't ride a bike at all (because the kid hates helmets that much - peer pressure is a big deal and if no one else does...) then I would strongly suspect the health benefits of the exercise and fitness far outweigh the amazingly small chance of serious head injury...
Of course my 7 year old plays outside unsupervised after dark, so I'm well into the bad parent range of safety...
Slashdot Mirror
It's school science education. Not university level study.
You teach the current ideas of science - you even teach the old stuff that we know is wrong but still works for the domains you are interested in.
For example, I was taught that F=ma in my high school science class, even though we've known for 90 years that that's simply not true.
High school science is not about doing cutting edge research, it's about learning the basics of science. Hence you teach what the scientific community as a whole currently accepts.
You teach that the sun is powered by fusion that occurs due gravity, you don't teach that the sun is an iron ball supernova remnant even though some people argue it is ( http://www.ballofiron.com/ ), you don't teach that the sun is an externally powered anode in a galactic circuit even though some people argue it is ( http://www.electric-cosmos.org/sun.htm ). You don't "teach the controversy" and leave it up to the students to decide which theory they like the best. Sure the widely accepted understanding could be wrong, but the place for arguing that is not the high school science class taught by a teacher almost certainly not specialized in that particular field.
Einstein didn't try to have his theory taught in high school science classes as a short cut instead of convincing other actual scientists to accept it.
There is no laugh track. They just film in front of a studio audience.
You don't find it funny, which is fine. Clearly the people in the audience do - which is also fine.
Yeah because geologists and seismoologists know so much about the politics of secession.
And of course you get to pick tthe areas you weigh in on. Though given your choice of experts to consult that won't help you much.
That's a strange definition.
I take "I've had nothing to eat today" to mean the person hasn't eaten. No I wouldn't chortle about those small organisms since in we don't call that eating.
Whereas "I don't commit crime" I would take to mean "I don't break any criminal laws", possible "I don't break any laws that classify as felonies". Which I would have though everyone would take as the meaning.
To the majority of people in the US smoking marijuana as a "crime that doesn't matter", yet I'm pretty sure you go to prison for that in a bunch of places in the US. I certainly wouldn't say "I don't commit crime" if I used marijuana (without say a permissions note from a doctor in a state that has such a thing - though the Federal Government still calls that a crime).
I'm not taking things liteally. You are just being obtuse.
In fact the very post being discussed said "all felonies" which covers a while bunch of things that your ridiculous definition does not.
Beause marraige isn't just a religious institution. It's a civil institution as well. Plenty of people who aren't religious get married.
There are lots of things assoiated with marriage - from paying taxes to receiving benefits to being able to jointly enter bankruptcy to being able to direct medical decisions involving your comatose/unconscious spouse, etc.
I'm sure "the left" would be just fine with leaving marraige to the church if all references to it were also removed from the non-church parts of society. However, being married has a lot of non-religious consequences in our current legal system.
Radon remediation is all about getting the radon out of the building. Providing ventilation and airflow is every so slightly different than trying to extract something from concrete...
Radon (and the chain it decays to) is alpha and beta as well - so getting it outside so you won't be breathing it in as much is fine. With gamma (the next step in the chain, a couple of minutes after cesium beta decays is a gamma producer) not so much since it doesn't really care about the walls...
Why would you not solve the problem before doing that first bit?
Sure they can. You just don't want to be inside the car being it with the high energy x-rays involved...
"i don't commit crime" does not restrict the crime to the stealing of copper cable, which should be obvious.
I'm pretty sure their are jurisdictions were publishing something anonymously is illegal.
For example your post annoyed me and: ...
"""
Whoever -
makes a telephone call or utilizes a telecommunications device, whether or not conversation or communication ensues, without disclosing his identity and with intent to annoy, abuse, threaten, or harass any person at the called number or who receives the communications; ...
shall be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.
""" 47 U.S.C. Â 223(a)(1)(C)
Now sure "intent to annoy" means something entirely different - but do you really know every single law that applies to you in enough detail to know you have never broken one?
I don't think so.
Take just one current theory: relativity.
Special was published in 1905 and general in 1916. Call it 1920 for widespread acceptance. So assuming relativity is in fact correct science has been correct for 90 years. Whereas Newton's laws of motion where published in 1687, so we had about 230 years of it. Science has already been wrong for a longer time than it is right. But we had other theories before Newton, all the way back to Aristotle in ~350BC. So call it 2300 years of being wrong versus 90 years of being right (and of course chances are someone will work out that relativity is "wrong" and needs some major tweaks/wholesale replacement at some point in the future).
Every other field is the same - structure of the atom, biology, etc, etc.
Science is almost always wrong. But it gets less wrong over time
The only way it issues a new dark age is if the US resorts to its military to get out of the problem. Otherwise we just have a huge ass depression until the world realizes that not having a huge drain on resources involved actually is better after all.
And military spending isn't the actual problem. SS isn't the actual problem either. Health care spending is the problem. All the US has to do is get health care costs down to those of any other wealthy country on a per capita basis and the entire budget problem goes away.
Note that Florida was a voting machine. Use paper and pencils and you have no such issues (sure the odd person who fills the thing in incorrectly, but do you really want their vote to matter anyway?)
Why not just the count the paper votes and wait those couple of days to see who wins? And skip the machines entirely.
It doesn't point a particle beams skyward - it's EM.
And you may be surprised to know that the ionisphere is in the direction we call "up". If you want to do something involving it you better be pointing your stuff skyward.
If you don't have the money you don't have a choice. Well if you ignore the "print it" option, since the consequences of that are as bad as just honestly defaulting.
Yeah SS is fine. As long as it can actually cash in its treasuries of course...
Change the laws: copyright on music expires after 20 days. ISP have to block websites hosting infringing copies of music 3 weeks after being given written notice of the specific file/url/whatever to block. Of course once the copyright expires the block is no longer required (since it isn't infringing anymore).
Everyone wins!
I think the issue is how does this water creature develop fire and metal smelting in the first place (you know bronze and iron age level) - once they have technology working around it is easy, the tricky bit would be developing that technology in the first place.
Sorry, string bet.
Almost as big as touching the same doorknob as someone else. Or the same hand rail. Or, dear God, standing next to them while they breathe. Or even using the same non-touch-screen phone.
A helmet while biking makes sense. It's not exactly a huge hassle and there is that small chance it'll prevent serious injury.
Of course if the choice is between ride a bike without a helmet and don't ride a bike at all (because the kid hates helmets that much - peer pressure is a big deal and if no one else does...) then I would strongly suspect the health benefits of the exercise and fitness far outweigh the amazingly small chance of serious head injury...
Of course my 7 year old plays outside unsupervised after dark, so I'm well into the bad parent range of safety...
Why? Seems pretty likely they'll fall over and crack their skills on the ground trying to throw a punch.
And brain damage from repeated blows the head isn't a one-way street.
so you pick things that at least you can work out how to look for and that you know can exist.