While I have worked on my reading and writing skills, which it seems every Grammar Nazi points out, is one of those setbacks that hold me back, however my stronger skills, I have learned to compensate and relay more on them to help push me further.
Aaaaaaag. I cringed reading that.
I'm still not sure whether you meant Grammar Nazis point out your mistakes, or that they point out that the poor reading and writing skills are holding you back. Probably the former, but jeez.
Also, you misspelled rely.
"While I have worked on my reading and writing skills, which it seems every Grammar Nazi points out, they are still one of those setbacks that holds me back. However, I have learned to compensate and rely more on my stronger skills to help push me further."
(Lucky thing I proofread this - I edited in a word and put it in the complete wrong place. That would have been embarrassing...)
I believe the phrase you're looking for is "ultra homogenized", not "ultra pasteurized".
Fun fact, pasteurizationactually actually doesn't require all that much heat - the standard "high temperature, short time" pasteurization heats the milk to 71.7 degrees C for 15-20 seconds. This results in 5-log reduction in microorganisms (99.999% kill rate).
No. But since fatality rate per 100,000 workers is an annual figure, not a career figure, it actually works in exactly the opposite direction as you probably would have assumed. The figure means that for every 100,000 ranchers, you can expect about 42 ranchers to die in work-related accidents every year, not just at some point in their entire careers. Working well beyond normal retirement would compound that risk further. Retiring earlier means less likelihood of dying in a work-related accident.
Although I imagine there's a pretty big difference between fresh new cops who get put on the streets and the older cops who have been there for a few decades and have seniority to get the less-dangerous desk jobs.
The purpose of teaching is that you learn, most importantly, how to learn. What you were learning was how to avoid learning (things that you deemed unimportant to remember). Both skills might have useful applications to your adult life, but you were doing yourself a disservice by short-circuiting the learning process.
A graphic of the periodic table was displayed, with the elements Ar, Cl, He, N, and Zn highlighted. The text of the question asked which element would have chemical properties most similar to Ar. As long as you know that the table is arranged so that elements in vertical columns share similar chemical properties, you'll get it correct.
The comparison I made was between children of non-immigrants in California, and the rest of the US, some of which states have very low immigrant populations and still approximately a 60% fail rate. The highest states were only about 44% passing.
Comparing immigrant children to immigrant children is a completely different tactic and one of the links in TFA already did it, so if that tickles your fancy, it'll probably be more relevant to your interest than my comment was.
For example, they can blatantly lie about the party affiliation of a politician caught in a sex scandal
If you have never, ever read Firstname Lastname (Rep) and not mistakenly extended that abbreviation into "Republican" rather than Representative, you are some kind of superhuman, because I know I have to do a mental check every damn time I see it.
We have something of a stereotype where I live (major metro area) for that debate, and it's best illustrated by a couple people I grew up with. Both are doctors that are paid very well. We assume they're very good at what they do. But one doesn't understand why you can't swim under a continent, and the other still lives with her parents (she's 32 and has money).
I find it hard to believe that the first can't understand that you can't swim under a continent for the same reason you can't swim underwater from my swimming pool to the one next door. And there is nothing wrong with living with your parents. Having money doesn't mean you have to spend it. Some people can actually stand to be around their parents.
If the test was given in English, then everyone who took it was an English learner, and, unless they've stopped learning, is still an English learner.
The problem appears to be that they have defined "English learner" as "child who spoke a language other than English at home prior to learning English". That is not what "English learner" means.
I, for one, would appreciate if people writing English would write in such a way for fluent English readers to understand what they're saying.
I just meant that it's illegal to view or possess child porn in most jurisdictions.
That's what I thought you meant. And yeah, I disagree with the logic behind those laws.
I'll say it this way then. A victim of child molestation is damaged greatly. Getting off on the evidence of that tragedy is also a pretty screwed up act, all by itself, and one that should continue to be punishable.
Pretty screwed up, yes, but not punishable, I don't believe, unless they're first offered counseling to help them avoid acting on their desires and/or shift their fantasies into more acceptable domain, without the severely life-altering consequences that are presently not only likely but almost certain. If they're unresponsive or uncooperative, then perhaps more severe actions should be taken.
Some men just want to watch the world burn. And then masturbate. Both of which make them feel better about their own miserable selves. And as long as they're not starting fires, I don't see the harm. People will do desperate things when they're suffering from severe depression. Self-harm or drinking your liver to death are probably more harmful physically; bizarre and socially unacceptable fetishes are probably more damaging to the psyche. All of it just tends to build a moat around the depressed individual and distance him/her from society, fostering a growing illusion of a desert island - far from any help, and more importantly, not worth helping anyway. Yes, some counseling would probably help, but prison certainly won't.
I don't believe that most pedos are happy about the way they are. And the ones who're complacent in the fact are that way because they've been hardened by hiding it for so long. My opinion. Probably could be backed up by medical fact, but I don't have the facts, so... take it for whatever you think it's worth.
Thank you very much for the discussion, though. It's been a good one, but I don't think we'll convince each other.
Not a problem. Thanks too for a reasoned conversation; often as not it's just trolls throwing accusations of pedophilia to see if they strike a nerve.
I believe it is simply wrong, both morally (via "gut") and legally (via research) to view child pornography with the intent of gaining sexual gratification in some form
In the moral sense I agree with you; in the legal sense I'm not sure what you mean, but I don't think I agree.
I'm thinking of the 10 year old girl having her life and psyche wrecked so some damaged mind can rub out that quick one
The first half of that statement is tragic, I'll agree, but I don't agree with the "so [that]" connection you made between it and the last half.
Slashdot Mirror
You forgot to mention - when he didn't capitalize Like, he insulted half a dozen Grammar Nazis.
I'm afraid I can't tell if you're serious or not.
He said "no thanks". Did you not hear him or something? Maybe he should say it in all caps?
No, the trick is to be the 1 person who finds the 100 who will influence the 1000 who can...
It was deliberate. And you're welcome.
They might have been triggered, operated, or activated by the "Magic Eye" device. But I'm pretty sure they were powered by electricity...
Good book. I too recommend it.
While I have worked on my reading and writing skills, which it seems every Grammar Nazi points out, is one of those setbacks that hold me back, however my stronger skills, I have learned to compensate and relay more on them to help push me further.
Aaaaaaag. I cringed reading that.
I'm still not sure whether you meant Grammar Nazis point out your mistakes, or that they point out that the poor reading and writing skills are holding you back. Probably the former, but jeez.
Also, you misspelled rely.
"While I have worked on my reading and writing skills, which it seems every Grammar Nazi points out, they are still one of those setbacks that holds me back. However, I have learned to compensate and rely more on my stronger skills to help push me further."
(Lucky thing I proofread this - I edited in a word and put it in the complete wrong place. That would have been embarrassing...)
So something from the year 775 would seem younger - appear to be, perhaps say, from the 1300s? Like the shroud...
I believe the phrase you're looking for is "ultra homogenized", not "ultra pasteurized".
Fun fact, pasteurizationactually actually doesn't require all that much heat - the standard "high temperature, short time" pasteurization heats the milk to 71.7 degrees C for 15-20 seconds. This results in 5-log reduction in microorganisms (99.999% kill rate).
No. But since fatality rate per 100,000 workers is an annual figure, not a career figure, it actually works in exactly the opposite direction as you probably would have assumed. The figure means that for every 100,000 ranchers, you can expect about 42 ranchers to die in work-related accidents every year, not just at some point in their entire careers. Working well beyond normal retirement would compound that risk further. Retiring earlier means less likelihood of dying in a work-related accident.
Although I imagine there's a pretty big difference between fresh new cops who get put on the streets and the older cops who have been there for a few decades and have seniority to get the less-dangerous desk jobs.
The purpose of teaching is that you learn, most importantly, how to learn. What you were learning was how to avoid learning (things that you deemed unimportant to remember). Both skills might have useful applications to your adult life, but you were doing yourself a disservice by short-circuiting the learning process.
It was a fairly basic, conceptual-level question.
A graphic of the periodic table was displayed, with the elements Ar, Cl, He, N, and Zn highlighted. The text of the question asked which element would have chemical properties most similar to Ar. As long as you know that the table is arranged so that elements in vertical columns share similar chemical properties, you'll get it correct.
link
n/t
Maybe it was "Firstname Lastname, Rep." or "Rep. Firstname Lastname". Whatever it is, it's common and it always confuses me.
The comparison I made was between children of non-immigrants in California, and the rest of the US, some of which states have very low immigrant populations and still approximately a 60% fail rate. The highest states were only about 44% passing.
Comparing immigrant children to immigrant children is a completely different tactic and one of the links in TFA already did it, so if that tickles your fancy, it'll probably be more relevant to your interest than my comment was.
For example, they can blatantly lie about the party affiliation of a politician caught in a sex scandal
If you have never, ever read Firstname Lastname (Rep) and not mistakenly extended that abbreviation into "Republican" rather than Representative, you are some kind of superhuman, because I know I have to do a mental check every damn time I see it.
In California the percentage of children with one or more immigrant parent is 49%.
Supposing ALL of these children failed the exam, that STILL means that something like 60% on the children with non-immigrant parents failed the exam.
...which would put them about on par with the rest of the US, actually...
We have something of a stereotype where I live (major metro area) for that debate, and it's best illustrated by a couple people I grew up with. Both are doctors that are paid very well. We assume they're very good at what they do. But one doesn't understand why you can't swim under a continent, and the other still lives with her parents (she's 32 and has money).
I find it hard to believe that the first can't understand that you can't swim under a continent for the same reason you can't swim underwater from my swimming pool to the one next door. And there is nothing wrong with living with your parents. Having money doesn't mean you have to spend it. Some people can actually stand to be around their parents.
Anyway, here's a few less-impressive but still revealing facts:
41% of public school students in California live in homes where the most frequently spoken language is not English. [1].doc
English fluency rate in the LA school district has risen from a mere 16% in 2001 to an unsatisfying 49% in 2005. [2]
If the test was given in English, then everyone who took it was an English learner, and, unless they've stopped learning, is still an English learner.
The problem appears to be that they have defined "English learner" as "child who spoke a language other than English at home prior to learning English". That is not what "English learner" means.
I, for one, would appreciate if people writing English would write in such a way for fluent English readers to understand what they're saying.
85% of California students speak fluent Spanish [PDF]
Related? Unrelated? You be the judge.
I just meant that it's illegal to view or possess child porn in most jurisdictions.
That's what I thought you meant. And yeah, I disagree with the logic behind those laws.
I'll say it this way then. A victim of child molestation is damaged greatly. Getting off on the evidence of that tragedy is also a pretty screwed up act, all by itself, and one that should continue to be punishable.
Pretty screwed up, yes, but not punishable, I don't believe, unless they're first offered counseling to help them avoid acting on their desires and/or shift their fantasies into more acceptable domain, without the severely life-altering consequences that are presently not only likely but almost certain. If they're unresponsive or uncooperative, then perhaps more severe actions should be taken.
Some men just want to watch the world burn. And then masturbate. Both of which make them feel better about their own miserable selves. And as long as they're not starting fires, I don't see the harm. People will do desperate things when they're suffering from severe depression. Self-harm or drinking your liver to death are probably more harmful physically; bizarre and socially unacceptable fetishes are probably more damaging to the psyche. All of it just tends to build a moat around the depressed individual and distance him/her from society, fostering a growing illusion of a desert island - far from any help, and more importantly, not worth helping anyway. Yes, some counseling would probably help, but prison certainly won't.
I don't believe that most pedos are happy about the way they are. And the ones who're complacent in the fact are that way because they've been hardened by hiding it for so long. My opinion. Probably could be backed up by medical fact, but I don't have the facts, so ... take it for whatever you think it's worth.
Thank you very much for the discussion, though. It's been a good one, but I don't think we'll convince each other.
Not a problem. Thanks too for a reasoned conversation; often as not it's just trolls throwing accusations of pedophilia to see if they strike a nerve.
First time I've ever seen the "copyright isn't theft" argument used in a discussion of child porn.
I'll brag a little, I beat him by 4 hours.
the analogy breaks down if you're looking at the photo as property, and the viewing of the photo as "stealing" the child's image for sexual purposes
If we're going there, why not go full retarded and claim that taking a photograph of someone steals their soul.
I believe it is simply wrong, both morally (via "gut") and legally (via research) to view child pornography with the intent of gaining sexual gratification in some form
In the moral sense I agree with you; in the legal sense I'm not sure what you mean, but I don't think I agree.
I'm thinking of the 10 year old girl having her life and psyche wrecked so some damaged mind can rub out that quick one
The first half of that statement is tragic, I'll agree, but I don't agree with the "so [that]" connection you made between it and the last half.
You've confused "intent" with Orwell's "thoughtcrime".
No, I've not. The "intent" is to produce the thoughts. The thoughts themselves are why it's illegal. Hence thoughtcrime.
The fact is, viewing naked children performing sexual acts for pleasure IS intended
Pleasure is nothing but a thought. As I said: the intent is merely to produce the thoughts. Thoughtcrime.