you're conflating "modern biology" with "evolution". those are two seperate and distinct things. or more accurately, one of those two things (evolutionary theory) is a very small subsection of the other, the other being huge and including basically EVERYTHING related to "Living things" (biology). medicine is likewise a subsection of biology, specifically the application of years of knowledge and science to the treatment of ills.
i say constitutional requirements...you know what i mean: they're laying out representation by population, so if that's to be the rule, then under the rule.....etc
still missing the point: no one's vote ever counted for 3/5 of a "normal" vote.
AvitarX is correct. The 3/5 compromise only related to the counting of population in order to determine representation in the House of Representives, it's size being determined by population.
And the bit the history books leave out, or that people continually misunderstand: the slaves WEREN'T counted at 3/5 of a person because Southerners wanted it...they wanted them to be counted as FULL persons as far as population was concerned.
They were counted as 3/5s because Northerners didnt want them to be counted as full persons. Not because they opposed the personhood of the slaves (though some may have...a lot of the tension was typical us vs them, opposition to X at any cost (X being the South in this case) we still see today in politics), but because they didnt want the South to achieve a stretegic control of the HoR..yet they couldnt deny the Constitutional requirements...
The 3/5 compromise was a Devil's Bargain, and a brilliant piece of political manuevering, strategically speaking: The abolitionists said slaves were people too, so the South basiaclly said, "Well, OK then, if that's so, then we are underrepresented in the HoR, as per the Constitutional", and basically turned the issue around to their advantage.
a chimp raised in human society (effectively) rather than around chimps doing chimp things, was eventually taught sign language after many years and difficulties, and has a competency almost on par with a small human child....
big deal, and also beside the point: he's not talking about sign language, he's talking about body language.
so simply put, your word, is wrong, because you lack comprehension of the subject at hand.
again: you know nothing about the paper itself, other than its origin, and you are attacking it based on that, and that alone. you can hate the religious sect all you want, but the paper is SEPERATE and DISTINCT from the religious group. it'd be like hating an internationally recognized and award winning newspaper...because it was owned by L Ron Hubbard who also started scientology. Just because she started both things, does not make one invalid simply becaus eyou consider the other invalid.
and in fact, the paper's reputation is stellar.
Despite its name, the Monitor does not claim to be a religious-themed paper, and says it does not promote the doctrine of its patron church. However, at its founder Eddy's request, a daily religious article has appeared in every issue of the Monitor. Eddy also required the inclusion of "Christian Science" in the paper's name, over initial opposition by some of her advisors who thought the religious reference might repel a secular audience.
Monitor staff have been the recipients of seven Pulitzer Prizes, the most recent in 2002.
1950, Pulitzer Prize for International Reporting: Edmund Stevens, for his series of 43 articles written over a three-year residence in Moscow entitled, "This Is Russia Uncensored."[8] 1967, Pulitzer Prize for International Reporting: R. John Hughes, For his thorough reporting of Indonesia's attempted Transition to the New Order in 1965 and the purge that followed in 1965–66.[9] 1968, Pulitzer Prize for National Reporting: Howard James, for his series of articles, Crisis in the Courts.[10] 1969, Pulitzer Prize for National Reporting: Robert Cahn, for his inquiry into the future of our national parks and the methods that may help to preserve them.[11] 1978, Pulitzer Prize Special Citations and Awards, Journalism: Richard Strout, for distinguished commentary from Washington over many years as staff correspondent for The Christian Science Monitor and contributor to The New Republic.[12] 1996, Pulitzer Prize for International Reporting: David Rohde, for his persistent on-site reporting of the slaughter of thousands of Bosnian Muslims in the Srebrenica Genocide.[13] 2002, Pulitzer Prize for Editorial Cartooning: Clay Bennett[14] In April 2003, after being provided documents by a former Iraqi General, several news organizations (including the Monitor) reported that George Galloway was accused by a U.S. Senate Committee led by Norm Coleman of personally profiting from corruption within the United Nations Oil-for-Food program. The Monitor investigated the matter, concluding that the documents were "almost certainly forgeries," and, in response to a lawsuit by Galloway, apologized in court.[15]
In 2006, Jill Carroll, a freelance reporter for the Monitor, was kidnapped in Baghdad, and released safely after 82 days. Although Carroll was initially a freelancer, the paper worked tirelessly for her release, even hiring her as a staff writer shortly after her abduction to ensure that she had financial benefits, according to Bergenheim.[16] Beginning in August 2006, the Monitor published an account[17] of Carroll's kidnapping and subsequent release, with first-person reporting from Carroll and others involved.
plus different controls can function in each axis depending on current situation. cars not only have only two directions, but 2 very simple control sets that really work in only one way, with little interaction: pedals to go faster or slower, wheel to change direction.
But in an airplane you can control: -altitude and vertical airspeed controlled by engine thrust at >0 AOA -indicated airspeed controlled by angle of attack (ie, via pitch) -yaw as a function of thrust differential, and the possibilty of using it to counteract a crosswind so you can still land straight ahead, even while angled to the side
thats one of things ground school teaches: not just the controls themselves, but the fundemental nature of an aircraft as a moving (flying) equilibrium equation, with multiple factors all acting in multitude of interactions.
sounds like the same tired saw about "only humans wage war", "only humans murder"....
snails rape each other to impregnate each other several beetle and other insect varieties do the same thing chimpanzees wage war on other chimp tribes baboons will given the chance kill entire other tribes (genocide) orcas and even dolphins kill for fun lions kill each other regularly, particularly a new alpha male in a pride with cubs, will kill all the cubs lions also have an instinctive hatred for hyenas (and vice versa) and will kill them just to kill them cats (of many species) "play" (torture) their food
"defective human mutation" ?? Hardly. It's across the entire animal and even plant kingdom, to the extent that it's cant even be considered a mutation. IE, its the norm, not the exception. the exception is the opposite trait.
Yes...they're trying to sto people from reading the book they read frm every weekend, the most published and read book on the planet. And the church is trying to stop them from doing that which they do every weekend...in church....
It's a close call, but you may actually be stupider than thephydes, the troll that started this thread.
let me guess, you probably also believe that Obama was directly responsible and complicit in: - an IRS office in the midwest (and just that office, and no others) investigating tea party groups with names like "tea party for action" when filing for the "nonpolitical, nonprofit" tax exempt status? - selecting the contractor who created healthcare.gov, but no other contractors, based on a 1000$ donation made years ago, amidst the other nearly 2 billion in campaign donations he recieved? - forcing the Marines to wear "girly hats" when the manufacturer went out of business?
No, I just cant go on. It's just too funny. And you're too stupid.
Parts machined from steel stock are fairly well known characteristics, re: machined steel characteristics, tolerances, and variability of a foundries output, are very well known in manufacturing. but then steel manufacturing has been around a long time. i dont know as much about the proprties of sintereed metal, and therefore the parts made of it. so I'd want to see some extensive testng done of the sintered metal, or the results anyway, so that I could have the same confidence and knowledge of the material.
whomever modded this troll has never read The Oklahoman. Owned by a oil/gas billionaire, it's always excusing the industry and only quotes science when its convenient an d supports the oil/gas industry. the rest of the time science is not to be believed.
your question about the carriers usefulness against terrorists shows two things: 1-your lack of understanding of what hte carreirs DID do 2-you also are simply preparing for the last war.
There is a an essay called the 4 warriors. It describes the 4 types of combatant. It's basically a 2x2 grid. High/low tech, and Brute/Seer. ( http://www.anomalies.net/archive/Government-Invlovement/NEWCORPS.TXT ) Written in 1992, it predicted and expounded on complications arising from this asymmetrical warfare between different categories of combatant. Of interest is that essay was written at the USMC war college by Robert David Steele, which some of the people around will recognize the name. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_David_Steele )
Our military has traditionally been in between a Hightech/seer and high tech/brute, and our enemies similar. Just because our most recent conflict has been against an enemy that is lowtech/seer does not mean we should give up our militarys capabilities just to engage that type of enemy. Doing so would once again leave us unprepared to fight a battle at parity.
how could they give that part away? thats so disappointing. to me, the shock of realizing what he had actually done, the shock of the character realizing that these werent just games, was a huge part ofhte books impact.
and i'd say goes with the reviews notes about everything being shiny...it doesnt fit hte story. i imagined when reading the story years ago, this was a losing war. we were getting our asses kicked. thats why they used kids int eh first place, desperation, because their own tactical geniuses were slowly being killed off. and a military on teh losing side isnts all shiny toys. its grimy and downtrodden. a military with shiny fancy toys doesnt need kids to fight its battles, however gifted they are.
Slashdot Mirror
you're conflating "modern biology" with "evolution".
those are two seperate and distinct things.
or more accurately, one of those two things (evolutionary theory) is a very small subsection of the other, the other being huge and including basically EVERYTHING related to "Living things" (biology). medicine is likewise a subsection of biology, specifically the application of years of knowledge and science to the treatment of ills.
in short: you're point is without merit.
its neither inherently bad blanketly, nor precisely a libertarian principle (ie, they dont own it). /. misuses the word libertarian.
once again:
i say constitutional requirements...you know what i mean: they're laying out representation by population, so if that's to be the rule, then under the rule.....etc
still missing the point: no one's vote ever counted for 3/5 of a "normal" vote.
AvitarX is correct. The 3/5 compromise only related to the counting of population in order to determine representation in the House of Representives, it's size being determined by population.
And the bit the history books leave out, or that people continually misunderstand: the slaves WEREN'T counted at 3/5 of a person because Southerners wanted it...they wanted them to be counted as FULL persons as far as population was concerned.
They were counted as 3/5s because Northerners didnt want them to be counted as full persons. Not because they opposed the personhood of the slaves (though some may have...a lot of the tension was typical us vs them, opposition to X at any cost (X being the South in this case) we still see today in politics), but because they didnt want the South to achieve a stretegic control of the HoR..yet they couldnt deny the Constitutional requirements...
The 3/5 compromise was a Devil's Bargain, and a brilliant piece of political manuevering, strategically speaking: The abolitionists said slaves were people too, so the South basiaclly said, "Well, OK then, if that's so, then we are underrepresented in the HoR, as per the Constitutional", and basically turned the issue around to their advantage.
a chimp raised in human society (effectively) rather than around chimps doing chimp things, was eventually taught sign language after many years and difficulties, and has a competency almost on par with a small human child....
big deal, and also beside the point:
he's not talking about sign language, he's talking about body language.
so simply put, your word, is wrong, because you lack comprehension of the subject at hand.
mod this up.
(i would, but i already commented)
also, supporting the paper, DOES NOT SUPPORT THE CHURCH. again. seperate. one does not fund or publish the other, or vice versa.
again: you know nothing about the paper itself, other than its origin, and you are attacking it based on that, and that alone. you can hate the religious sect all you want, but the paper is SEPERATE and DISTINCT from the religious group. it'd be like hating an internationally recognized and award winning newspaper...because it was owned by L Ron Hubbard who also started scientology. Just because she started both things, does not make one invalid simply becaus eyou consider the other invalid.
and in fact, the paper's reputation is stellar.
Despite its name, the Monitor does not claim to be a religious-themed paper, and says it does not promote the doctrine of its patron church. However, at its founder Eddy's request, a daily religious article has appeared in every issue of the Monitor. Eddy also required the inclusion of "Christian Science" in the paper's name, over initial opposition by some of her advisors who thought the religious reference might repel a secular audience.
Monitor staff have been the recipients of seven Pulitzer Prizes, the most recent in 2002.
1950, Pulitzer Prize for International Reporting: Edmund Stevens, for his series of 43 articles written over a three-year residence in Moscow entitled, "This Is Russia Uncensored."[8]
1967, Pulitzer Prize for International Reporting: R. John Hughes, For his thorough reporting of Indonesia's attempted Transition to the New Order in 1965 and the purge that followed in 1965–66.[9]
1968, Pulitzer Prize for National Reporting: Howard James, for his series of articles, Crisis in the Courts.[10]
1969, Pulitzer Prize for National Reporting: Robert Cahn, for his inquiry into the future of our national parks and the methods that may help to preserve them.[11]
1978, Pulitzer Prize Special Citations and Awards, Journalism: Richard Strout, for distinguished commentary from Washington over many years as staff correspondent for The Christian Science Monitor and contributor to The New Republic.[12]
1996, Pulitzer Prize for International Reporting: David Rohde, for his persistent on-site reporting of the slaughter of thousands of Bosnian Muslims in the Srebrenica Genocide.[13]
2002, Pulitzer Prize for Editorial Cartooning: Clay Bennett[14]
In April 2003, after being provided documents by a former Iraqi General, several news organizations (including the Monitor) reported that George Galloway was accused by a U.S. Senate Committee led by Norm Coleman of personally profiting from corruption within the United Nations Oil-for-Food program. The Monitor investigated the matter, concluding that the documents were "almost certainly forgeries," and, in response to a lawsuit by Galloway, apologized in court.[15]
In 2006, Jill Carroll, a freelance reporter for the Monitor, was kidnapped in Baghdad, and released safely after 82 days. Although Carroll was initially a freelancer, the paper worked tirelessly for her release, even hiring her as a staff writer shortly after her abduction to ensure that she had financial benefits, according to Bergenheim.[16] Beginning in August 2006, the Monitor published an account[17] of Carroll's kidnapping and subsequent release, with first-person reporting from Carroll and others involved.
Air France 447
plus different controls can function in each axis depending on current situation. cars not only have only two directions, but 2 very simple control sets that really work in only one way, with little interaction: pedals to go faster or slower, wheel to change direction.
But in an airplane you can control:
-altitude and vertical airspeed controlled by engine thrust at >0 AOA
-indicated airspeed controlled by angle of attack (ie, via pitch)
-yaw as a function of thrust differential, and the possibilty of using it to counteract a crosswind so you can still land straight ahead, even while angled to the side
thats one of things ground school teaches: not just the controls themselves, but the fundemental nature of an aircraft as a moving (flying) equilibrium equation, with multiple factors all acting in multitude of interactions.
air france 447.
sounds like the same tired saw about "only humans wage war", "only humans murder" ....
snails rape each other to impregnate each other
several beetle and other insect varieties do the same thing
chimpanzees wage war on other chimp tribes
baboons will given the chance kill entire other tribes (genocide)
orcas and even dolphins kill for fun
lions kill each other regularly, particularly a new alpha male in a pride with cubs, will kill all the cubs
lions also have an instinctive hatred for hyenas (and vice versa) and will kill them just to kill them
cats (of many species) "play" (torture) their food
"defective human mutation" ??
Hardly. It's across the entire animal and even plant kingdom, to the extent that it's cant even be considered a mutation. IE, its the norm, not the exception. the exception is the opposite trait.
Yes...they're trying to sto people from reading the book they read frm every weekend, the most published and read book on the planet. And the church is trying to stop them from doing that which they do every weekend...in church....
It's a close call, but you may actually be stupider than thephydes, the troll that started this thread.
let me guess, you probably also believe that Obama was directly responsible and complicit in:
- an IRS office in the midwest (and just that office, and no others) investigating tea party groups with names like "tea party for action" when filing for the "nonpolitical, nonprofit" tax exempt status?
- selecting the contractor who created healthcare.gov, but no other contractors, based on a 1000$ donation made years ago, amidst the other nearly 2 billion in campaign donations he recieved?
- forcing the Marines to wear "girly hats" when the manufacturer went out of business?
No, I just cant go on. It's just too funny.
And you're too stupid.
Hey look, it's Buzz Killington, and once again, he doesnt get the joke
because liberals by defintion oppose the 2nd amendment, and/or gun owners by defintion cannot be liberal?
Parts machined from steel stock are fairly well known characteristics, re: machined steel characteristics, tolerances, and variability of a foundries output, are very well known in manufacturing. but then steel manufacturing has been around a long time. i dont know as much about the proprties of sintereed metal, and therefore the parts made of it. so I'd want to see some extensive testng done of the sintered metal, or the results anyway, so that I could have the same confidence and knowledge of the material.
whomever modded this troll has never read The Oklahoman. Owned by a oil/gas billionaire, it's always excusing the industry and only quotes science when its convenient an d supports the oil/gas industry. the rest of the time science is not to be believed.
Stop abusing mod points.
A factual post is not a troll post.
Stop abusing mod points.
Not flamebait.
Stop abusing mod points.
(note that i dont agree with all of his conclusions, but his construct for analysing the types of potential enemy, is immensely useful)
your question about the carriers usefulness against terrorists shows two things:
1-your lack of understanding of what hte carreirs DID do
2-you also are simply preparing for the last war.
There is a an essay called the 4 warriors. It describes the 4 types of combatant. It's basically a 2x2 grid. High/low tech, and Brute/Seer. ( http://www.anomalies.net/archive/Government-Invlovement/NEWCORPS.TXT ) Written in 1992, it predicted and expounded on complications arising from this asymmetrical warfare between different categories of combatant. Of interest is that essay was written at the USMC war college by Robert David Steele, which some of the people around will recognize the name. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_David_Steele )
Our military has traditionally been in between a Hightech/seer and high tech/brute, and our enemies similar. Just because our most recent conflict has been against an enemy that is lowtech/seer does not mean we should give up our militarys capabilities just to engage that type of enemy. Doing so would once again leave us unprepared to fight a battle at parity.
Amen brother.
how could they give that part away? thats so disappointing. to me, the shock of realizing what he had actually done, the shock of the character realizing that these werent just games, was a huge part ofhte books impact.
and i'd say goes with the reviews notes about everything being shiny...it doesnt fit hte story. i imagined when reading the story years ago, this was a losing war. we were getting our asses kicked. thats why they used kids int eh first place, desperation, because their own tactical geniuses were slowly being killed off. and a military on teh losing side isnts all shiny toys. its grimy and downtrodden. a military with shiny fancy toys doesnt need kids to fight its battles, however gifted they are.
Hmmm....you must write for the Oklahoman paper.