No, no, no. It's the wallyworld cashier who is funny -- I just described it to you.
That'll be $10--pay at the door. It wouldn't have been more than fifty cents, but I shouldn't have to explain the basics of humor to you. You're supposed to bring something to the table yourself, you know.
No, the tide is turning. But is my estimate that the spirit of restraint has been removed, theman of sin is revealing himself, and shortly thereafter those you term enlightened will perpetrate such unjustifiable attrocities that there will be no excuse, only the explanation will be, "I hated the Son of Man, and everything He stood for, and all who were His."
And that explanationwill be given, standing in front of Him, with Him as judge.
No joke, come to terms before the judge sits down.
Okay, I'm a bit of an engineer. Not a PE, but I have a degree. And I'm a great believer in the idea that if something doesn't ever happen, it is because it is prevented from happening. That is, I all the time hear people say "What this country needs to do is... " and my response is, "if you think that that is a solution, then what is the path from here to there?"
In the same way, science didn't progress except under Christianity. That is under atheistic cultures, pluritheistic cultures, animistic cultures, and so on. Under all of these, there were some developments. But the cultures self-destructed, and in the process also destroyed scientific progress profoundly.
That isn't just in Europe, or the Middle East, or Africa. It's also in the Americas.
To my way of thinking, there were great technological feats by the Olmecs, for example. But the civilization destroyed itself. There was another civilization based in central America, founded on beer. It extended its influence all the way up to Virginia -- but one day, they just shut down and self destructed. When the Europeans came, the Indians were still in the stone age. They didn't have to be -- but they were. They didn't have writing in North America. They could have -- there was basic writing in Central America -- but they didn't.
I contend that the astoundingly consistent "didn't" is evidence of "couldn't".
And what of it, if there were acts of God -- an asteroid strike in North America that destroyed the Clovis Point People, or another asteroid strike that decapitated a mountain in Austria, and sent a plasma ball on Sodom -- to make the leader in progress, from Christianity?
Wouldn't that be evidence that the Christianity was the truth? After enough coincidences, I'd think a rational person would stop saying "coincidence", and start say "system."
So are you using a European sense of the word "know", or a Jewish sense of the word "know"? Because the first is to talk the talk, and the second is to walk the walk.
No, the old testament is not merely a preface. "All these things were written down, to be ensamples for you to follow."
Or again, the scribes and pharisees at the temple were impressed with Jesus' understanding of scripture, even as a boy.
Understand, then, that all of the New Testament is encapsulated as a seed in the old testament. Do you want to see the story of a soul's salvation, within the Christian Church? Read the Apocalypse of Isaiah (Is 23-27), as a parable, with the human heart being the earth, and remembering -- when you come to "Moab" as a name, that "Moab" -- from Genesis -- means "the Son of the Father". The story will go from the dryness that everyone is condemned to, to their finding help from God in their dryness, to entering the Church, receiving communion and the forgiveness/life that comes with it, to reading the Word of God to learn wisdom, to the birth of the Holy Spirit in their heart, to their being the defended garden of God, to their deliverance at the Great Trump.
Or again, the entire passion is encapsulated in the celebration of the Passover. That third cup of passover, drunk right before they sing the psalm, the "Great Hallel", was the "Cup of Blessing" -- which we in turn call the communion cup. The fourth cup -- the one Christ asked to be taken away -- he drank on the cross: it is the "Cup of Salvation", as in "How can I make a return to the Lord for all the good he has done for me? The Cup of Salvation I will take up, and I will call upon the Lord." Thus, at 33 Christ celebrated the passover, fulfilling all the roles: He was the chief celebrant, the priest, the sacrificial lamb, and so on. But it is already in seed form, in the Old Testament.
No, the Old Testament was not just a preface: it was the fullness of God's Word, given to those of that time, so that they could have a share in the expectant waiting for the Lord, just as I have a share in it today.
Your understanding of history is astoundingly poor.
Did religious folks help? I'm going to say, on the contrary to your post, that religious folks help more than non-religious folks helped, for the following reasons: (1) their belief in the importance of a single truth. That concept was latched onto early by Christians, and it helped establish the procedures of logic, which admittedly were already developed by their time, but were not terribly popular. Outside that, what was important was what a person wanted -- which doesn't drive science at all. But in the concept of a single truth, is the necessity of arguing it out to find out what that truth is. (2) the economic and political stability they lent, allowing free time to study. Some of our greatest technological feats occurred in the modern age. But our greatest, most foundational scientific advances had to preceed them, and those occurred in the late dark ages. (3) If I look at the progress of evolutionary theory, the proponents are terrified to question it at all -- therefore it does not progress. It takes dissent to drive science forward, and right now, the only dissent comes from creationists. (4) Even the Inquisition mostly helped drive science forward as the only safe haven for free thought, insofar as the inquisition only challenged religious heresy, and allowed scientific progress as long as it stayed away from religion. If anything, it hurt the progress of theology, not science.
Would Isaac Newton have been a better physicist if he had been Richard Dawkins? No. (1) He was a natural philosopher. There was no physics back at that time. (2) He would have been a better publicist if he was Richard Dawkins. He would have been a better natural philosopher if he were Euler. But he still did pretty well as Isaac Newton, the creator of Calculus. (3) Your statement about Cotton Mather is not an appropriate comparison -- you might instead question if we would have Geology today, if the father of the science had instead been, for example, Blessed Nicholas Steno. Wait a minute -- a person who doesn't know history is liable to miss that. The father of geology WAS Blessed Nicholas Steno.
Galileo, Christopher Hitchens, Tyson There you have me. Everyone knows some history that another knows nothing about. I'll look it up sometime soon. But... it is the very discipline that allowed Gelileo to be reined in, that also allowed the science to go forward. You can't do science if you aren't disciplined. But it was a bitter blow for him. The era of the inquisition was an era of war between Muslim and Christian, and war has bad consequences. Thank God that such as Bernard of Clairveaux -- who had preached a crusade -- roundly denounced the crusade when he saw what it had become, before they left. But people err, sometimes badly.
Augustine. Wrong era. To be in the right era, you'd have to use the phrase "thrown into the coliseum", or even "crucified", "torn apart limb from limb", or such. Not that burning didn't happen back then, but that really wasn't typical until the era of the Inquisition. And yes, that was a valid fear for people of his era. Sometime, read the story of Georgius the Aryan and the fall of Mithraism. Again, I have no idea who is Daniel Dennett.
Finally, I might note that -- yes -- there have been significant contributions to science from Muslim and Hindu culture. However, they have been far fewer than from Christian culture. And no, that isn't just western-centric ideation, held because the west was militarily dominant. Rather, the west was militarily dominant, because the technology was better, which in turn was because the science was better.
I wonder why that is, that in Christian Europe science progressed faster? Do you?
Maybe it's because science never really got a fair start, except for Christianity.
It's not as bad as you think, but the paper does discuss that towards the end. And yes, the author did use it elsewhere to show that the trojan asteroids cycled around their -- well, I'd actually call it their lagrangian spots on Jupiter's orbit.
Biggie here. I work at a concrete plant, and we sometimes need to check the weather loops. At our remote location, the only internet available is by way of AT&T through Verizon lines, so the latency is terrible. Maybe that's part of the problem, but when weather.com switched to running multiple ad loops, the weather loop page would reset and timeout -- then reload (starting with a whole new page of the ads) before we ever saw the first motion of the weather map.
We never got the content we came for!!!
So I don't go there any more. I go to a local TV station instead. I tried to notify weather.com, but they've isolated themselves very well from any feedback.
Not to mention, the Windows had significant Linux ripoff, as did the Apple OS X.
Oh, and MS Word 98 was a wordperfect ripoff, right down to. The file corruption bugs -- loopback errors, no end of file errors, complete system shutdown errors -- that they couldn't find for five years, and thererfore simply denied that they existed, and said, no, don't send us a copy to pick apart.
Yes, but not all problems are Np. For example, the Parker-sockaki has allready passed existence and uniqueness, but AFAIK, NP is still out there. it would be nice to know that it was NP, but right now it only might be.
But there are limitations of how good our understanding of the initial position/velocity vectors are, so yes, we are also limited on the value of the results.
Actua\ly, not always. Accuracy is often dependent on getting convergence at all (existance and uniqueness), and then on not getting an infinitely slow convergence (iirc, the mcLauren/Taylor solution to the ATAN function is an example.)
After that, you are limited in a very real way by computing power. Thus, any time you can eliminate whole swathes of calculation by refining your model -- or coming up with an exact solution -- it's always a big plus.
I don't think they did it that way, rathe, they are using the computer to help them predict repeating lissajous patterns (for want of a better term) on their transformed sphere-space.
That then relates back to a specific repeating orbit in 3-space.
This is rather interesting, in that it is quite similar (methinks) to the knot classification problem.
But looking at the lissajous figures, it doesn't really seem to me that there are fourteen new classes, unless the lagrange solutions -- which are all a single class -- were counted as five.
But it's no less impressive, what they have done. They have started to transform from physicists to mathematicians.
Let's see, I work with prestressed concrete. At various times I may google -- dayton Superior inserts; the density of A36 steel, the DOT specs for galvanizing plate, the dimensions of a particular bulb-tee section, the formula for concrete elasticity based on ultimate strength, the standard construction details for an OK Corrall style barrier wall, or a jersey barrier or an Oregon thrie insert barrier attachment system...
Google is often the quickest way to an answer.
But I do agree with the general gist that the 200 emails are a sign of bad work habits, and possibly bad organizational skills.
I would strongly advise against the chemical path. Couldn't it simply be that he has bad organization skills? The 200 unread emails are a sign. My prescription, for first-level intervention would be:
1] A daily to-do list posted on the wall, with priorities assigned by number. Cross out items that are finished, add items that you need to.
2] better use of mail folders. One should be "personal", another "useless". I keep folders named "corporate" for stuff about production meetings, a couple for specific reports I have to file, twenty or so according to the jobs I have to do, with shipping dates on the name, and one called archive that gets all the finished jobs.
3] A calendar on your phone, with alarms for important stuff
4] use your smart phone for quick google lookups.
5] since I already have a notebook I plug an auxillary monitor into the computer and use both screens. You'd be surprised how having the priority task always in front of me helps keep me on task. I'd suggest the same for anyone with attention issues.
North michigan, north minnesota. Lake superior. Oh, and great lakes tectonic zone.
PS:I was born in Wisconsin, you insensitive clods! (I really was, and I have good memories of the years I was there, at the university of Wisconsin housing for grad students with children. It was cold, and we loved it.)
Me being a pessimist, I figure it could be real, and could be quite likely to pass.
It should put the nail it the coffin of those annoying inventors applying for patents, and keep the patents where they should be, in the hands of the overlords.
If this law is tailored to the job, not only will you have to be able to afford to go round after round of appeal, but if you lose on any of them, you face instant financial ruin. So then if the ones you sue don't come to terms, then your goose is cooked before you begin.
Not that the intent of Patent law wasn't to do as the constitution states... but any time you have a law that goes against natural law [and for someone to own another person's thoughts, methods, or skills does go against natural law], it's going to wreak destruction.
I thought Lemuria was far more recent, and more to the east. Atlantis, on the other hand, seems to fit pretty well with the google maps find, especially when you consider that the original Atlantis had a moat within a moat within a moat, all carved out of mountains, and --- looking at the same location in Yahoo maps -- you see that very feature just to the west.
Now, this one is more interesting, in that it might also imply that we could find major parts of the old continent in the Himilayan mountains, all crumpled up. Apparently, it got buried in the breakup of Pangaea, but it predates it by far.
As far as I can tell, a lot of the stuff on the website you mentioned are nonissues, due to a basic lack of understanding. To address item --345, was it?--I just googled passover week timeline, and came up with this,
which basically matches my understanding: the Jewish day doesn't match our day from 12-12, but rather runs from sundown to sundown. Ritual impurity also lasted the whole day. So the leadership wanted to celebrate the full passover, staying clean the whole week, lest 1] they not be able to lead, a horror for the wicked 2] they have to delay their celebration of the passover until the 50th day, pentecaust.
That, according to their law in Leviticus/Numbers/Deuteronomy.
You might question whether they would go to that extent on little issues, but pharisees were purists by profession.
Slashdot Mirror
No, no, no. It's the wallyworld cashier who is funny -- I just described it to you.
That'll be $10--pay at the door. It wouldn't have been more than fifty cents, but I shouldn't have to explain the basics of humor to you. You're supposed to bring something to the table yourself, you know.
No, the tide is turning. But is my estimate that the spirit of restraint has been removed, theman of sin is revealing himself, and shortly thereafter those you term enlightened will perpetrate such unjustifiable attrocities that there will be no excuse, only the explanation will be, "I hated the Son of Man, and everything He stood for, and all who were His."
And that explanationwill be given, standing in front of Him, with Him as judge.
No joke, come to terms before the judge sits down.
Okay, I'm a bit of an engineer. Not a PE, but I have a degree. And I'm a great believer in the idea that if something doesn't ever happen, it is because it is prevented from happening. That is, I all the time hear people say "What this country needs to do is... " and my response is, "if you think that that is a solution, then what is the path from here to there?"
In the same way, science didn't progress except under Christianity. That is under atheistic cultures, pluritheistic cultures, animistic cultures, and so on. Under all of these, there were some developments. But the cultures self-destructed, and in the process also destroyed scientific progress profoundly.
That isn't just in Europe, or the Middle East, or Africa. It's also in the Americas.
To my way of thinking, there were great technological feats by the Olmecs, for example. But the civilization destroyed itself. There was another civilization based in central America, founded on beer. It extended its influence all the way up to Virginia -- but one day, they just shut down and self destructed. When the Europeans came, the Indians were still in the stone age. They didn't have to be -- but they were. They didn't have writing in North America. They could have -- there was basic writing in Central America -- but they didn't.
I contend that the astoundingly consistent "didn't" is evidence of "couldn't".
And what of it, if there were acts of God -- an asteroid strike in North America that destroyed the Clovis Point People, or another asteroid strike that decapitated a mountain in Austria, and sent a plasma ball on Sodom -- to make the leader in progress, from Christianity?
Wouldn't that be evidence that the Christianity was the truth? After enough coincidences, I'd think a rational person would stop saying "coincidence", and start say "system."
So are you using a European sense of the word "know", or a Jewish sense of the word "know"? Because the first is to talk the talk, and the second is to walk the walk.
Which did you specialize in?
No, the old testament is not merely a preface. "All these things were written down, to be ensamples for you to follow."
Or again, the scribes and pharisees at the temple were impressed with Jesus' understanding of scripture, even as a boy.
Understand, then, that all of the New Testament is encapsulated as a seed in the old testament. Do you want to see the story of a soul's salvation, within the Christian Church? Read the Apocalypse of Isaiah (Is 23-27), as a parable, with the human heart being the earth, and remembering -- when you come to "Moab" as a name, that "Moab" -- from Genesis -- means "the Son of the Father". The story will go from the dryness that everyone is condemned to, to their finding help from God in their dryness, to entering the Church, receiving communion and the forgiveness/life that comes with it, to reading the Word of God to learn wisdom, to the birth of the Holy Spirit in their heart, to their being the defended garden of God, to their deliverance at the Great Trump.
Or again, the entire passion is encapsulated in the celebration of the Passover. That third cup of passover, drunk right before they sing the psalm, the "Great Hallel", was the "Cup of Blessing" -- which we in turn call the communion cup. The fourth cup -- the one Christ asked to be taken away -- he drank on the cross: it is the "Cup of Salvation", as in "How can I make a return to the Lord for all the good he has done for me? The Cup of Salvation I will take up, and I will call upon the Lord." Thus, at 33 Christ celebrated the passover, fulfilling all the roles: He was the chief celebrant, the priest, the sacrificial lamb, and so on. But it is already in seed form, in the Old Testament.
No, the Old Testament was not just a preface: it was the fullness of God's Word, given to those of that time, so that they could have a share in the expectant waiting for the Lord, just as I have a share in it today.
Your understanding of history is astoundingly poor.
Did religious folks help? I'm going to say, on the contrary to your post, that religious folks help more than non-religious folks helped, for the following reasons: (1) their belief in the importance of a single truth. That concept was latched onto early by Christians, and it helped establish the procedures of logic, which admittedly were already developed by their time, but were not terribly popular. Outside that, what was important was what a person wanted -- which doesn't drive science at all. But in the concept of a single truth, is the necessity of arguing it out to find out what that truth is. (2) the economic and political stability they lent, allowing free time to study. Some of our greatest technological feats occurred in the modern age. But our greatest, most foundational scientific advances had to preceed them, and those occurred in the late dark ages. (3) If I look at the progress of evolutionary theory, the proponents are terrified to question it at all -- therefore it does not progress. It takes dissent to drive science forward, and right now, the only dissent comes from creationists. (4) Even the Inquisition mostly helped drive science forward as the only safe haven for free thought, insofar as the inquisition only challenged religious heresy, and allowed scientific progress as long as it stayed away from religion. If anything, it hurt the progress of theology, not science.
Would Isaac Newton have been a better physicist if he had been Richard Dawkins? No. (1) He was a natural philosopher. There was no physics back at that time. (2) He would have been a better publicist if he was Richard Dawkins. He would have been a better natural philosopher if he were Euler. But he still did pretty well as Isaac Newton, the creator of Calculus. (3) Your statement about Cotton Mather is not an appropriate comparison -- you might instead question if we would have Geology today, if the father of the science had instead been, for example, Blessed Nicholas Steno. Wait a minute -- a person who doesn't know history is liable to miss that. The father of geology WAS Blessed Nicholas Steno.
Galileo, Christopher Hitchens, Tyson There you have me. Everyone knows some history that another knows nothing about. I'll look it up sometime soon. But... it is the very discipline that allowed Gelileo to be reined in, that also allowed the science to go forward. You can't do science if you aren't disciplined. But it was a bitter blow for him. The era of the inquisition was an era of war between Muslim and Christian, and war has bad consequences. Thank God that such as Bernard of Clairveaux -- who had preached a crusade -- roundly denounced the crusade when he saw what it had become, before they left. But people err, sometimes badly.
Augustine. Wrong era. To be in the right era, you'd have to use the phrase "thrown into the coliseum", or even "crucified", "torn apart limb from limb", or such. Not that burning didn't happen back then, but that really wasn't typical until the era of the Inquisition. And yes, that was a valid fear for people of his era. Sometime, read the story of Georgius the Aryan and the fall of Mithraism. Again, I have no idea who is Daniel Dennett.
Finally, I might note that -- yes -- there have been significant contributions to science from Muslim and Hindu culture. However, they have been far fewer than from Christian culture. And no, that isn't just western-centric ideation, held because the west was militarily dominant. Rather, the west was militarily dominant, because the technology was better, which in turn was because the science was better.
I wonder why that is, that in Christian Europe science progressed faster?
Do you?
Maybe it's because science never really got a fair start, except for Christianity.
It's not as bad as you think, but the paper does discuss that towards the end. And yes, the author did use it elsewhere to show that the trojan asteroids cycled around their -- well, I'd actually call it their lagrangian spots on Jupiter's orbit.
Biggie here. I work at a concrete plant, and we sometimes need to check the weather loops. At our remote location, the only internet available is by way of AT&T through Verizon lines, so the latency is terrible. Maybe that's part of the problem, but when weather.com switched to running multiple ad loops, the weather loop page would reset and timeout -- then reload (starting with a whole new page of the ads) before we ever saw the first motion of the weather map.
We never got the content we came for!!!
So I don't go there any more. I go to a local TV station instead. I tried to notify weather.com, but they've isolated themselves very well from any feedback.
Not to mention, the Windows had significant Linux ripoff, as did the Apple OS X.
Oh, and MS Word 98 was a wordperfect ripoff, right down to. The file corruption bugs -- loopback errors, no end of file errors, complete system shutdown errors -- that they couldn't find for five years, and thererfore simply denied that they existed, and said, no, don't send us a copy to pick apart.
Yes, but not all problems are Np. For example, the Parker-sockaki has allready passed existence and uniqueness, but AFAIK, NP is still out there. it would be nice to know that it was NP, but right now it only might be.
We do have analytical solutions to the orbital problem,look up the parker sochacki solution to the picard iteration.
http://csma31.csm.jmu.edu/physics/rudmin/parkersochacki.htm
But there are limitations of how good our understanding of the initial position/velocity vectors are, so yes, we are also limited on the value of the results.
Actua\ly, not always. Accuracy is often dependent on getting convergence at all (existance and uniqueness), and then on not getting an infinitely slow convergence (iirc, the mcLauren/Taylor solution to the ATAN function is an example.)
After that, you are limited in a very real way by computing power. Thus, any time you can eliminate whole swathes of calculation by refining your model -- or coming up with an exact solution -- it's always a big plus.
I don't think they did it that way, rathe, they are using the computer to help them predict repeating lissajous patterns (for want of a better term) on their transformed sphere-space.
That then relates back to a specific repeating orbit in 3-space.
This is rather interesting, in that it is quite similar (methinks) to the knot classification problem.
But looking at the lissajous figures, it doesn't really seem to me that there are fourteen new classes, unless the lagrange solutions -- which are all a single class -- were counted as five.
But it's no less impressive, what they have done. They have started to transform from physicists to mathematicians.
In fine slashdot fashion, you didn't read the article.
No, there was no accelerant. Tests disproved accelerant.
And yes, standard Texas procedure proved an innocent man guilty.
Let's see, I work with prestressed concrete. At various times I may google -- dayton Superior inserts; the density of A36 steel, the DOT specs for galvanizing plate, the dimensions of a particular bulb-tee section, the formula for concrete elasticity based on ultimate strength, the standard construction details for an OK Corrall style barrier wall, or a jersey barrier or an Oregon thrie insert barrier attachment system...
Google is often the quickest way to an answer.
But I do agree with the general gist that the 200 emails are a sign of bad work habits, and possibly bad organizational skills.
I would strongly advise against the chemical path. Couldn't it simply be that he has bad organization skills? The 200 unread emails are a sign. My prescription, for first-level intervention would be:
1] A daily to-do list posted on the wall, with priorities assigned by number. Cross out items that are finished, add items that you need to.
2] better use of mail folders. One should be "personal", another "useless". I keep folders named "corporate" for stuff about production meetings, a couple for specific reports I have to file, twenty or so according to the jobs I have to do, with shipping dates on the name, and one called archive that gets all the finished jobs.
3] A calendar on your phone, with alarms for important stuff
4] use your smart phone for quick google lookups.
5] since I already have a notebook I plug an auxillary monitor into the computer and use both screens. You'd be surprised how having the priority task always in front of me helps keep me on task. I'd suggest the same for anyone with attention issues.
North michigan, north minnesota. Lake superior. Oh, and great lakes tectonic zone.
PS:I was born in Wisconsin, you insensitive clods! (I really was, and I have good memories of the years I was there, at the university of Wisconsin housing for grad students with children. It was cold, and we loved it.)
Yeah,but you have michigan next door. And chicago to the south. And you're possibly not asgeologically stable as you think. No place is perfect.
And bushes.
Or maybe you can stretch carbon fiber across the unit, lay down ABS, stretch it back, lay down more ABS... change the angle 45 degrees...
But that's not what this company is doing.
Me being a pessimist, I figure it could be real, and could be quite likely to pass.
It should put the nail it the coffin of those annoying inventors applying for patents, and keep the patents where they should be, in the hands of the overlords.
If this law is tailored to the job, not only will you have to be able to afford to go round after round of appeal, but if you lose on any of them, you face instant financial ruin. So then if the ones you sue don't come to terms, then your goose is cooked before you begin.
Not that the intent of Patent law wasn't to do as the constitution states... but any time you have a law that goes against natural law [and for someone to own another person's thoughts, methods, or skills does go against natural law], it's going to wreak destruction.
Come, Lord Jesus!
Can? I don't think that word means what you think it means.
I thought Lemuria was far more recent, and more to the east. Atlantis, on the other hand, seems to fit pretty well with the google maps find, especially when you consider that the original Atlantis had a moat within a moat within a moat, all carved out of mountains, and --- looking at the same location in Yahoo maps -- you see that very feature just to the west.
Now, this one is more interesting, in that it might also imply that we could find major parts of the old continent in the Himilayan mountains, all crumpled up. Apparently, it got buried in the breakup of Pangaea, but it predates it by far.
Your mention of Carly, and the mess that we are generally in, proves my point and disproves yours exactly.
Carly COST many times what she was paid, EARNED nothing, and TOOK much. Any value that the company got was due to the workers, not her.
Who weren't paid.
She was paid handsomely.
Now multiply that by the number of similar cases across the nation.
As far as I can tell, a lot of the stuff on the website you mentioned are nonissues, due to a basic lack of understanding. To address item --345, was it?--I just googled passover week timeline, and came up with this,
http://hoshanarabbah.org/passover_week_timeline.html
which basically matches my understanding: the Jewish day doesn't match our day from 12-12, but rather runs from sundown to sundown. Ritual impurity also lasted the whole day. So the leadership wanted to celebrate the full passover, staying clean the whole week, lest 1] they not be able to lead, a horror for the wicked 2] they have to delay their celebration of the passover until the 50th day, pentecaust.
That, according to their law in Leviticus/Numbers/Deuteronomy.
You might question whether they would go to that extent on little issues, but pharisees were purists by profession.