Nelson was a post captain at 23.
John Paul Jones commanded his first fighting ship at 29.
Cochrane took a 32 gun frigate with a 16 gun sloop at the age of 26.
Steven Decatur fought the Barbary Pirates in a sloop at 24.
Edward Pellew was made post at 23. His brother Israel was made a commander at 32.
I could go through most of the list of captains at Trafalgar and do the same thing.
It used to be the case. They've been doing quite a lot more with genetic testing in recent years. For example, the Mephitidaes (skunks) used to be grouped in with Mustelidae (weasels and otters), but DNA evidence caused the family to be moved out. The Panda is now Ursa, when it used to be Procyonidae, though I'm not sure that was based on DNA.
WTF? A cow is order Artiodactyla, and a whale is order Cetacea. Their DNA would be miles apart. The only thing they have in common is that they are mammals. How did anyone ever think this could work? And a biologist at that? Again I say, WTF?
There's a movement in modern psychology that states all human actions are the results of humans attempting to avoid death. If the player dies but avoids death, is the player not in some way cheating death? And if this is the case, is not the player acting this out?
This probably has less to do with scary movies than the religious symbolism that tends to be in many horror movies. The Exorcist comes to mind, Fallen is another.
You're a fool if you think that God or anyone else can defend yourself or your liberties. The only time men are free is when their government is afraid of them. That's why the Founders were great, and men like you are sniveling cowards who depend on men like me for their freedom.
You're joking, right? When the Senate first met in New York, there was a vote on whether or not to have prayer in the Senate. It passed by one vote. In fact, John Adams said "the Government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion." The Founding Fathers knew, apparently much better than you, that when government interferes with religion, it does irreparable harm to both.
And your rights may come from God and his ordained ministers. I do not know about that. My rights do not come from any god. They come from my gun and my pen.
Most the religious folks (read Pilgrims) on the Mayflower were lunatics; real David Koresh Heaven's Gate don't drink the kool-aid types. They were kicked out of England for causing rebellion and went to Holland. Once there, they found their religion could not flourish under the auspices of a tolerant government - they felt they had to oppress others for salvation. So they left Holland, traveled back to England, rented a couple of boats, and traveled to the far side of the ocean to form a religious colony. During the first couple of years, most of them died. It was God's doing, the rest said. The colony managed to make it with support from the government that exiled them in the first place. They would later slaughter each other in the name of religion.
The Founding Fathers were one of the most secular groups that ever existed in the United States. In fact, Franklin in his youth debated the advantages of secularism with the thoroughly vile Cotton Mather of the previously mentioned Pilgrims. Individually, some of the Founding Fathers may have been religious. But collectively, they knew that religion is oppressive. They created the first truly secular country. This has been one of the key points that the US has grown on. There is a wise separation of Church and State.
But perhaps you doubt this. Don't listen to me, there are other resources available.
Statistically, I would be safer in any major European city than any major US city. Including the UK.
Let's take a look at a typical UK city, say, Manchester and compare it to a typical US city, say, New York, and a violent city, like Saint Louis. In Saint Louis, crime in 2006 was 14228.6 per one hundred thousand. In Greater Manchester, crime in 2005 was roughly 1110 per one hundred thousand, with a population around 2.55 million. (This information might very well be apples to oranges, but is police report to police report.) In New York, the number is 2,487.6 per hundred one thousand.
I'm having difficulty finding the exact US federal statistics for crime all over the US, but I imagine it's worse than in the UK. It's just safer there. And don't live in Saint Louis. Someone will kick your ass.
Esmie Tseng. She was a 15 year old girl who was physically, sexually, and emotionally abused by her immigrant parents. (Emotional abuse is BS in my opinion, except in this case. The crap they did to her was awful.) One day, when she was getting beaten by her mother, she grabbed a knife. Her mother took it away from her. Esmie grabbed another knife and stabbed her mother 5 times. She then ran to her bedroom. Esmie's mother called Esmie's father who was at work. He got home, spoke to Esmie's mother, called 911, and then Esmie's mother died. She had been afraid to call 911 because she might have been put in jail for abuse.
So what does Paul Morrison do? He throws the book at an abused 15 year old girl. At 16, she is placed in an adult prison. The 16 year old girl is forced to strip on a weekly basis in front of male guards. She's surrounded by women and transgender men who are in jail for trafficking drugs, violent crimes, prostitution, and other violent crimes. She is not allowed to take college courses. At 15, her life was over, all because she did not want to be abused any longer.
As you know, Paul Morrison is now AG. He used the misery of a little girl to catapult himself to statewide office.
This is typical. Lawyers go after the most vulnerable members of our society, trying to score the big win that will elevate them to next political office or paycheck. Children are targeted, thrown in jail for decades to 'make the streets safe'. Why is it the streets are safe in Europe, Australia, Canada, or Japan and not here? Why is there a need for vile men like Paul Morrison of Kansas to put 16 year old girls in jail for a decade because they defended themselves from beatings and sexual abuse?
Until we're willing to elect leaders to make a change, until we are willing to demand that the education system educate, until we vote with our pocketbooks and with our protest signs, this will continue. How long are we going to let the law abuse us? How long will our children be tossed in jail among adults to be murdered and sexually abused?
I have spent some time in Beijing, and there are some mean ass dogs there. OK - you're thinking I'm a pussy. Not true. So I have hung around with mean-ass Chessies, owned a pit bull, and dated a girl with Dobermans. These 'vicious' dog breeds have nothing on the little mutts in Beijing. Nothing. These under 14"s are absolutely bat-shit insane. They'll take a damn finger off because you'll be like, "hello little doggie, you are so cute, how are you?"
Then BAM, no more finger. You'll be looking at the bloody stump on your right hand going WTF? How could that little thing do that much damage that quickly? And the 14" dog will be walking away chewing on your pointer for the win.
Until the people of Beijing learn to actually train dogs, it's probably best this way.
Wikipedia has already hit a decline. Basically, it's too much of a pain-in-the-ass to work on the darn thing. There's tons of rules and regulations. Talk pages aren't fun. The articles are routinely turned into crack-pot crap in a misguided effort to be fair. There is too much emphasis on being factually correct and not enough on being timely. The get 'er done attitude that used to pervade is gone, replaced with a fear about lawsuits because some knucklehead or other is not actually dead yet.
Like an large organization, wikipedians who used to contribute have been replaced by web-bureaucrats. Like bureaucrats everywhere, efficiency and style is replaced by pointless efforts at standardization and supporting documents. Certainly, these are important, but they have reached the point where they are stifling ideas.
It's fine for me to say all this, but what's the solution? It's easy to condemn but hard to fix.
If Wikipedia wishes to fix all this, it must slash the number of those with administrator power. It should remove the focus on formulas and documentation. Let Wikipedia revert back to the "wild west" anything goes culture that first made it special. Wikipedia is not a reference, it's a starting point. Treating it like a genuine reference kills what makes it special.
And if it contains more pages about Simpsons episodes than social sciences, so what? It'll eventually work itself out like any open market. Jimbo and crew should just take their hands off, lean back, and see what happens.
Slashdot Mirror
Heinlein's Razor - Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.
If there is not proof that there were no ships there at the time, ships seems like the most likely explanation.
mod parent up
Kind of like Archimedes' death ray. What a way to go.
Nelson was a post captain at 23.
John Paul Jones commanded his first fighting ship at 29.
Cochrane took a 32 gun frigate with a 16 gun sloop at the age of 26.
Steven Decatur fought the Barbary Pirates in a sloop at 24.
Edward Pellew was made post at 23. His brother Israel was made a commander at 32.
I could go through most of the list of captains at Trafalgar and do the same thing.
It used to be the case. They've been doing quite a lot more with genetic testing in recent years. For example, the Mephitidaes (skunks) used to be grouped in with Mustelidae (weasels and otters), but DNA evidence caused the family to be moved out. The Panda is now Ursa, when it used to be Procyonidae, though I'm not sure that was based on DNA.
WTF? A cow is order Artiodactyla, and a whale is order Cetacea. Their DNA would be miles apart. The only thing they have in common is that they are mammals. How did anyone ever think this could work? And a biologist at that? Again I say, WTF?
A twenty year old court ruling doesn't mean a whole lot any more though. Particularly with the way Bush stacked the court.
Thanks. Never heard of Walter Payton making a hat trick.
There's a movement in modern psychology that states all human actions are the results of humans attempting to avoid death. If the player dies but avoids death, is the player not in some way cheating death? And if this is the case, is not the player acting this out?
This probably has less to do with scary movies than the religious symbolism that tends to be in many horror movies. The Exorcist comes to mind, Fallen is another.
How is this a troll?
You're a fool if you think that God or anyone else can defend yourself or your liberties. The only time men are free is when their government is afraid of them. That's why the Founders were great, and men like you are sniveling cowards who depend on men like me for their freedom.
You're joking, right? When the Senate first met in New York, there was a vote on whether or not to have prayer in the Senate. It passed by one vote. In fact, John Adams said "the Government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion." The Founding Fathers knew, apparently much better than you, that when government interferes with religion, it does irreparable harm to both.
And your rights may come from God and his ordained ministers. I do not know about that. My rights do not come from any god. They come from my gun and my pen.
Most the religious folks (read Pilgrims) on the Mayflower were lunatics; real David Koresh Heaven's Gate don't drink the kool-aid types. They were kicked out of England for causing rebellion and went to Holland. Once there, they found their religion could not flourish under the auspices of a tolerant government - they felt they had to oppress others for salvation. So they left Holland, traveled back to England, rented a couple of boats, and traveled to the far side of the ocean to form a religious colony. During the first couple of years, most of them died. It was God's doing, the rest said. The colony managed to make it with support from the government that exiled them in the first place. They would later slaughter each other in the name of religion.
The Founding Fathers were one of the most secular groups that ever existed in the United States. In fact, Franklin in his youth debated the advantages of secularism with the thoroughly vile Cotton Mather of the previously mentioned Pilgrims. Individually, some of the Founding Fathers may have been religious. But collectively, they knew that religion is oppressive. They created the first truly secular country. This has been one of the key points that the US has grown on. There is a wise separation of Church and State.
But perhaps you doubt this. Don't listen to me, there are other resources available.
MOD PARENT UP: Insightful
Statistically, I would be safer in any major European city than any major US city. Including the UK.
Let's take a look at a typical UK city, say, Manchester and compare it to a typical US city, say, New York, and a violent city, like Saint Louis. In Saint Louis, crime in 2006 was 14228.6 per one hundred thousand. In Greater Manchester, crime in 2005 was roughly 1110 per one hundred thousand, with a population around 2.55 million. (This information might very well be apples to oranges, but is police report to police report.) In New York, the number is 2,487.6 per hundred one thousand.
I'm having difficulty finding the exact US federal statistics for crime all over the US, but I imagine it's worse than in the UK. It's just safer there. And don't live in Saint Louis. Someone will kick your ass.
Esmie Tseng. She was a 15 year old girl who was physically, sexually, and emotionally abused by her immigrant parents. (Emotional abuse is BS in my opinion, except in this case. The crap they did to her was awful.) One day, when she was getting beaten by her mother, she grabbed a knife. Her mother took it away from her. Esmie grabbed another knife and stabbed her mother 5 times. She then ran to her bedroom. Esmie's mother called Esmie's father who was at work. He got home, spoke to Esmie's mother, called 911, and then Esmie's mother died. She had been afraid to call 911 because she might have been put in jail for abuse.
So what does Paul Morrison do? He throws the book at an abused 15 year old girl. At 16, she is placed in an adult prison. The 16 year old girl is forced to strip on a weekly basis in front of male guards. She's surrounded by women and transgender men who are in jail for trafficking drugs, violent crimes, prostitution, and other violent crimes. She is not allowed to take college courses. At 15, her life was over, all because she did not want to be abused any longer.
As you know, Paul Morrison is now AG. He used the misery of a little girl to catapult himself to statewide office.
This is typical. Lawyers go after the most vulnerable members of our society, trying to score the big win that will elevate them to next political office or paycheck. Children are targeted, thrown in jail for decades to 'make the streets safe'. Why is it the streets are safe in Europe, Australia, Canada, or Japan and not here? Why is there a need for vile men like Paul Morrison of Kansas to put 16 year old girls in jail for a decade because they defended themselves from beatings and sexual abuse?
Until we're willing to elect leaders to make a change, until we are willing to demand that the education system educate, until we vote with our pocketbooks and with our protest signs, this will continue. How long are we going to let the law abuse us? How long will our children be tossed in jail among adults to be murdered and sexually abused?
I would normally agree, but I noticed that entire cast of A Shot at Love with Tila Tequila managed not to be killed and eaten by packs of wild dogs.
Or hopefully Grace Park. Wow-wee.
I have spent some time in Beijing, and there are some mean ass dogs there. OK - you're thinking I'm a pussy. Not true. So I have hung around with mean-ass Chessies, owned a pit bull, and dated a girl with Dobermans. These 'vicious' dog breeds have nothing on the little mutts in Beijing. Nothing. These under 14"s are absolutely bat-shit insane. They'll take a damn finger off because you'll be like, "hello little doggie, you are so cute, how are you?"
Then BAM, no more finger. You'll be looking at the bloody stump on your right hand going WTF? How could that little thing do that much damage that quickly? And the 14" dog will be walking away chewing on your pointer for the win.
Until the people of Beijing learn to actually train dogs, it's probably best this way.
Or you can be the daughter of Asian immigrants in Kansas with no record and on the honor-roll, having defended yourself in a knife fight from a sexually abusive mother. And have the district attorney who used your case to catapult himself to state-wide office claim that sex abuse is a cultural issue.
How about we just require the White House to follow the same requirements as GLBA, SOX, BSA, FACT Act, and all the others?
OK. What the name mean? My Mandarin isn't great. "He is not a big fish?"
Wikipedia has already hit a decline. Basically, it's too much of a pain-in-the-ass to work on the darn thing. There's tons of rules and regulations. Talk pages aren't fun. The articles are routinely turned into crack-pot crap in a misguided effort to be fair. There is too much emphasis on being factually correct and not enough on being timely. The get 'er done attitude that used to pervade is gone, replaced with a fear about lawsuits because some knucklehead or other is not actually dead yet.
Like an large organization, wikipedians who used to contribute have been replaced by web-bureaucrats. Like bureaucrats everywhere, efficiency and style is replaced by pointless efforts at standardization and supporting documents. Certainly, these are important, but they have reached the point where they are stifling ideas.
It's fine for me to say all this, but what's the solution? It's easy to condemn but hard to fix.
If Wikipedia wishes to fix all this, it must slash the number of those with administrator power. It should remove the focus on formulas and documentation. Let Wikipedia revert back to the "wild west" anything goes culture that first made it special. Wikipedia is not a reference, it's a starting point. Treating it like a genuine reference kills what makes it special.
And if it contains more pages about Simpsons episodes than social sciences, so what? It'll eventually work itself out like any open market. Jimbo and crew should just take their hands off, lean back, and see what happens.