Nice of you to provide the approved manner in which to use the words shallow/deep/narrow/broad.
Interesting thing about linguistics - words have more than one definition. Shallow is perfectly fine word to describe an education lacking in many elements.
This, by the way, from my wife who holds two -- count 'em, two -- Masters in communications. You're an engineer, she's a linguist. You tell me who understands words better.
"Just as there are only so many combinations of words available to demonstrate an understanding of the topic, there are only so many combinations of words available that you can use to teach the topic."
Oh, please. There are near limitless ways to combine words into ideas.
Nope. The one on Discovery wasn't a huge, gently sloping mound, it used the limestone to create a mortar and wound around the pyramid. They even duplicated the mixture and had men haul a rock up it.
"Truth and fact are two seperate ideas. They can very well be mutually exclusive."
truth, n., pl. truths.
1. the true or actual state of a matter: He tried to find out the truth.
2. conformity with fact or reality; verity: the truth of a statement.
3. a verified or indisputable fact, proposition, principle, or the like: mathematical truths.
4. the state or character of being true.
5. actuality or actual existence.
6. an obvious or accepted fact; truism; platitude.
7. honesty; integrity; truthfulness.
8. (often cap.) ideal or fundamental reality apart from and transcending perceived experience: the basic truths of life.
9. agreement with a standard or original.
10. accuracy, as of position or adjustment.
11. Archaic. fidelity or constancy.
12. in truth, in reality; in fact; actually: In truth, moral decay hastened the decline of the Roman Empire.
Can you point out the definition where truth and fact can be mutually exclusive?
Um, no. Macroevolution is a term used by creationists to be able to move goalposts. Found a new species? Just ask for examples at the genus level. Repeat as needed to sustain disbelief in evolution.
Evolution is the change in living organisms over time. Ta, da. The evidence is that this is a predominantly gradual process and has left a very well documented trail as to the manner in which it has occurred.
No. You're drawing a false equivalence, there. The music/video thing is entertainment, your work (presumably) is not. Any given facet of the performance is available for enjoyment and is part of the expected/desired total income. It would be more like your expecting to get paid for doing your daily work and for the weekly meetings you have to attend as well.
Why coulds are meaningless. I can construct a negative to every statement you make if I can indulge in why nots and coulds. Point is, that how we got there.
"As far as the upswelling of anti-science philisophy that is just part of the South here in the US."
Uh, Kansas and Illinois are not part of the South. For the rest of that paragraph tirade; school systems in the north are broken too, good ol' boy network in effect in north (just different boys), the north sports Nazis and reason and understanding are in equal measure to the south.
Kinda like asking one to disprove invisible flying unicorns, ain't it?
You're argument is based on simple stories not at all involving the US (just some citizens) and now you want him to do leg work to refute something you didn't even provide evidence for (the gov being behind your claims)?
You made the first claim, you have to come up with the justification. You've failed so far.
Ah. Then you actually refute his statement that the US (ie: the gov) funds said thing. Were we to agree that any individual or group not representing the country body doing some thing then means that the country body is doing that thing, we would then lump GB right in there with the US. They have their own fundies, their own science issues, etc, etc.
Apparently, copyright is ok for them to declare (and sure's hell would prosecute infringement on), but because they serve the geek communitiy, they can infringe indescriminately? Bullshit.
I have personally witnessed the sorry end to a scene where a seven year old boy was pounding a kitten to death with a wrench. Please describe in terms of "They really can't do stuff wrong".
Anyone who has raised kids or lived around them knows your view is naive at best, but plain wrong, period.
You mean where SCO defended the hell out of themselves, then lost? That case? Perhaps you're suggesting people shouldn't be allowed to mount as furious a defense as they can?
As has already been pointed out, they're not suing the child. But, that sounds bad, right?
What you said makes no sense. Dinosaurs and mammals share an extremely ancient ancestor. There is no branch that sprouted burrowing dinosaurs/mammals.
Your recollection is faulty. I'd say the Asian gliding lizard, komodo dragon and other tropical reptiles that never see fall, much less winter, do not hibernate. Estivate? Another story.
Slashdot Mirror
Nice of you to provide the approved manner in which to use the words shallow/deep/narrow/broad.
Interesting thing about linguistics - words have more than one definition. Shallow is perfectly fine word to describe an education lacking in many elements.
This, by the way, from my wife who holds two -- count 'em, two -- Masters in communications. You're an engineer, she's a linguist. You tell me who understands words better.
"Just as there are only so many combinations of words available to demonstrate an understanding of the topic, there are only so many combinations of words available that you can use to teach the topic."
Oh, please. There are near limitless ways to combine words into ideas.
Wow. So much of what you said speaks to the obvious fact that you don't know dick about either writing or what plagerization really is.
"But say it WAS an idea. Why can't he write about it?"
He can, but if he's substantially taking the structure of someone else, he should cite. What's with the loath to cite thing? Ego?
Nope. The one on Discovery wasn't a huge, gently sloping mound, it used the limestone to create a mortar and wound around the pyramid. They even duplicated the mixture and had men haul a rock up it.
"Truth and fact are two seperate ideas. They can very well be mutually exclusive."
truth, n., pl. truths.
1. the true or actual state of a matter: He tried to find out the truth.
2. conformity with fact or reality; verity: the truth of a statement.
3. a verified or indisputable fact, proposition, principle, or the like: mathematical truths.
4. the state or character of being true.
5. actuality or actual existence.
6. an obvious or accepted fact; truism; platitude.
7. honesty; integrity; truthfulness.
8. (often cap.) ideal or fundamental reality apart from and transcending perceived experience: the basic truths of life.
9. agreement with a standard or original.
10. accuracy, as of position or adjustment.
11. Archaic. fidelity or constancy.
12. in truth, in reality; in fact; actually: In truth, moral decay hastened the decline of the Roman Empire.
Can you point out the definition where truth and fact can be mutually exclusive?
Um, no. Macroevolution is a term used by creationists to be able to move goalposts. Found a new species? Just ask for examples at the genus level. Repeat as needed to sustain disbelief in evolution.
Evolution is the change in living organisms over time. Ta, da. The evidence is that this is a predominantly gradual process and has left a very well documented trail as to the manner in which it has occurred.
No. You're drawing a false equivalence, there. The music/video thing is entertainment, your work (presumably) is not. Any given facet of the performance is available for enjoyment and is part of the expected/desired total income. It would be more like your expecting to get paid for doing your daily work and for the weekly meetings you have to attend as well.
Why coulds are meaningless. I can construct a negative to every statement you make if I can indulge in why nots and coulds. Point is, that how we got there.
"I don't need to cite references."
That is religious belief.
"As far as the upswelling of anti-science philisophy that is just part of the South here in the US."
Uh, Kansas and Illinois are not part of the South. For the rest of that paragraph tirade; school systems in the north are broken too, good ol' boy network in effect in north (just different boys), the north sports Nazis and reason and understanding are in equal measure to the south.
Kinda like asking one to disprove invisible flying unicorns, ain't it?
You're argument is based on simple stories not at all involving the US (just some citizens) and now you want him to do leg work to refute something you didn't even provide evidence for (the gov being behind your claims)?
You made the first claim, you have to come up with the justification. You've failed so far.
Ah. Then you actually refute his statement that the US (ie: the gov) funds said thing. Were we to agree that any individual or group not representing the country body doing some thing then means that the country body is doing that thing, we would then lump GB right in there with the US. They have their own fundies, their own science issues, etc, etc.
So, you propose that because we are humans, somehow we should ignore the tons (literally) of evolutionary evidence concerning our origins? Nope.
Evolution is a theory of science, not a parlor talk theory. There is no faith in evolution, only vast reams of empirical data supporting it.
"We have to be vigilant almost to the point of parania in protecting our freedom."
By the way, that includes noncitizens who would brung our government and society down, you now.
"...only conspiracy to abduct and murder people."
Yeah, that's so unterroristic, ain't it?
Yeah, because of Disney we should rip off any small artist, writer, composer, etc. Nice outlook there. Got a good rational for ripping.... not.
You're naive, shallow or disingenuous. Go to Google's and YouTube's home pages. Scroll down to the bottom. What do you see?
"©2007 Google"
"Copyright © 2007 YouTube, Inc."
Apparently, copyright is ok for them to declare (and sure's hell would prosecute infringement on), but because they serve the geek communitiy, they can infringe indescriminately? Bullshit.
I have personally witnessed the sorry end to a scene where a seven year old boy was pounding a kitten to death with a wrench. Please describe in terms of "They really can't do stuff wrong".
Anyone who has raised kids or lived around them knows your view is naive at best, but plain wrong, period.
I agree with your last sentence.
"Remember SCO v IBM?"
You mean where SCO defended the hell out of themselves, then lost? That case? Perhaps you're suggesting people shouldn't be allowed to mount as furious a defense as they can?
As has already been pointed out, they're not suing the child. But, that sounds bad, right?
"what is it with all these death penalty cases the rest of the world thinks."
It's a canard and one that sounds horrifying. Anything to beat up on the US.
What you said makes no sense. Dinosaurs and mammals share an extremely ancient ancestor. There is no branch that sprouted burrowing dinosaurs/mammals.
Your recollection is faulty. I'd say the Asian gliding lizard, komodo dragon and other tropical reptiles that never see fall, much less winter, do not hibernate. Estivate? Another story.
And, just what IQ would you assign to someone who believes that show is not rigged and the 'contestants' don't really know the answers?
Nope. They still think that way.