So, where's your citation? You say the OP is wrong and ask for a citition, but don't provide one yourself? Not saying you're wrong... but it's kind arrogent for you to assume the OP should believe you when you've offered just as much evidence for your claim.
I've also noticed a lot of misdiagnoses going on with autistics
Interesting... you said you've done research? Are you a doctor? Or a person with the condition that's done a lot of research? The former qualifies your statement about misdiagnoses. The latter means your opinion matters as much as mine does.
Well, except that here in the US radio stations are allowed to play music royalty free. The arguement is that the stations are basically advertising the songs played by playing them. The US Supreme Court agreed.
What baffles me is that online radio used the same argument and lost. Hmm.
Well, if it killed instantly, most that have it would die off pretty quick, leaving no way for anyone else to get the virus. A virus that kills too quickly dooms itself.
If we've been eating apples for so long and everyone does it all the time it would be hard to notice any negative long term effects from it. Really apples are a bad example but look at how red meat is portrayed nowadays, maybe apples are next
Wait... so we might not know of problems due to eating apples because we've been eating them so long, yet we CAN find problems with red meat, even though we've eaten that just as long? Also, the "red meat" in question seems mainly to be cows. There's other read meat; bisson, ostrich, which have been shown to be exteremly good for you. Of course the tie in is that most bisson and ostrich are raised organically and fed whole grains, unlike how the typical cow meat is processed (and that most people eat, and what the study likely focused on). I wish I could see that recent study, because I'm really curious to see if they studied organic beef vs. non-organic, and the other red meats I've mentioned.
or something else (theres people who think wheat and milk are bad for you due to the above average stickiness of the protein in them causing it to coat your GI tract and stop absorption of vitamins and such)
Huh? Whey protient absorbs very quickly, which is why it's a favor for bodybuilders. Casien digests more slowly.. but it's still absorbed and thus why bodybuilders take some before going to bed. Please, I know bodybuilders aren't necessarly the picture of health... but before you go blaming milk protiens, I suggest you rule out steriods and other drugs. Anyway... wheat also absords.. the parts that don't are insoluble fiber, which you REQUIRE. Research shows wheat bread is what you ALWAYS should be eating, over white, because white turns to sugar almost immediately and spikes blood sugar. Yes, I did just complete my personal trainer course (and passed), so I do know a little more than the average person on metabolism.
I haven't heard anyone reputable saying milk and wheat products coat your intestines and prevent absorbition of anything.. do you have ANY studies? Or is it some gluten-free wackjob?
Many of the "chemicals" added to foods are also found in other foods you eat (I gave sodium benzoate as an example, look it up). The thing is that were now consuming it in different amounts in along with different other chemicals that are present naturally in all the foods we eat. For the most part noone knows the effect of this and theres no way to do a real cost-benefit analysis on it.
Right... and there's a difference between naturally occuring chemicals and natrual ones. In other words, the manufactored one isn't quite the same as the original. Take sugar for example. After processing, there's no vitamins or minerals left.. just the pure sugar. Natural sugar is actually not as bad for you as the processed one.
I mean fine stick to the tried and true diet, but its going take more work and resources to make that happen. Diet isnt the only thing important to your health.
WTF are you talking about? More work? I shop at the grocey store just like everyone else. I don't buy TV dinners and crap... is that what you mean by "more work?" Seriously, if your health is so unimportant you can't be bothered to cook your own food, I really don't feel for you when you drop dead.
As far as diet goes... proper diet is the foundation of good health. You CANNOT be healthy and have a crap diet. The old CS says applies to your body "garbage in, garbage out." Since I've cleaned up my diet and began exercising, I've had a HUGE improvement in quality of life. I'm full of energy, happier, no more spikes and crashes, and I feel better now at 30 than I did at 24. I tried exercise and no diet changes (lots of fast food, soda, sugar, white flour products).. it doesn't work. Nor does it work for ANYONE at my gym trying to get healthier.
Go ask your doctor about your opinion on diet and see if he agrees.
All that said I like the idea of organic foods but just wanted to point out that its more compli
Those roads generally aren't (in my experience) located in areas with a high volume of pedestrian traffic.
And my experience says those roads certainly can have high volumes of pedestrian traffic. There's a signal for peds which indicates when THEY may safely cross. What does the speed limit have to do with ped crossings?
Do you live in my fucking town or are you just making assumptions about our roadways?
I'll take that as "No, I'm not a civil engineer." Of course I'm arguing from a view point were state after state has the same findings, and all states must at least adhere to Federal roadway guidelines. Of course part of my argument is also a study that says they don't. Said study found that 85% of ALL roads have limits set below what an engineering study would dictate. So yes, I'm making assumptions, but grounded very much in reality. Unless you have something to show me the road which you're talking about just happens to be correct (of which, there's only a 15% chance), then I suggest you shut it.
A 30mph speed limit is perfectly appropriate for a roadway in an area with lots of businesses/foot traffic/people making sudden stops/turns/etc/etc/etc.
What are your credentials to make that statement? If you're a civil engineer and did a study on the road in question, please let me know. It would add some credibility, provided you can show me the study.
See, until you show me a study that says you're right, or you're a civil engineer, I don't really give a flying fuck what you believe is "perfectly appropriate for a roadway in an area with lots of businesses/foot traffic/people making sudden stops/turns/etc/etc/etc."
Who said I was talking about one intersection? It's a common problem around these parts, something you would actually know if weren't some random internet jackass making assumptions about an area where you don't live. Friends of mine from out of town have even observed it -- buddy of mine who moved here couldn't figure out why people wait a few seconds before going when the light turns green until he saw how many people run red lights.
Fine... show me studies, accident reports, etc. I really don't give a flying fuck what your opinion is. If you think there's a problem, show me. Otherwise, I'm going to stick by my assertions that 1) you're confirmation bias is greatly overexaggerating the problem and 2) the problem is likely due to traffic engineering study findings not being implemented, speed limit set incorrectly and all. I don't care what you're anecdotes tell you.
Citation needed. You are just great at putting words into my mouth aren't you? A three second claim that I don't recall (and can't find) making and now this.
My mistake, I misunderstood. Regardless, just because you believe there's a problem doesn't mean it's so. Also, you have demonstrated that the cause of the problem isn't local politians screwing with traffic light timings and / or speed limits for whatever reason.
Pot, kettle, black?
I'm willing to change my mind if you can give me ANYTHING that backs your position up. As it is, you haven't even indicated what state you're in. So yes... until I see much more detail from you, I'm not going to budge. But you didn't even bother looking for anything compelling, did you?
Huh... how very irresponsible of people to get cancer, right? Oh, you didn't see the number one cause of huge debt is healthcare? Of course looking at what people eat, maybe it is their irresponbility for eating garbage and getting fat (guess which kind of cell is more likely to become maligant?).
I ran it, and there's a lot of options. Of course the defaults are more of a quick test, but you can set it to be pretty thorough. The problem is that the really intesive tests would likely take hours, maybe days depending on how much ram you have.
For those that say memtest didn't find the problem... what settings did you use?
Well, I think that's the point of organic food. People have been eating apples off of trees for thousands of years and we haven't seen any negative side effects. So given a choice... would you rather the apple off the tree, or the apple off the tree coated with chemicals that have only been around for a hundred years or so?
Yet "Organic food" has a different, and legal, meaning. Amazing that isn't it? So are you going to claim to me now that since gasoline has carbon, it's organic, and therefore safe to drink with my pizza? Organic food has to met some certain strict standards. Here's the origin of the word organic as it relates to organic food: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organic_food#Meaning_and_origin_of_the_term
Also, there's a difference between "natural" almond flavor and "organic." There's virtually no regulation on what can be labeled natural. Also, where's your source? All the natural almond flavors I found are made with almond oils.
Of course, eating too many bananas can kill you too... so would we be better off with artificial banana flavoring? Please.
Your experience doesn't count though, because from state to state, most US traffic laws are the same or very similar. So out of staters tend to use experience from similar intersections back home.
Um, that law doesn't show anythign to my point... which was that you entered the intersection WHILE TRAFFIC WAS moving, but it stopped without there being adequate room for your car. Which by the way, according to the exact wording you've posted here, is NOT against the law.
I dunno... banning cameras outright gives them one less way to steal money from you.. I don't see a problem with that. I mean, whats to stop them from changing the light back a few years later, when people have forgotten? I'd rather just remove that temptation all together.
perhaps there's a ped light that is green while your light is red? That's about the only time i've seen something like this. Or maybe it's to allow traffic on the road you'd like to turn get further away from your intersection, to prevent a backup.
I'd been driving 15 years now, without a single at fault accident.
It is obvious when this is the case when traffic is backed up.
I'm asserting it's not. Normal flow can be interrupted for a variety of reasons, and you can't necessarly see too far beyond the intersection sometimes. I've had a accident occur just as I entered the intersection, and all traffic in front of me stopped. It happens, and sometimes you just can't expect it.
The solution is to allow cameras to exist, but they must be administered by the government not a separate profit-making company.
You mean like speed limits are enforced? Sorry... the government will do the same thing to make profit for themselves. In every resession, enforcement of speed limits is stepped up. There was just a study recently showing the relationship.
Also... why is fixing the yellow light time not an option? Especially when it's shown to reduce both t-bone and rear end collections, whereas cameras trade tbones for rear enders.
Well, surely then its possible someone gets stuck because they don't expect the traffic ahead of them to stop, right? Do you really keep an intersection length behind the car in front of you? Somehow I doubt it... and that's the only way to never get stuck.
Yes, that must be it. It couldn't be that people are selfish self-centered asshats -- I must be "exaggerating" the problem.
It's pretty likely, re-enforcement bias or whatever it's called. Of course if people WERE acting as you claimed, there'd be a huge number of accidents. It's like calling everyone on the road an idiot... yet even with heavy traffic there are relatively few idiots. So ya.
Yes, that must be it. It couldn't be that people are selfish self-centered asshats -- I must be "exaggerating" the problem.
WTF kind of stupid statement is that? There are plenty of roads in towns and cities that are 45MPH. Just because a road is "in-town" doesn't mean that 30 is the highest limit, period. As I said, the limit should be what would cover the 85th percentile.
I don't have a problem with that concept out on the freeway or in the country. I do have a problem when people run perfectly adjusted traffic lights because they know it isn't enforced and they think getting to their destination is more important than not t-boning the guy who has a green light on the other side.
Oh shut up, are a fucking civil engineer? Did you do a traffic study? Did you even find a properly done study for the road in question? What an arrogant ass... talk about self-centered. YOU DON'T KNOW THE SPEED LIMIT IS CORRECT, AND THE LIGHT IS ADJUSTED CORRECTLY.
Why is that we have a four or five second yellow right, followed by a two second delay before the other side turns green and I still see at least one asshole plow through the intersection when I have a green light almost every day I venture out onto the roadway? If you don't think this is a problem in certain areas you are sticking your head in the sand.
Funny, earlier you told me the yellow light time for this intersection was three seconds. Now it's up to four or five? Like I said, it's prefectly reasonable to think that something is wrong with the speed limit and / or yellow light time. Especially since you say the problem is this one particular intersection... so I assume this problem doesn't exist with other intersections.
Do me a favor; find the engineering studies and corolate that to how the intersection is actually setup. Also, I'd like to see some accident statistics for the intersection on question.
You think there's a problem, fine. Let's find out for sure... don't worry, I don't expect you to actually do this. You see what you want to see, and no one will tell you're wrong.
Amazing how that works. If you are planning on running an operating system you CHECK for compatibility before you buy it. What an amazing concept. Or you could just buy a preloaded system and have zero problems.
With Windows though, you pretty much don't need to check. Almost everything supports it. Your options for buying preloaded are also greatly increased. Of course the point here is that you can't just take Linux and throw it on just about anything, and expect it to work. Windows has higher success in that area.
And why would anyway want to run an OS that doesn't run all the applications they want it to?
And sorry, Linux isn't ready for mass adoption until any joe blow can buy a printer at best buy and have it work. My exerience with printing in linux... well I've yet to own a compatiable printer. I have a printer now which MIGHT work, it's a networked laser printer... but I don't really have any desire to go back to linux.
I'm not sure what you're getting at by look and feel... my problem with linux on the desktop has always been hardware issues (usually printers, but other things as well) and usablity (lack of applications / Linux's own issues).
Slashdot Mirror
Great. A refenence to a book. I'll post back when I check it out at the library. If only there were some other way to cite sources online...
So, where's your citation? You say the OP is wrong and ask for a citition, but don't provide one yourself? Not saying you're wrong... but it's kind arrogent for you to assume the OP should believe you when you've offered just as much evidence for your claim.
Ya. God forbid you stop drinking soda.
I've also noticed a lot of misdiagnoses going on with autistics
Interesting... you said you've done research? Are you a doctor? Or a person with the condition that's done a lot of research? The former qualifies your statement about misdiagnoses. The latter means your opinion matters as much as mine does.
hmm... poor is most likely caused by stupidity. Which is what I would say about someone that smokes to the detriment of all other aspects of his life.
Hmm... I think you didn't get the memo..
Well, it's better than nothing.
Well, except that here in the US radio stations are allowed to play music royalty free. The arguement is that the stations are basically advertising the songs played by playing them. The US Supreme Court agreed.
What baffles me is that online radio used the same argument and lost. Hmm.
Huh? Haven't you see Obama's domestic policy? :-)
Well, if it killed instantly, most that have it would die off pretty quick, leaving no way for anyone else to get the virus. A virus that kills too quickly dooms itself.
If we've been eating apples for so long and everyone does it all the time it would be hard to notice any negative long term effects from it. Really apples are a bad example but look at how red meat is portrayed nowadays, maybe apples are next
Wait... so we might not know of problems due to eating apples because we've been eating them so long, yet we CAN find problems with red meat, even though we've eaten that just as long? Also, the "red meat" in question seems mainly to be cows. There's other read meat; bisson, ostrich, which have been shown to be exteremly good for you. Of course the tie in is that most bisson and ostrich are raised organically and fed whole grains, unlike how the typical cow meat is processed (and that most people eat, and what the study likely focused on). I wish I could see that recent study, because I'm really curious to see if they studied organic beef vs. non-organic, and the other red meats I've mentioned.
or something else (theres people who think wheat and milk are bad for you due to the above average stickiness of the protein in them causing it to coat your GI tract and stop absorption of vitamins and such)
Huh? Whey protient absorbs very quickly, which is why it's a favor for bodybuilders. Casien digests more slowly.. but it's still absorbed and thus why bodybuilders take some before going to bed. Please, I know bodybuilders aren't necessarly the picture of health... but before you go blaming milk protiens, I suggest you rule out steriods and other drugs. Anyway... wheat also absords.. the parts that don't are insoluble fiber, which you REQUIRE. Research shows wheat bread is what you ALWAYS should be eating, over white, because white turns to sugar almost immediately and spikes blood sugar. Yes, I did just complete my personal trainer course (and passed), so I do know a little more than the average person on metabolism.
I haven't heard anyone reputable saying milk and wheat products coat your intestines and prevent absorbition of anything.. do you have ANY studies? Or is it some gluten-free wackjob?
Many of the "chemicals" added to foods are also found in other foods you eat (I gave sodium benzoate as an example, look it up). The thing is that were now consuming it in different amounts in along with different other chemicals that are present naturally in all the foods we eat. For the most part noone knows the effect of this and theres no way to do a real cost-benefit analysis on it.
Right... and there's a difference between naturally occuring chemicals and natrual ones. In other words, the manufactored one isn't quite the same as the original. Take sugar for example. After processing, there's no vitamins or minerals left.. just the pure sugar. Natural sugar is actually not as bad for you as the processed one.
I mean fine stick to the tried and true diet, but its going take more work and resources to make that happen. Diet isnt the only thing important to your health.
WTF are you talking about? More work? I shop at the grocey store just like everyone else. I don't buy TV dinners and crap... is that what you mean by "more work?" Seriously, if your health is so unimportant you can't be bothered to cook your own food, I really don't feel for you when you drop dead.
As far as diet goes... proper diet is the foundation of good health. You CANNOT be healthy and have a crap diet. The old CS says applies to your body "garbage in, garbage out." Since I've cleaned up my diet and began exercising, I've had a HUGE improvement in quality of life. I'm full of energy, happier, no more spikes and crashes, and I feel better now at 30 than I did at 24. I tried exercise and no diet changes (lots of fast food, soda, sugar, white flour products).. it doesn't work. Nor does it work for ANYONE at my gym trying to get healthier.
Go ask your doctor about your opinion on diet and see if he agrees.
All that said I like the idea of organic foods but just wanted to point out that its more compli
Those roads generally aren't (in my experience) located in areas with a high volume of pedestrian traffic.
And my experience says those roads certainly can have high volumes of pedestrian traffic. There's a signal for peds which indicates when THEY may safely cross. What does the speed limit have to do with ped crossings?
Do you live in my fucking town or are you just making assumptions about our roadways?
I'll take that as "No, I'm not a civil engineer." Of course I'm arguing from a view point were state after state has the same findings, and all states must at least adhere to Federal roadway guidelines. Of course part of my argument is also a study that says they don't. Said study found that 85% of ALL roads have limits set below what an engineering study would dictate. So yes, I'm making assumptions, but grounded very much in reality. Unless you have something to show me the road which you're talking about just happens to be correct (of which, there's only a 15% chance), then I suggest you shut it.
A 30mph speed limit is perfectly appropriate for a roadway in an area with lots of businesses/foot traffic/people making sudden stops/turns/etc/etc/etc.
What are your credentials to make that statement? If you're a civil engineer and did a study on the road in question, please let me know. It would add some credibility, provided you can show me the study.
See, until you show me a study that says you're right, or you're a civil engineer, I don't really give a flying fuck what you believe is "perfectly appropriate for a roadway in an area with lots of businesses/foot traffic/people making sudden stops/turns/etc/etc/etc."
Who said I was talking about one intersection? It's a common problem around these parts, something you would actually know if weren't some random internet jackass making assumptions about an area where you don't live. Friends of mine from out of town have even observed it -- buddy of mine who moved here couldn't figure out why people wait a few seconds before going when the light turns green until he saw how many people run red lights.
Fine... show me studies, accident reports, etc. I really don't give a flying fuck what your opinion is. If you think there's a problem, show me. Otherwise, I'm going to stick by my assertions that 1) you're confirmation bias is greatly overexaggerating the problem and 2) the problem is likely due to traffic engineering study findings not being implemented, speed limit set incorrectly and all. I don't care what you're anecdotes tell you.
Citation needed. You are just great at putting words into my mouth aren't you? A three second claim that I don't recall (and can't find) making and now this.
My mistake, I misunderstood. Regardless, just because you believe there's a problem doesn't mean it's so. Also, you have demonstrated that the cause of the problem isn't local politians screwing with traffic light timings and / or speed limits for whatever reason.
Pot, kettle, black?
I'm willing to change my mind if you can give me ANYTHING that backs your position up. As it is, you haven't even indicated what state you're in. So yes... until I see much more detail from you, I'm not going to budge. But you didn't even bother looking for anything compelling, did you?
Huh... how very irresponsible of people to get cancer, right? Oh, you didn't see the number one cause of huge debt is healthcare? Of course looking at what people eat, maybe it is their irresponbility for eating garbage and getting fat (guess which kind of cell is more likely to become maligant?).
http://www.nih.gov/news/research_matters/november2006/11202006fat.htm
I ran it, and there's a lot of options. Of course the defaults are more of a quick test, but you can set it to be pretty thorough. The problem is that the really intesive tests would likely take hours, maybe days depending on how much ram you have.
For those that say memtest didn't find the problem... what settings did you use?
Well, I think that's the point of organic food. People have been eating apples off of trees for thousands of years and we haven't seen any negative side effects. So given a choice... would you rather the apple off the tree, or the apple off the tree coated with chemicals that have only been around for a hundred years or so?
Yet "Organic food" has a different, and legal, meaning. Amazing that isn't it? So are you going to claim to me now that since gasoline has carbon, it's organic, and therefore safe to drink with my pizza? Organic food has to met some certain strict standards. Here's the origin of the word organic as it relates to organic food: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organic_food#Meaning_and_origin_of_the_term
Also, there's a difference between "natural" almond flavor and "organic." There's virtually no regulation on what can be labeled natural. Also, where's your source? All the natural almond flavors I found are made with almond oils.
Of course, eating too many bananas can kill you too... so would we be better off with artificial banana flavoring? Please.
Your experience doesn't count though, because from state to state, most US traffic laws are the same or very similar. So out of staters tend to use experience from similar intersections back home.
Um, that law doesn't show anythign to my point... which was that you entered the intersection WHILE TRAFFIC WAS moving, but it stopped without there being adequate room for your car. Which by the way, according to the exact wording you've posted here, is NOT against the law.
I dunno... banning cameras outright gives them one less way to steal money from you.. I don't see a problem with that. I mean, whats to stop them from changing the light back a few years later, when people have forgotten? I'd rather just remove that temptation all together.
perhaps there's a ped light that is green while your light is red? That's about the only time i've seen something like this. Or maybe it's to allow traffic on the road you'd like to turn get further away from your intersection, to prevent a backup.
I'd been driving 15 years now, without a single at fault accident.
It is obvious when this is the case when traffic is backed up.
I'm asserting it's not. Normal flow can be interrupted for a variety of reasons, and you can't necessarly see too far beyond the intersection sometimes. I've had a accident occur just as I entered the intersection, and all traffic in front of me stopped. It happens, and sometimes you just can't expect it.
The solution is to allow cameras to exist, but they must be administered by the government not a separate profit-making company.
You mean like speed limits are enforced? Sorry... the government will do the same thing to make profit for themselves. In every resession, enforcement of speed limits is stepped up. There was just a study recently showing the relationship.
Also... why is fixing the yellow light time not an option? Especially when it's shown to reduce both t-bone and rear end collections, whereas cameras trade tbones for rear enders.
Well, surely then its possible someone gets stuck because they don't expect the traffic ahead of them to stop, right? Do you really keep an intersection length behind the car in front of you? Somehow I doubt it... and that's the only way to never get stuck.
Yes, that must be it. It couldn't be that people are selfish self-centered asshats -- I must be "exaggerating" the problem.
It's pretty likely, re-enforcement bias or whatever it's called. Of course if people WERE acting as you claimed, there'd be a huge number of accidents. It's like calling everyone on the road an idiot... yet even with heavy traffic there are relatively few idiots. So ya.
Yes, that must be it. It couldn't be that people are selfish self-centered asshats -- I must be "exaggerating" the problem.
WTF kind of stupid statement is that? There are plenty of roads in towns and cities that are 45MPH. Just because a road is "in-town" doesn't mean that 30 is the highest limit, period. As I said, the limit should be what would cover the 85th percentile.
I don't have a problem with that concept out on the freeway or in the country. I do have a problem when people run perfectly adjusted traffic lights because they know it isn't enforced and they think getting to their destination is more important than not t-boning the guy who has a green light on the other side.
Oh shut up, are a fucking civil engineer? Did you do a traffic study? Did you even find a properly done study for the road in question? What an arrogant ass... talk about self-centered. YOU DON'T KNOW THE SPEED LIMIT IS CORRECT, AND THE LIGHT IS ADJUSTED CORRECTLY.
Why is that we have a four or five second yellow right, followed by a two second delay before the other side turns green and I still see at least one asshole plow through the intersection when I have a green light almost every day I venture out onto the roadway? If you don't think this is a problem in certain areas you are sticking your head in the sand.
Funny, earlier you told me the yellow light time for this intersection was three seconds. Now it's up to four or five? Like I said, it's prefectly reasonable to think that something is wrong with the speed limit and / or yellow light time. Especially since you say the problem is this one particular intersection... so I assume this problem doesn't exist with other intersections.
Do me a favor; find the engineering studies and corolate that to how the intersection is actually setup. Also, I'd like to see some accident statistics for the intersection on question.
You think there's a problem, fine. Let's find out for sure... don't worry, I don't expect you to actually do this. You see what you want to see, and no one will tell you're wrong.
Amazing how that works. If you are planning on running an operating system you CHECK for compatibility before you buy it. What an amazing concept. Or you could just buy a preloaded system and have zero problems.
With Windows though, you pretty much don't need to check. Almost everything supports it. Your options for buying preloaded are also greatly increased. Of course the point here is that you can't just take Linux and throw it on just about anything, and expect it to work. Windows has higher success in that area.
And why would anyway want to run an OS that doesn't run all the applications they want it to?
And sorry, Linux isn't ready for mass adoption until any joe blow can buy a printer at best buy and have it work. My exerience with printing in linux... well I've yet to own a compatiable printer. I have a printer now which MIGHT work, it's a networked laser printer... but I don't really have any desire to go back to linux.
I'm not sure what you're getting at by look and feel... my problem with linux on the desktop has always been hardware issues (usually printers, but other things as well) and usablity (lack of applications / Linux's own issues).