I guess that's true for a critical thinking course, as the subject matter is more on the many ways that logical arguments can be flawed rather than just on how they ought to be properly constructed. I admit that I was a tad hasty in my judgement, and Intelligent Design should prove an excellent example of several type of subtle flaws in argumentation.
Imagine your definition of sports cars (massless particles, thus no time) didn't include convertibles (time-based oscillation). For a car to be convertible, it has to be a luxury car (have mass), not a sports car. Then, you see a sports car drive by a few times, and one of the times the top is down. You have to wonder, is it not really a sports car (the way we think neutrinos work must change), or is your definition of sports cars broken (the way we think mass works must change)?
These aren't my quotes or omissions, these are from the article.
That said, it would seem that there are consistent themes regarding brutal slaughter of unbelievers throughout the text. I don't think that any more evidence should be needed than the many, many people who seem to devote their lives toward that end.
Some interpret as you have, that killing people during war is okay. Which is not an unreasonable view. Some seem to interpret that the war is not over until you're done with the killing. That seems to be the major issue.
Well, here's an interesting article on the subject... and here's some choice selections:
“Truly Allah loves those who fight in His cause in battle array, as if they were a solid cemented structure” (Koran 61:4)
“O ye who believe! Take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends: They are but friends to each other. And he amongst you that turns to them [for friendship] is of them [an infidel]. Verily Allah guideth not a people unjust” (Koran 5:51)
“When ye meet the unbelievers smite at their necks” (Koran 47:4)
I guess you're right. Those are clearly all sentence fragments. The rest of that last sentence will obviously be "smite at their necks... with explanatory pamphlets, so that they are at eye level and clearly readable!"
Also, the test is broken. You still receive a point for the lowest option, so the minimum score is 20%. This is why psych majors need to take more math.
I know, right. Surely, if they can ship bananas to New York from South America and they're still green, then they can ship this cacao husk stuff to Delaware.
They should have a bit torrent-like system for streams. Like, you just connect to the swarm and request a fairly recent image. Everyone keeps the past minute or so cached to send to new people in the swarm. Maybe a tiered system so that the people who have been connected longest are closest to the original stream.
Let's say I connect to Joe and Mary, who're connected to the original server. They send me frames two or three frames behind the server. Jack connects, and he's getting a bit lagged images too, right with me. Now Sally connects and she's behind me and Jack, so Me, Jack, Joe and Mary all send her images. It's like a pyramid scheme for streaming video.
Now Joe leaves. I've been around longer than Jack, so I move up in the tiers. I see a single frameskip, but now I'm connected directly to the source stream.
The real purpose here is to relieve some of the pressure from the initial server. Maybe they've got 100/100, and I connect with my 20/5. Well, 5 isn't much compared to 100, but I'm pulling less than 1. Let's call it 1. Now the available bandwidth for streaming is 105 and I'm only using 1. With all them other folks connected up, the server might be only holding half the load. And higher bandwidths could get tiering priority, like, if I have 100/100, well, I get directly connected to the server pretty quick so I can redistribute the stream faster.
Oh, that's right, video comes in streams, not images... well, okay, it's got some problems. But it seems like a good solution to a very, very common problem. Make things easier on Hulu and Youtube (cause we all know they need the help, right?) and such too. Maybe drastically reduce the barrier for entry into that field, at least.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm sorry to be the one to break this to you, but they don't actually issue the real geek cards to people who watch Voyager.
Because regenerative braking would be several orders of magnitude more complex and expensive to implement than a simple permanent magnet generator.
I'd vote for JFK's clone.
Drop the modem and implement it as a Skype plug in...
... it is time for us to start looking at new ways to pay journalists for their services.
It's called blogs. Look it up.
I always believed that the "shrimp" term was an ironic statement referring to an extremely large, or "Australian-sized," steak. Is this not correct?
More like a malamanteau.
"Thou shalt not do things I don't like"
I guess that's true for a critical thinking course, as the subject matter is more on the many ways that logical arguments can be flawed rather than just on how they ought to be properly constructed. I admit that I was a tad hasty in my judgement, and Intelligent Design should prove an excellent example of several type of subtle flaws in argumentation.
I really meant it more as a joke, though.
Not really. There's no need to include more than one or two simple examples of a complete lack of critical thinking in such a course.
Signs point to yes.
You could say they're acting wonky.
Imagine your definition of sports cars (massless particles, thus no time) didn't include convertibles (time-based oscillation). For a car to be convertible, it has to be a luxury car (have mass), not a sports car. Then, you see a sports car drive by a few times, and one of the times the top is down. You have to wonder, is it not really a sports car (the way we think neutrinos work must change), or is your definition of sports cars broken (the way we think mass works must change)?
How's that sound?
These aren't my quotes or omissions, these are from the article.
That said, it would seem that there are consistent themes regarding brutal slaughter of unbelievers throughout the text. I don't think that any more evidence should be needed than the many, many people who seem to devote their lives toward that end.
Some interpret as you have, that killing people during war is okay. Which is not an unreasonable view. Some seem to interpret that the war is not over until you're done with the killing. That seems to be the major issue.
Hey, for $2000 bucks I'll build you one that goes to 12.
Yes. The whole "Islamic Terrorist" idea is obviously a conspiracy on the part of western translators. Good eye!
Well, here's an interesting article on the subject... and here's some choice selections:
“Truly Allah loves those who fight in His cause in battle array, as if they were a solid cemented structure” (Koran 61:4)
“O ye who believe! Take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends: They are but friends to each other. And he amongst you that turns to them [for friendship] is of them [an infidel]. Verily Allah guideth not a people unjust” (Koran 5:51)
“When ye meet the unbelievers smite at their necks” (Koran 47:4)
I guess you're right. Those are clearly all sentence fragments. The rest of that last sentence will obviously be "smite at their necks... with explanatory pamphlets, so that they are at eye level and clearly readable!"
But it would trivial to simply design the test so that the outcome isn't idiotic.
Also, the test is broken. You still receive a point for the lowest option, so the minimum score is 20%. This is why psych majors need to take more math.
No, don't be absurd, that only affects the poor.
But couldn't the people who want the filter just, you know, not look at porn?
I know, right. Surely, if they can ship bananas to New York from South America and they're still green, then they can ship this cacao husk stuff to Delaware.
Weight can't be a reliable indicator of volume, though. We would best correct weight values with Body Mass Index.
Once turned off a brain is a very difficult thing to get turned back on again.
They say the same thing about your sister.
They should have a bit torrent-like system for streams. Like, you just connect to the swarm and request a fairly recent image. Everyone keeps the past minute or so cached to send to new people in the swarm. Maybe a tiered system so that the people who have been connected longest are closest to the original stream.
Let's say I connect to Joe and Mary, who're connected to the original server. They send me frames two or three frames behind the server. Jack connects, and he's getting a bit lagged images too, right with me. Now Sally connects and she's behind me and Jack, so Me, Jack, Joe and Mary all send her images. It's like a pyramid scheme for streaming video.
Now Joe leaves. I've been around longer than Jack, so I move up in the tiers. I see a single frameskip, but now I'm connected directly to the source stream.
The real purpose here is to relieve some of the pressure from the initial server. Maybe they've got 100/100, and I connect with my 20/5. Well, 5 isn't much compared to 100, but I'm pulling less than 1. Let's call it 1. Now the available bandwidth for streaming is 105 and I'm only using 1. With all them other folks connected up, the server might be only holding half the load. And higher bandwidths could get tiering priority, like, if I have 100/100, well, I get directly connected to the server pretty quick so I can redistribute the stream faster.
Oh, that's right, video comes in streams, not images... well, okay, it's got some problems. But it seems like a good solution to a very, very common problem. Make things easier on Hulu and Youtube (cause we all know they need the help, right?) and such too. Maybe drastically reduce the barrier for entry into that field, at least.
Just a thought.