The polarized light method only creates a 60%, 40% disparity, then crystallization can occur to amplify the left handed concentration, the crystallization of only left handed amino acids only occurs in 2 of the 20 amino acids needed for life the other 18 will crystallize with both left and right amino acids. You can't have the optimal conditions for the two amino acids to crystallize and not have those conditions crystallize the other 18.
What evidence is there to indicate that spontaneous generation occurred? There is none. However there is a lot of evidence that spontaneous generation did not occur (left handed amino acids). Just because spontaneous generation correlates with your beliefs does not make it any more valid?
Intelligent design and creationism are two very different things. ID revolves around there being no natural way to explain the origins of life.There is no natural way to create proteins, DNA, and RNA with life being present. The problem is that the amino acids that are required must be in a solution with 95% left handed amino acids to form. When amino acids are created both left and right are present there is currently no know way to naturally filter them. Further percentages of left handed amino acids higher then 60 have not been observed in nature. With our current knowledge it is more likely that an intelligent creator or a "seed" from a living organism on a different planet started life as opposed to spontaneous generation.
using flour as the food for yeast will take 24-30 hours to rise as it has to break down the starches to sugar first where as adding sugar only takes 6-8.
Free market had its chance and is hell-bent on selling food-labeled slow-acting suicide pills. Unhealthy food is a bigger health problem than cocaine nowadays, so it needs to be treated as or more seriously.
To start with, absolutely ban adding sugar in any form to anything.
Lets look at some what your short sighted sugar ban would eliminate, all breads as the yeast needs sugar to work or would honey be legal, pretty much all baked goods, beer, wine, liquor, all require adding sugar so the yeast can work. You won't just be eliminating sweets and soda which are not a problem, self control is.
That is an individual case and really not relevant to how a group of people should be accommodated for your perceived stereo types. To answer your question I'll be as accommodating as I can without hurting my productivity or slowing the project down. To say that stem fields should bend over backwards by limiting competition because women don't like to compete, sugar coat criticisms because women are delicate and can't handle criticisms, and be more mindful of body language because women are sensitive to that is flat out wrong and sexists. Either women are equal to men and don't need special accommodations or they are inferior and need special accommodations. You can't say you are as good as someone else and then say well I actually need special accommodations. It would be like saying I'm as fast as you but you weigh less so you need to put on a weighted suit to make it fair then we are the same speed.
You absolutely are misunderstanding my point, again your white helm is probably obstructing your vision. I'm not in favor of forcing either group to accommodate the other while you are more then happy to have a minority group dictate the behavior of the whole group. Why is it that people that rail the hardest against gender inequality are always in favor of more inequality to fix it, do you enjoy doubling down on stupidity.
So I'm self entitled because I think it's nonsense to force a majority of people to act a certain way to accommodate a a minority. The expectation that a majority of people should change their behavior to accommodate a few is just as absurd as forcing the few to change their behavior. That's my point which apparently you couldn't see due to your white helm obstructing your vision.
I once had the pleasure of working with a male intern from a certain country in sub-Saharan Africa. Great guy, smart, hard-working, fast learner, funny, and *extremely* polite. For one reason or another, he was very different in his mannerisms from the other males on the team. He was very passive, very deferential. If you gave him any criticism, including constructive criticism, he would avert his eyes and apologize. In order to advance in my workplace, he was sooner or later going to have to learn how to argue with his boss. When I knew him, he seemed a long way off from that point. But the expectation in my workplace was you have to stand up for yourself, and it was clear that in his background and upbringing, he'd not been taught how to do that.
If the attitude of my team had been, "fuck it, he has to act like everybody else because that's how we do it," I think he would have had a lousy internship. But instead what people did was recognize his differences and meet him halfway. Instead of expecting him to butt into a conversation, people would pause and ask him directly, "what do you think?" When he gave a presentation, people didn't interrupt, they held questions till the end. Over the few months he appeared to become more confident, at least more used to our styles of communication, and he fit in better.
That's an extreme example, but it's what I'm talking about. Let people be themselves and be willing to change our behavior a little to help them fit in.
So what you are saying is let the minority of people be them selves while requiring the majority of people to change who they are to accommodate the minority.
If they truly are promising employment upon completion of their course then the students have grounds for a refund if they fail to be employed. What is the purpose of this government body? To ensure students are not ripped off? California all ready has a consumer protections enforced by the Department of Justice, this is just another bureaucratic hurdle imposed by California that will stifle smaller companies while protecting established companies and universities from competition.
Our military is not that big, of the 144,000,000 military aged adults in the US only 1,430,000 are active less then 1%. The US military budget on the other hand is about 5% of our GDP, even that has been decreasing since the 50's. The US ranks 11th in GDP military spending percentage and the active duty percentage puts the US outside the the top 25 in the world. The US is a large wealthy country so even though its spending and personal are at the top of the list once you factor in it's size and wealth they are in line with many other nations.
The research I've read indicates men are more overtly competitive, more direct in their speech and especially in how they give instructions and feedback, and are less sensitive to nonverbal cues than women. Men are inclined to see women as indecisive because they exhibit male dominance behaviors more weakly. But I'm not a psychologist, so unqualified to give a full answer. I believe the differences are cultural, not physiological, but that doesn't make them less real.
So letting people know you want something keeps women out of STEM fields? Being blunt keeps women out of stem fields? Ignoring nonverbal clues keeps women out of STEM fields? For a person that seems to want gender equality you seem to be using a lot of gender stereotypes. It's people like you that are holding women back pushing your women are weak stereotype so you can come in and rescue these helpless women form the tyranny of brutish men.
Basically, the pressure to compete against male peers for job openings, promotion, and funding.
So how do you have a limited resource, jobs, promotions, funding,..., and distribute them amongst a larger group of qualified candidates and not have competition for those resources? That pressure is called life, in other fields women don't have problems competing and STEM fields are no different. The difference between you and I is that I think women are more then capable of succeeding with out everyone else stopping what they are doing to help a person that is more then capable of succeeding on their own.
I am a woman, therefore I deserve special treatment. All men have it easy because they are men.
Have you stopped to consider how your workplace and career would be different if all your instructors, colleagues, and entire management chain were women? And, every time you pointed out that you should not be expected to think and behave exactly like them, they mocked and derided you for "demanding special treatment?"
How exactly do men think? What is this pressure that forces women to think like men in the STEM fields?
Local forecasters don't forecast nor do they own their own weather satellites.
Anyone using anything but the National Weather Service for weather information is a fool consuming altered data proffered with the intent to draw eyeballs to adverts.
Your comment would be relevant if they were calling it the storm of the century but the local news called for little to no snow, that simply is not going to draw eyeballs to adverts.
Anonymity is not a feature of bitcoin transactions or any transactions for that matter, as in order to receive a good you have to give it up at some level to receive that good. The advantage of bitcoin is the lack of central authority, it is an excellent way of transferring funds from country to country without having to go through a bank or physically bringing money across the border. The downside of bitcoin is that it is not backed by anything but the pubic perception of its value so it can be manipulated and is much more unstable because of that.
You are disconnecting the batteries from the car, not the batteries from the service supply. The switch or solenoid must be able to handle the current to power the motors, the 215Kw motor would require 570 amps at peak usage, once a factor of safety is added in a 1000amp rated solenoid is pretty close to correct.
It will cost more then a few bucks, you will need a heavy duty solenoid that can handle 1,000 amps at 375volts. A 1000 amp 12v solenoid is going to cost around $150, something that specialized is going to be at least $500.
That is exactly my point. The media narrative when good things happen was Obama is in full control and knows what he is doing, when bad things happen the narrative was Obama was not aware of the issue.
If you look at any of the blunders that happened during this administration you will see a pattern Obama was not aware of the missteps in his administration. The one positive thing the Bin Laden raid, Obama was at the controls making the tough calls. This worked mostly because the media gave his administration a pass and any critics were deemed right wing cooks or racists. More then likely the pressure to have everything up and running so that the success could be trumpeted for the midterm elections was more important then making sure it worked. Their thinking was that even if there are some hiccups the media will give us a pass like they have in the past and we can crush the republicans. Actually helping people was not part of the thinking process, the problem that millions of people with canceled plans may not be able to get insurance by the deadline is not a concern. This was about politics not uninsured Americans.
My class had the same rule, except you could write a report on one of the chapters not covered if you refused to be a test subject. I had no desire to be a test monkey and told the professor I not going to do the punishment paper for refusing to be tested on. I got an A in the class so if it did count against my grade it didn't hurt my grade that much.
Here are just a few of the electronic parts in modern cars
Fuel Injection - the computer can monitor O2 and fuel precisely resulting in much better efficiency.
ABS - a computer senses when your car is skidding and rapidly pumps the brakes so you can still steer.
ESC/Traction control - when loss of steering or wheel spin is detected it will automatically start braking to enable steering and stop the skidding
Unfortunately, that's not a good plan either. If you look at the place in which it's succeeded the most, the US, you'll still see lots of undesirable byproducts of unregulated business, like major income inequality and, consequently, a higher prison population. Not to mention the decline the US has been experiencing due to relying on unsustainable exponential growth. What I mean to say is that we're fucked either way, embracing or extinguishing the free market.
The prison growth has nothing to do with unregulated business, there is not even a correlation between regulation and prison population, or it would be decreasing. One of the few things that does correlate with prison population is single parent households. When children of single parents are corrected for there is little difference in crime rates between blacks and whites, 70% of children in juvenile prisons are from simple parent households, 80% of inmates are from single parent households. Many of these studies were done in the 90's when only 25% of children were raised by single parents, while now the number is over 40%, which would correlate with the growth in prison population. CEO's making 6 or 7 figure salaries are not causing it there is not evidence to even correlate it.
Slashdot Mirror
The polarized light method only creates a 60%, 40% disparity, then crystallization can occur to amplify the left handed concentration, the crystallization of only left handed amino acids only occurs in 2 of the 20 amino acids needed for life the other 18 will crystallize with both left and right amino acids. You can't have the optimal conditions for the two amino acids to crystallize and not have those conditions crystallize the other 18.
What evidence is there to indicate that spontaneous generation occurred? There is none. However there is a lot of evidence that spontaneous generation did not occur (left handed amino acids). Just because spontaneous generation correlates with your beliefs does not make it any more valid?
Intelligent design and creationism are two very different things. ID revolves around there being no natural way to explain the origins of life.There is no natural way to create proteins, DNA, and RNA with life being present. The problem is that the amino acids that are required must be in a solution with 95% left handed amino acids to form. When amino acids are created both left and right are present there is currently no know way to naturally filter them. Further percentages of left handed amino acids higher then 60 have not been observed in nature. With our current knowledge it is more likely that an intelligent creator or a "seed" from a living organism on a different planet started life as opposed to spontaneous generation.
The Isuzu NPR EFI comes with the option of a gas engine or diesel.
using flour as the food for yeast will take 24-30 hours to rise as it has to break down the starches to sugar first where as adding sugar only takes 6-8.
Free market had its chance and is hell-bent on selling food-labeled slow-acting suicide pills. Unhealthy food is a bigger health problem than cocaine nowadays, so it needs to be treated as or more seriously.
To start with, absolutely ban adding sugar in any form to anything.
Lets look at some what your short sighted sugar ban would eliminate, all breads as the yeast needs sugar to work or would honey be legal, pretty much all baked goods, beer, wine, liquor, all require adding sugar so the yeast can work. You won't just be eliminating sweets and soda which are not a problem, self control is.
That is an individual case and really not relevant to how a group of people should be accommodated for your perceived stereo types. To answer your question I'll be as accommodating as I can without hurting my productivity or slowing the project down. To say that stem fields should bend over backwards by limiting competition because women don't like to compete, sugar coat criticisms because women are delicate and can't handle criticisms, and be more mindful of body language because women are sensitive to that is flat out wrong and sexists. Either women are equal to men and don't need special accommodations or they are inferior and need special accommodations. You can't say you are as good as someone else and then say well I actually need special accommodations. It would be like saying I'm as fast as you but you weigh less so you need to put on a weighted suit to make it fair then we are the same speed.
You absolutely are misunderstanding my point, again your white helm is probably obstructing your vision. I'm not in favor of forcing either group to accommodate the other while you are more then happy to have a minority group dictate the behavior of the whole group. Why is it that people that rail the hardest against gender inequality are always in favor of more inequality to fix it, do you enjoy doubling down on stupidity.
So I'm self entitled because I think it's nonsense to force a majority of people to act a certain way to accommodate a a minority. The expectation that a majority of people should change their behavior to accommodate a few is just as absurd as forcing the few to change their behavior. That's my point which apparently you couldn't see due to your white helm obstructing your vision.
I once had the pleasure of working with a male intern from a certain country in sub-Saharan Africa. Great guy, smart, hard-working, fast learner, funny, and *extremely* polite. For one reason or another, he was very different in his mannerisms from the other males on the team. He was very passive, very deferential. If you gave him any criticism, including constructive criticism, he would avert his eyes and apologize. In order to advance in my workplace, he was sooner or later going to have to learn how to argue with his boss. When I knew him, he seemed a long way off from that point. But the expectation in my workplace was you have to stand up for yourself, and it was clear that in his background and upbringing, he'd not been taught how to do that.
If the attitude of my team had been, "fuck it, he has to act like everybody else because that's how we do it," I think he would have had a lousy internship. But instead what people did was recognize his differences and meet him halfway. Instead of expecting him to butt into a conversation, people would pause and ask him directly, "what do you think?" When he gave a presentation, people didn't interrupt, they held questions till the end. Over the few months he appeared to become more confident, at least more used to our styles of communication, and he fit in better.
That's an extreme example, but it's what I'm talking about. Let people be themselves and be willing to change our behavior a little to help them fit in.
So what you are saying is let the minority of people be them selves while requiring the majority of people to change who they are to accommodate the minority.
If they truly are promising employment upon completion of their course then the students have grounds for a refund if they fail to be employed. What is the purpose of this government body? To ensure students are not ripped off? California all ready has a consumer protections enforced by the Department of Justice, this is just another bureaucratic hurdle imposed by California that will stifle smaller companies while protecting established companies and universities from competition.
We leveled Belgium once, what's the harm in doing it again.
Our military is not that big, of the 144,000,000 military aged adults in the US only 1,430,000 are active less then 1%. The US military budget on the other hand is about 5% of our GDP, even that has been decreasing since the 50's. The US ranks 11th in GDP military spending percentage and the active duty percentage puts the US outside the the top 25 in the world. The US is a large wealthy country so even though its spending and personal are at the top of the list once you factor in it's size and wealth they are in line with many other nations.
Both countries have a very good track record of not accidentally launching nuclear missiles?
The research I've read indicates men are more overtly competitive, more direct in their speech and especially in how they give instructions and feedback, and are less sensitive to nonverbal cues than women. Men are inclined to see women as indecisive because they exhibit male dominance behaviors more weakly. But I'm not a psychologist, so unqualified to give a full answer. I believe the differences are cultural, not physiological, but that doesn't make them less real.
So letting people know you want something keeps women out of STEM fields? Being blunt keeps women out of stem fields? Ignoring nonverbal clues keeps women out of STEM fields? For a person that seems to want gender equality you seem to be using a lot of gender stereotypes. It's people like you that are holding women back pushing your women are weak stereotype so you can come in and rescue these helpless women form the tyranny of brutish men.
Basically, the pressure to compete against male peers for job openings, promotion, and funding.
So how do you have a limited resource, jobs, promotions, funding, ..., and distribute them amongst a larger group of qualified candidates and not have competition for those resources? That pressure is called life, in other fields women don't have problems competing and STEM fields are no different. The difference between you and I is that I think women are more then capable of succeeding with out everyone else stopping what they are doing to help a person that is more then capable of succeeding on their own.
Have you stopped to consider how your workplace and career would be different if all your instructors, colleagues, and entire management chain were women? And, every time you pointed out that you should not be expected to think and behave exactly like them, they mocked and derided you for "demanding special treatment?"
How exactly do men think? What is this pressure that forces women to think like men in the STEM fields?
Local forecasters don't forecast nor do they own their own weather satellites. Anyone using anything but the National Weather Service for weather information is a fool consuming altered data proffered with the intent to draw eyeballs to adverts.
Your comment would be relevant if they were calling it the storm of the century but the local news called for little to no snow, that simply is not going to draw eyeballs to adverts.
Anonymity is not a feature of bitcoin transactions or any transactions for that matter, as in order to receive a good you have to give it up at some level to receive that good. The advantage of bitcoin is the lack of central authority, it is an excellent way of transferring funds from country to country without having to go through a bank or physically bringing money across the border. The downside of bitcoin is that it is not backed by anything but the pubic perception of its value so it can be manipulated and is much more unstable because of that.
You are disconnecting the batteries from the car, not the batteries from the service supply. The switch or solenoid must be able to handle the current to power the motors, the 215Kw motor would require 570 amps at peak usage, once a factor of safety is added in a 1000amp rated solenoid is pretty close to correct.
It will cost more then a few bucks, you will need a heavy duty solenoid that can handle 1,000 amps at 375volts. A 1000 amp 12v solenoid is going to cost around $150, something that specialized is going to be at least $500.
That is exactly my point. The media narrative when good things happen was Obama is in full control and knows what he is doing, when bad things happen the narrative was Obama was not aware of the issue.
If you look at any of the blunders that happened during this administration you will see a pattern Obama was not aware of the missteps in his administration. The one positive thing the Bin Laden raid, Obama was at the controls making the tough calls. This worked mostly because the media gave his administration a pass and any critics were deemed right wing cooks or racists. More then likely the pressure to have everything up and running so that the success could be trumpeted for the midterm elections was more important then making sure it worked. Their thinking was that even if there are some hiccups the media will give us a pass like they have in the past and we can crush the republicans. Actually helping people was not part of the thinking process, the problem that millions of people with canceled plans may not be able to get insurance by the deadline is not a concern. This was about politics not uninsured Americans.
My class had the same rule, except you could write a report on one of the chapters not covered if you refused to be a test subject. I had no desire to be a test monkey and told the professor I not going to do the punishment paper for refusing to be tested on. I got an A in the class so if it did count against my grade it didn't hurt my grade that much.
Here are just a few of the electronic parts in modern cars
Fuel Injection - the computer can monitor O2 and fuel precisely resulting in much better efficiency.
ABS - a computer senses when your car is skidding and rapidly pumps the brakes so you can still steer.
ESC/Traction control - when loss of steering or wheel spin is detected it will automatically start braking to enable steering and stop the skidding
Unfortunately, that's not a good plan either. If you look at the place in which it's succeeded the most, the US, you'll still see lots of undesirable byproducts of unregulated business, like major income inequality and, consequently, a higher prison population. Not to mention the decline the US has been experiencing due to relying on unsustainable exponential growth. What I mean to say is that we're fucked either way, embracing or extinguishing the free market.
The prison growth has nothing to do with unregulated business, there is not even a correlation between regulation and prison population, or it would be decreasing. One of the few things that does correlate with prison population is single parent households. When children of single parents are corrected for there is little difference in crime rates between blacks and whites, 70% of children in juvenile prisons are from simple parent households, 80% of inmates are from single parent households. Many of these studies were done in the 90's when only 25% of children were raised by single parents, while now the number is over 40%, which would correlate with the growth in prison population. CEO's making 6 or 7 figure salaries are not causing it there is not evidence to even correlate it.