Find out what the experts are saying about new print and electronic reference products. Thomson Gale hosts three monthly review columns to assist you in deciding which products are right for your library. Please note, products are not exclusively from Thomson Gale and are chosen at the discretion of the individual reviewer.
To learn more about each reviewer, or suggest a title you'd like them to review, use the links below:
Your "sarcasm" truly lacks. I'll leave it at that.
"What makes you think that the one book you were forced to follow as a child is the one right book?"
Um, it appears you are assuming things... since I was not forced to follow any book as a child. But apparently since you are all knowing I won't be able to tell you otherwise.
You are just showing your idiocy in re-stating your postulation of "book, book, book". YOU were the one who said that the Koran and the Torah were NOT bibles (which YOU said are just a book, bible = book, YOU said that). Which means, from your understanding they are not books. You are one messed up confused little person.
Main Entry: theory Pronunciation: 'thE-&-rE, 'thi(-&)r-E Function: noun Inflected Form(s): plural -ries Etymology: Late Latin theoria, from Greek theOria, from theOrein 1 : the analysis of a set of facts in their relation to one another 2 : abstract thought : SPECULATION 3 : the general or abstract principles of a body of fact, a science, or an art 4 a : a belief, policy, or procedure proposed or followed as the basis of action b : an ideal or hypothetical set of facts, principles, or circumstances -- often used in the phrase in theory 5 : a plausible or scientifically acceptable general principle or body of principles offered to explain phenomena 6 a : a hypothesis assumed for the sake of argument or investigation b : an unproved assumption : CONJECTURE c : a body of theorems presenting a concise systematic view of a subject
From a analysis of a set of facts to a belief, covers a lot of ground.
In that case, you are wrong in saying there is only one theory. Both are theories, as there are probably a couple dozen other theories on how the earth was created. But since you are so sure, you are right and you know all the answers I won't bother discussing it with you.
Yes, what? You obviously are one of those angry hate anyone who believes in anything type of atheists... I can feel it emenating off your posts, like the fetid smell from a turgid piece of dog crap on a hot summer day.
Wait, you are contradicting yourself... That goes for the Koran and the Torah as well, they aren't really bibles either.
Yet, you effusively postulate...
Of course you probably didnt know that 'bible' is simply ancient greek for 'book'. In fact i just read a great bible by Stephen King the other day.
You don't consider the Koran and Torah books, yet Steven King's writing constitutes a book. You are a strange sick little man, all wrapped up in yourself.
One is fact, one is fiction... It does not matter how much we argue or what the courts rule. We all will know which one is true and which one is false in the End.
That is weird, you have the same rug and floor that we do, although our walls are painted a nice taupe (or whatever it is called). You have great taste!
So the only other option you are suggesting, is total immersion.
You keep talking about other "options", yet total immersion... going to foreign country and living among the locals, is the only option you have suggested.
And IMO, from experience, totally immersing yourself in another culture is not as big a change as having your body a body part cut off (or one added) as the case may be.
"...isn't going to that country and talking to the 3-dimentional people the best way to learn?"
While full immersion might make for quicker learning, it is also cost and time prohibitive.
While you are living in Spain or France, who is paying your bills back home, walking your dog (if you have a dog), feeding your cat (if you have a cat), spending time with your girlfriend/spouse (if you have either of those)?
"There are other better options." Full immersion, in foreign country. Language school/college course (in your own country). Language course (using audio tapes). Language course (using books). Language course (using computer).
IMO, using the computer allows for you to both see the word(s) as well as hear them, on your own schedule for usually not a whole lot of money. While using only audio tapes or a book, you are limited to one form of learning (verbal or visual). While language school uses both forms of learning, it is also cost prohibitive. Although I have seen courses at my local community college, for under a hundred dollars for entry level foreign language courses, it still requires you to pony up and pay (at least $75 in this case) plus actually attend the classes, two hours twice a week.
Using the computer allows you to learn around your schedule. While using the computer to learn a language is not always the BEST option I think it is probably the most feasible.
They can just Google the information they are looking for.
Better yet, automate that so all possible information is searched every x amount of time and then return the top hits. Use whatever keyword(s) you are currently investigating and you now have a way to effectively narrow down possible information of interest.
You have an actual person viewing results and then determing if there should befurther investigation.
And I am sure Google would be willing to provide the storage as well with their new Google GRID (http://www.robinsloan.com/epic/).
I was going to reply to the parent but I couldn't resit this one...
"Nobody is really evil, just greedy and motivated by their own self-interests."
Obviously you are not familiar with the field of Psychology. There is evil in this world, you just have not seen it or recognized it. Just because you have not seen it or recognized it does not mean it does not exist.
Start off with People of the Lie by Scott Peck, some pretty good basic reading about evil (not motivated by greed or self-interest). Plain. Simple. Evil.
And speaking of Evil... that is why I don't trust anyone in the government to wiretap my VoIP.;)
On the other hand.... What if he was in a rush to get to a hospital becuase his kid was just run over by a car? Or what if he was in a rush because he just got a call from his wife that their house was being robbed. (Oh wait, you are in Oz they don't have crime there since they outlawed handguns, my bad). *roll*
"Riding the bumper of the person in front of you because they're driving too slowly is NOT the proper response."
No the proper response is, pull out your handgun and whip off a few rounds at their windshield. Nine times out of ten, the driver in front of your IS going to "get the message" and yield his position. Barring that - flip them off when you pass them on the left (shoulder).
If you are NOT passing when you are in the left lane, get over to a NON-passing lane. There is a reason they call it the "passing" lane. You think?
Haha. Ok, sorry I should have been more specific... in what good and correct ways has a Government Agency applied "only minimal regulations" to anything.
New York State Public Service Commission said, "...saying that it nevertheless hoped to apply "only minimal regulations to ensure that it does not interfere with the rapid, widespread deployment of new technologies."
When was the last time a Government Agency applied "only minimal regulations" to anything? The tendency of bureaucracy, once involved in something, is to strengthen their involvement in that thing.
Slashdot Mirror
And this as well...
/ about/index.htm
From the "About the Reviewers" page:
Find out what the experts are saying about new print and electronic reference products. Thomson Gale hosts three monthly review columns to assist you in deciding which products are right for your library. Please note, products are not exclusively from Thomson Gale and are chosen at the discretion of the individual reviewer.
To learn more about each reviewer, or suggest a title you'd like them to review, use the links below:
http://www.galegroup.com/free_resources/reference
"It has been said before: the review by Thomsom Gale compairs its own product to Google Scholar and can therefore not be taken seriously."
As it has been said before... Thomson Gale does not own any of the products compared to Google Scholar.
True.
...it is a review by Peter Jasco, who is an independent reviewer.
/ index.htm
http://www2.hawaii.edu/~jacso/
We just provide him the space to post his reviews.
As we do for several others...
http://www.galegroup.com/free_resources/reference
"Visit gale.com regularly to check out the latest reviews on reference resources by these prominent experts:"
I work for Thomson Gale and can assure you that we do not produce "The Web of Science" or "Scopus".
;)
And I haven't even RTFA yet...
Try http://wap.slashdot.org/palm
You might find it somewhat usefull in easing your pain.
Your "sarcasm" truly lacks. I'll leave it at that.
"What makes you think that the one book you were forced to follow as a child is the one right book?"
Um, it appears you are assuming things... since I was not forced to follow any book as a child. But apparently since you are all knowing I won't be able to tell you otherwise.
You are just showing your idiocy in re-stating your postulation of "book, book, book". YOU were the one who said that the Koran and the Torah were NOT bibles (which YOU said are just a book, bible = book, YOU said that). Which means, from your understanding they are not books. You are one messed up confused little person.
Hey, I didn't make up the definition of "theory" if you don't like it go argue with Webster.
Theory...
Main Entry: theory
Pronunciation: 'thE-&-rE, 'thi(-&)r-E
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural -ries
Etymology: Late Latin theoria, from Greek theOria, from theOrein
1 : the analysis of a set of facts in their relation to one another
2 : abstract thought : SPECULATION
3 : the general or abstract principles of a body of fact, a science, or an art
4 a : a belief, policy, or procedure proposed or followed as the basis of action b : an ideal or hypothetical set of facts, principles, or circumstances -- often used in the phrase in theory
5 : a plausible or scientifically acceptable general principle or body of principles offered to explain phenomena
6 a : a hypothesis assumed for the sake of argument or investigation b : an unproved assumption : CONJECTURE c : a body of theorems presenting a concise systematic view of a subject
From a analysis of a set of facts to a belief, covers a lot of ground.
In that case, you are wrong in saying there is only one theory. Both are theories, as there are probably a couple dozen other theories on how the earth was created. But since you are so sure, you are right and you know all the answers I won't bother discussing it with you.
Yes, what?
You obviously are one of those angry hate anyone who believes in anything type of atheists... I can feel it emenating off your posts, like the fetid smell from a turgid piece of dog crap on a hot summer day.
Wait, you are contradicting yourself...
That goes for the Koran and the Torah as well, they aren't really bibles either.
Yet, you effusively postulate...
Of course you probably didnt know that 'bible' is simply ancient greek for 'book'. In fact i just read a great bible by Stephen King the other day.
You don't consider the Koran and Torah books, yet Steven King's writing constitutes a book. You are a strange sick little man, all wrapped up in yourself.
Anyways, you have taken us totally OT now...
*sigh* Prove to me it (soul) does not (still exist) and I will reduce my theory down to a, well a mere theory.
d
Heh, I was referring to the two theories of Biblical Creation and Evolution.
Since I did not RTFA, I assumed it was talking about Biblical Creation, not Buddhism Creationism.
"Both could be fiction."
True. But then which other theory would be fact?
Funny how you assumed I was a "religious" person from my post.
"Because the absolute nothingness of death..."
Hmmm, smells like a theory to me.
One is fact, one is fiction... It does not matter how much we argue or what the courts rule. We all will know which one is true and which one is false in the End.
OT, I know...
That is weird, you have the same rug and floor that we do, although our walls are painted a nice taupe (or whatever it is called). You have great taste!
So the only other option you are suggesting, is total immersion.
You keep talking about other "options", yet total immersion... going to foreign country and living among the locals, is the only option you have suggested.
And IMO, from experience, totally immersing yourself in another culture is not as big a change as having your body a body part cut off (or one added) as the case may be.
"...isn't going to that country and talking to the 3-dimentional people the best way to learn?"
While full immersion might make for quicker learning, it is also cost and time prohibitive.
While you are living in Spain or France, who is paying your bills back home, walking your dog (if you have a dog), feeding your cat (if you have a cat), spending time with your girlfriend/spouse (if you have either of those)?
"There are other better options."
Full immersion, in foreign country.
Language school/college course (in your own country).
Language course (using audio tapes).
Language course (using books).
Language course (using computer).
IMO, using the computer allows for you to both see the word(s) as well as hear them, on your own schedule for usually not a whole lot of money. While using only audio tapes or a book, you are limited to one form of learning (verbal or visual). While language school uses both forms of learning, it is also cost prohibitive. Although I have seen courses at my local community college, for under a hundred dollars for entry level foreign language courses, it still requires you to pony up and pay (at least $75 in this case) plus actually attend the classes, two hours twice a week.
Using the computer allows you to learn around your schedule.
While using the computer to learn a language is not always the BEST option I think it is probably the most feasible.
They can just Google the information they are looking for.
Better yet, automate that so all possible information is searched every x amount of time and then return the top hits.
Use whatever keyword(s) you are currently investigating and you now have a way to effectively narrow down possible information of interest.
You have an actual person viewing results and then determing if there should befurther investigation.
And I am sure Google would be willing to provide the storage as well with their new Google GRID (http://www.robinsloan.com/epic/).
I was going to reply to the parent but I couldn't resit this one...
;)
"Nobody is really evil, just greedy and motivated by their own self-interests."
Obviously you are not familiar with the field of Psychology. There is evil in this world, you just have not seen it or recognized it. Just because you have not seen it or recognized it does not mean it does not exist.
Start off with People of the Lie by Scott Peck, some pretty good basic reading about evil (not motivated by greed or self-interest).
Plain. Simple. Evil.
And speaking of Evil... that is why I don't trust anyone in the government to wiretap my VoIP.
Out of all the online newspaper registrations that I have tried I have never had one of the following not work.
U: slashdot
P: slashdot
OR
email: slashdot@slashdot.org
P: slashdot
On the other hand....
What if he was in a rush to get to a hospital becuase his kid was just run over by a car?
Or what if he was in a rush because he just got a call from his wife that their house was being robbed. (Oh wait, you are in Oz they don't have crime there since they outlawed handguns, my bad). *roll*
"Riding the bumper of the person in front of you because they're driving too slowly is NOT the proper response."
No the proper response is, pull out your handgun and whip off a few rounds at their windshield.
Nine times out of ten, the driver in front of your IS going to "get the message" and yield his position.
Barring that - flip them off when you pass them on the left (shoulder).
If you are NOT passing when you are in the left lane, get over to a NON-passing lane. There is a reason they call it the "passing" lane. You think?
Haha. Ok, sorry I should have been more specific... in what good and correct ways has a Government Agency applied "only minimal regulations" to anything.
;)
But yeah, you do have a valid point.
New York State Public Service Commission said, "...saying that it nevertheless hoped to apply "only minimal regulations to ensure that it does not interfere with the rapid, widespread deployment of new technologies."
When was the last time a Government Agency applied "only minimal regulations" to anything? The tendency of bureaucracy, once involved in something, is to strengthen their involvement in that thing.