Posts by Lyndon Hood
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Ah, we return to the debate over ethnicity.
[hides behind desk]
-
While I know nobody can compete with Rabelais either for scatology or for long lists of things:
A knave, a rascal, an eater of broken meats; a base, proud, shallow, beggarly, three-suited, hundred-pound, filthy worsted-stocking knave; a lily-livered, action-taking, whoreson, glass-gazing, super-serviceable, finical rogue; one-trunk-inheriting slave; one that wouldst be a bawd in way of good service, and art nothing but the composition of a knave, beggar, coward, pander, and the son and heir to a mongrel bitch: one whom I will beat into clamorous whining if thou deni'st the least syllable of thy addition.
is a reasonable effort from Shakespeare. Perhaps inappropriate in this case, as the threats of beating usually go the other way.
-
Just working my way through the thread (Near halfway! Sad!)
Steven:
therapeutic treatment from a clinical psychologist is a privilege, that few can afford.
If he saw a clin psych, it sure didn't take. He didn't even learn to pretend to take responsibility.
Besides, when people say they've had councilling, I tend to assume they saw a councillor or a therapist (neither of which necessarily mean anything as far as I know).
-
Funny thing, but the press release describe Jersey Swap as A Game for the Ladies.
I suspected it might be more popular elsewhere.
-
I'd be as happy with 'a particle or a wave' to 'a particle and a wave' because the graspable experiments find that it's one or the other; which leads us to conclude it's both and neither.
Anyhoo, I'm not sure the approach you're advocating is "people taking a relativistic sense of 'balance' or 'fairness to both sides'" in the sense that Caleb was disparaging. There's exploring scientific uncertainty, and then there's everybody getting a chance to put their opinion forward. The latter isn't actually balanced or fair in this case, but it looks like it is.
-
snap
-
Graeme, the thing with that particular example is that people don't seriously contend that light is just-a-particle or that it's just-a-wave. - people contend that it acts as both (or rather, as one or the other - Hence the "Um, yes.").
While this means that quantum particles are odd, it's not a dispute between two positions.
I suspect you'll find either serious disputes are at too advanced a level to be taught in schools or it would be wise to go with a simple version anyway.
-
Isn't there a fanfare for him?
And you're a comma commedian.
-
I think the point is that if your ignore the theological aspects a lot of conflicts make sense anyway. Looks like promising lines of dispute are a) this might be wrong and b) non-theological aspects can be religion-related.
-
I think of the crusades as the properly religious war. OTOH Terry Jones left me with the impression it basically started as something to do with all those knights Europe had kicking around.
...
I recall Jim Mora's panel once agreeing on teaching the controversy in evolution. Of course I demand equal time for the flying spaghetti monster.
Firstly, there's scientific controversy and then there's unscientific controversy.
And then, most of the stuff they teach in school science has a lies-for-children quality compared to the actual state of the art. Which suggest the actual purpose of science class is consistent with judicious editing.