MishMish

MrL:

"Isn't the right to bear arms as part of a militia, or did I imagine that bit?"

You did not imagine it, the problem being the interpretation

Don't know whether or not it's a legal question, but a question for me is whether or not "the people" can be equated with the state, rather doubtful far as I'm concerned. But I would not expect your deer rifle to be of much use come the revolution

Another interesting point about the Bill of Rights, and on my understanding, the reason specific rights were not listed was not lack of respect for civil liberties, but because civil liberties and state rights were supposed to be the default, with the federal gov't the restricted party. Enumerating rights carries the implication, and has had the effect, of limiting rights to those specifically enumerated.

While philosophically I start with the position of unlimited rights as the default, which gives me a bent towards not banning guns but only prosecuting the crime or misuse, in the real world I lean towards banning them, though have not quite decided

Mooey, no problem

mooeypoo said in post # :

I said i'll look it up, I didn't say i'm going to thrash the person because what you said, give me a TINSY BIT of credit here.

 

I also said that *if he does have anything to do with creationism* (stress the IF HE DOES part) i don't need to REALLY look it up -- I meant I can just know how valid his "scientific" opinions are.

Snipped out the part that seems to apply to me

I am giving you credit, if it's me you were addressing, or would not have suggested you look him up yourself. But the phrasing above was ambiguous and I went with the meaning that occurred to me, which was the more rhetorical, and so felt should restate the suggestion

Mooey:

"Well I will do that out of curiousity, but if he's having anything to do with creationism I don't REALLY think I have to actually look him up to form a general opinion"

And you're going to take my word on it?

The name was unfamiliar to me, to be fair went to his web site, but did not take me long and doubt it would waste much of your time

MrL:

"That doesn't really show what it's like. It's like trying to show 3D perspective by drawing a line."

Oh. Then perhaps is just as well I could not see it

Unsure then what you are referring to

MrL:

"For instance, the university of warwick has a 3d imaging system that you can view a hypercube (for instance) in. I've seen one.

Of course, some peoples' brains can't visualise 4D objects, or at least that's the theory."

I do not have the glasses and can not see it, but had seen someone else post this elsewhere:

http://dogfeathers.com/java/hyprcube.html

Sayonara:

"

Humans don't get BSE as such - the human form is CJD:

http://www.cjd.ed.ac.uk/intro.htm "

I have wondered about that, and can't say your link answered it for me

If people are getting it from infected cows, why would it not be considered the same

For some diseases I know the symptoms may be different depending on age for example with the same underlying cause so have different names, but do not understand the classification for TSE's in use

I do not spend much listening to creationists and had to look him up.

Do that, and then decide for yourself if the assessment is warranted

Afraid I don't understand your question

Not quite the same perhaps, but in Cairo they fire a cannon to announce the end of the fast during Ramadan, so went to watch one evening. They seemed quite pleased to have someone show some interest

Next class day, arriving early and being unsure what to say to my instructor, rather old school, mentioned it for small talk. He simply looked at me and asked why, they play it over the radio.

I thought the problem with HIV was the high mutation rate

Hard to tell sometimes when someone is presenting their own argument or someone else's

If I don't already know their position or knowledge base, I will assume it is their own unless otherwise stated

As not all the Islamists base their support on that reason made it more ambiguous

This is going to take me directions I really can't go.

But taking a hopefully somewhat simpler example, say some phobia. There must be some reason some would be more predisposed to over-learn than others. In an applied context, the reaction (or pre-emtive action) may not be appropriate to the threat, but that would not make it baseless

I don't mean to be playing semantic games here, it is just that I have a fair distrust of "psychological" explanations

Did not see anything other than derived from Hebrew or the Bibilical reference. Further looking:

"Jadon

(From International Standard Bible Encyclopedia) ja'-don (yadhon, perhaps "he will judge" or "plead"): One who helped to rebuild the wall of Jerusalem in company with the men of Gibeon and of Mizpah (Nehemiah 3:7). He is called the "Meronothite," and another Meronothite is referred to in 1 Chronicles 27:30, but there is no mention of a place Meronoth. Jadon is the name given by Josephus (Ant., VIII, viii, 5; ix, 1) to "the man of God" from Judah who confronted Jeroboam as he burned incense at the altar in Bethel, and who was afterward deceived by the lie of the old prophet (1Ki. 13). Josephus may probably have meant Iddo the seer, whose visions concerning Jeroboam (2 Chronicles 9:29) led to his being identified in Jewish tradition with "the man of God", from Judah.

James Crichton"

http://bibletools.org/index.cfm/fuseaction/Def.show/RTD/ISBE/Topic/Jadon

Had occured to me yesterday evening his name may not be Hebrew but borrowed in, the above could support that

My dad recently gave me his Anchor Bibles which am afraid went straight to the garage as am out of religion these days, but may dig those up to see if I can get a better sense, if they chose to address the question. Otherwise, expect am beginnning to get more interested in this question than most others here could be expected to

Okay, though was not clear to me that's what you were doing

Greg:

"they rally behind him because he summarises their hatred of Isrealis butchering children in gaza and bulldozing homes."

The issues are related, but not the same.

The Islamist movement is separate from the Palestinian, even if there are points of overlap.

The Islamists draw on overall antipathy to Israel, some of the Palestinian groups are Islamist as well, and some would put the rise of the modern Islamist movement to the 67 defeat, but they remain two issues not one

What seems most reliable from a quick search:

"JADON m Biblical

Pronounced: JAY-dun

Means "thankful" in Hebrew. This name is borne by a minor character in the Old Testament"

http://www.behindthename.com/nm/j.html

Am personally disappointed, however. Many of the religious or devotional terms in Hebrew are cognates with Arabic. This one may not be, but certainly is not one I can place if it is, and I had not guessed Hebrew at all

Okay, thanks

Think will go with my gut feel on this and go back to thinking it's a useless term...

While I might have to acknowledge "irrational," depending on how one defines it, I have a hard time with "baseless in reality." That's just me, of course

Sayonara, are you determined to get me to spruce up my grammar despite myself? Or just pointing out was being a bit of a nuisance

Was speaking to you, referring to the point made by Cap'n Refsmmat. The article said Cruithene shares orbit with the earth. "[Q] Does asteroid 3753 Cruithne orbit the Earth like a moon or satellite?

[A:] No. The asteroid's behaviour is more complicated than that: it doesn't orbit the Earth, but rather it shares the Earth's orbit. The relationship of a moon to its planet is called a two-body because there are only two important players (ie. the moon and the planet). However, in the case of Cruithne, the Earth and the asteroid both share the same orbit about the Sun, but are choreographed in such a away as to remain stable and avoid colliding with each other. This is called a three-body relationship as there are three main players: the Earth, the asteroid and the Sun."

My understanding was that, quite possibly simplistic, was that the shape of the orbit is not the determining factor in classigfying some body as a moon or planet but what it orbits. You answered by referring to the shape of the orbit instead of what it orbits, which I didn't think addressed the question of what it should be classified as

Thanks, have heard of Oedipus complex and had the basic idea, but you had maintained a distinction between complex and syndrome.

My question referred to that distinction and whether or not there is a technical definition for complex, or is it just a hold over term

rockstarjaiden said in post # :

my name means child of god

In what language

Changing topics slightly, think more interesting is the idea barriers to incest are established by being raised in proximity

What's a complex?

Frankly, I do not understand this at all.

Do not understand your insistence on why one needs guns. There is precious little in this world one needs, most revolves around wants. It's a silly question to ask, and sillier to demand an answer.

Nor do I understand why you are so hung up on the legal status. He has nothing to justify to you, you believe him or you do not, your choice.

If the legal status of YT's gun possession had even any remote bearing on the topic of the thread most his responses could do here is serve to weaken or strengthen any argument he was making. It has none, and frankly is none of your business. Nor did he make it "your business" beyond whatever of his personal life he cares to reveal.

The only remote connection or relevance I can find is perhaps you do not consider wanting to shoot for sport valid reason for allowing gun possession. If so fine, but it get back on that not YT's personal situation, or otherwise state explicitly what your purpose here is

And just in case anyone gets any wrong ideas here, it is only the question of irrelevant personal attacks has me making any comments

Late to the party and have only reviewed this last page.

I will say much depends on the purpose of the education. If we are referring to teaching basic numeracy to third world women so that they may conduct a small business, I might be inclined to adopt the functional approach. I do not need to know how a car operates to drive, and while knowing something about computers would no doubt be of benefit get by for most of what I need or want as plug and play only.

That said, not having learned the theory, cast my vote for theory. Am still disappointed that having been able to divine my way through most of school no consideration was given to whether or not I understood what was doing (and no comment on calculators or Ti-89, we did not have them until college, including for basic calculus, and have no idea what Ti-89 is.) Was not until set theory finally accepted the reality of it. All a long time ago now, and have essentially been left with nothing for it.

Had I learned or been forced to learn the underlying principles instead I would not be in the same position. The specifics may have left my mind by this time, as they have anyway, but the underlying concepts would have remained.

Not sure you're addressing the point. Said it shares an orbit around the sun, not the Earth.