zapatos

Worked for me. Guess I didn't think about it that hard.

I never thought of it in that specific way before but it makes sense. I can't really think of a time someone told me about their feelings on some issue, then lamented the fact that God disagreed with them.

A mushroom walks into a bar and orders drinks for everyone. Someone asks the bartender why he did it, and the bartender responds "because he is a fun guy".

Thank you. That was very helpful.

Nice. Very similar to what we have here. I remember going when I was a kid, then as a teenager discovering the laser light shows on the ceiling of the planetarium at about the same time I discovered recreational drugs, then completing the cycle by bringing my children. Sans drugs of course. Fond memories.

I love the idea. Here in St. Louis we have a Science Center that is similar to what you are describing, but without all the rides. There are many interactive features that let you try out science for yourself. For example, in one location there are dozens of soft blocks laying around where spontaneous groups of visitors can work together to build free standing arches. An enclosed bridge over a nearby highway lets people use radar guns with the cars below and learn about that technology. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Louis_Science_Center Another local place is called the Magic House which includes hundreds of hands-on exhibits and games introducing children to science and learning. https://www.magichouse.org/exhibits/

In another thread the Big Bang Model was mentioned and it made me wonder; do 'current' versions of models ever exist in a specific place? For example, is a compiled, current version of the Big Bang Model available in a format such as a .pdf, or at a lab at a university on computers and in boxes? Or does perhaps the 'current model' refer to something more akin to 'all of the generally accepted scientific knowledge' about the Big Bang, where some is shown in a public source, but other parts are in a scientific journal, and no one has bothered to (or even can) compile it into a single place? Back in the day if someone wanted to know precisely what people meant when they were talking about the length of a meter, they might have to go to France to look at the accepted most accurate version. I'm just wondering if an agreed upon 'most accurate version' of a scientific model ever exists in a single place.

The ID that is in the wallet?

Stay calm friend. It wasn't a personal attack. It was just a comparison to others who dismissed something as worthless without all the facts.

There is a Richard Head Toyota dealer in my home state. Always made me laugh. What were his parents thinking?!?! http://www.usa.com/frs/richard-head-toyota-inc.html

There is a difference between 'speculation' and 'guess based on no data, and presented as an assertion'. You moved the goalposts pretty quickly from "The only thing of interest about Mars is whether it has fossil life, or frozen remnants of life" to "There might be stuff on Mars that makes it all worthwhile. There might not".

They were at risk as soon as the Russians knew. The rest of the world, as far as we know, doesn't know any of the details that can put the people or operations at risk. All the rest of the world knows is that the Russians have the details. Unless of course the Russians shared the details with, say, Syria. The problem was not that we talked to the Russians about ISIS, it was that we shared specific details the Russians did not need to know. Similarly, there is nothing necessarily wrong with telling an outside party that we know Organized Crime is planning some nefarious activity, but we shouldn't give out the details that could allow Organized Crime to figure out who within their organization is giving us the information. Even if they never found out it was still wrong. We put their people at risk. The Israelis may never have found out what went wrong when one of their people died due to Trump leaking information.

I disagree. The Israeli's needed to know. It was their people and their operations that were put at risk.

Then perhaps it is premature to suggest that "The only thing of interest about Mars is whether it has fossil life, or frozen remnants of life."

Kiplngram didn't give you the negative rep, I did. And I didn't give it 'simply because I disagree'. I used it because I abhor the disrespectful, smart-ass attitude you often use with people. In this case, starting off your post with "And o golly gee. Another failure at english." That type of response also contributes nothing to the current conversation.

Just a friendly tip for future reference when on this site, if you make the claim then you are expected to do the research.

Again and again. Year after year. One kid after another, this happens. And I see it year after year, again and again. Let's be careful about using Youtube and its appeal to emotion.

Well, that and having an educated work force that allows a country to compete in the world, and ensuring standards, and controlling costs, and a country ensuring the welfare of its citizens, and helping people be self-sufficient so that the government doesn't have to support them their whole lives, and... Of course it is. Just like National Parks, Interstate Highways, the National Transportation Safety Board, the FDA, etc.

Much the same was said when Seward purchased Alaska for the United States from Russia in 1867.

Well, it looks like you are suggesting the scenic route, but I end up in the same place either way. In the US, many 'rich' parents do send their children to public schools, and they do agree to more tax money being spent on public education, especially in primary and secondary education. Rich people (and poor people) tend to congregate by income. Public school funding comes from the school district. If the school districts are rich, then the public schools get a lot of funding. In Catholic schools at least, the public schools lure away the private school teachers, as the public school teachers receive a higher salary. In the US, "private" does not necessarily equate to "rich". My kids went to private school, but the tuition was subsidized by the Church Parish for all, income was taken into account, there were work opportunities for both children and parents to reduce tuition, and in addition, kids could get lunch subsidies. I'd be willing to bet that not one single child at my children's school would be classified as 'elite' under anyone's definition. We did not have nearly the facilities, computers, or extra-curricular activities provided by the public schools. What we did have was a shared vision of values, and we were willing to pay above and beyond what we were already paying to the public school districts, while receiving fewer physical benefits in return. I am a big fan of public education, but one size does not fit all. I get the impression that private/public education in Belgium is not necessarily the same as it is elsewhere. Are you blaming our poor public school scores on private schools? If so, any evidence for that?

Private schools that aren't religious don't do that.

If you believe in proper education, then clearly private schools are the place to send your children. https://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/pubs/studies/2006461.asp Are you suggesting that if I have more money than you, I should not be allowed to buy a better education for my children than you can? An obvious advantage to private school over public school is that you are allowed to teach religion or have a single sex environment if that is what you want for your children. I don't know. Are we also going to ban ultra orthodox Jewish schools?

Interesting. Why shouldn't private schools be able to do as they wish? I agree that Catholic school is pretty mild. I was never asked to read the Bible, and remember fondly the vast quantities of beer consumed at every imaginable school event.

You can stand by it all you want, but you are mistaken about whether or not they had any choice in what to believe, and you are not in a position to know otherwise. Hoping to put the debate on this particular matter to rest, both my sons are atheists, with my blessing.

Completely agree. What is getting my hackles up is the suggestion that religious schooling is nothing more than fairy tales, bullshit, and a sign of poor parenting skills. It is an incredibly biased and shallow view of what my children were taught in Catholic school with regard to service, empathy, integrity, respect, and responsibility, among many other attributes. One of the nice things about being a parent is the role we play in helping our children separate the good from the bad, the truth from the fiction, and helping them to become good human beings. While there is much of religion that I find objectionable and even immoral, I think it is foolish to throw out the baby with the bath water. An open mind includes the ability to recognize the good that can come from religion, as well as the bad.