doG

The only sure test is an A1C at the doctor's office. Your immediate blood sugar as measured with a blood glucose meter is not a good indicator unless you test yourself 3 to 4 times a day before meals and read the same consistently. Self diagnosis is not a good option.

Within any subject category there are a multitude of elements. Rarely will there be a single teacher that can communicate a thorough understanding of all the elements to all of the students. For any given element some teachers will be better than others and weaker than others so alternate viewpoints can greatly help to achieve a broader understanding of the material. IMO a tutor is worth it.

Look at the Signature Permissions in the Usergroup Manager in the ACP to set the maximum size allowed. You'll have to set it for each group you want to limit. HTH,

Yule was a celebration of the passing of the shortest day. The time in the year when the days would begin to get longer.

Whoa, now he's taken up bestiality....

Actually thanking God would still be correct if you consider the primordial ooze as the pantheistic God....

In the interest of science you should try it out and report back. You should probably test your results against another product as well, maybe something like Bengay

I do agree you would likely have given it away with the next ratio but as posed, the OP was not enough to define the sequence as unique either. Perhaps that's not too revealing. I do seem to remember Donald Duck getting a lesson on it if that helps anyone.

The burden of proof lies with the one making a claim. If he claims c has changed then challenge him for proof.

It would approach 1 as a limit...

This one? It was the top hit in a Google search for "human tarsier divergence"

It seemed to me, because he acted everything out, like bible stories were just another source of material for his moral-of-the-story acts, stories that taught some humanist value. He seemed to avoid stories that involved unique Christian activities like baptismals and never talked to anyone about being saved or any of that. He didn't present himself in a way that felt like he was pushing Christianity.

Not always. I went to public school and never cared much for history class until the 10th grade. The teacher there was quite an unusual teacher compared to most. He started every class with a bible story but it wasn't a reading from the bible. Each of the stories he picked to illustrate some moral value he wanted to convey, not a belief in his God, Christ. He acted out all of the parts very vividly and made it very entertaining. It was always short but got everyone's attention. He taught history the same way. He turned it all into a kind of play where he acted out all of the parts. He kept everybody's attention and everyone passed his course because they actually learned the material. His methods may be questionable but he did a very good job at getting the material through to us in a way no other teacher I ever had did. I'd have to say that he was one of the best teachers I ever had.

Tis time for Yule. Someone light the log and spike the eggnog....

I concede your point. Perhaps those that do not will rethink the meaning of this that different groups can hold common values. This is really the answer to the OP's question. No agent of the state can show preference for any religion. In a church school, effectively a private school, it would be different but Capistrano Valley High School is a public school so the 1st Amendment applies.

http://www.vbulletin.com/forum/showthread.php?p=1151498&highlight=quick+links+IE6#post1151498 http://www.vbulletin.com/forum/showthread.php?p=1155836&highlight=quick+links+IE6#post1155836 http://www.vbulletin.com/forum/showthread.php?p=1138696&highlight=quick+links+IE6#post1138696 HTH,

All of the drop down nav links seem to be affected. It looks like it's choking on something in the style sheet when the oversize picture stretches the window width. At the vBulletin forums it looks like the standard answer is remove all hacks and try the default templates which seems to have fixed it for everyone that's tried it.

I disagree. As a humanist I believe in the value of treating others as I would have them treat me. If a Christian applies this it does not make it a "Christian" value by "definition". As a Libertarian I believe in liberty. If that concept is applied to government by people who are Christians it does not make it a "Christian" value by "definition". This country was founded on moral values held by those of many different belief systems. That Christians which hold some of these beliefs were part of the founding fathers does not make this a nation founded on Christian values.

So how did things go at the police station?

If I had to guess I would say that the average lifespan in America has doubled over that last 200 years, an increase resulting directly from advances in medical science.

This teacher crossed the line and should be appropriately dealt with by the local school board. OTOH, I tend to agree with Dan Dennett that religion should be the 4th 'R' in school with reading, 'riting and 'rithmetic. He advocates that we teach kids learn the facts about all religions in school. This would undermine the spin put on it by kids parents and even some churches. I tend to think that in many cases the detrimental aspects of religion arise from false teachings of what a religion means or represents.

I don't know that we can draw that conclusion as a certainty. And I'm not claiming that it's not happening, I stated that I do believe warming is real. Solutions must address the cause though. Several studies have identified several "possible" candidates but I don't think any can claim with certainty a definitive cause. If we spend our time and energy chasing solutions for the wrong cause will it get us where we need to be when we need to be there? I do think it is important that we also acknowledge the fact that the planet has gone through tropical cycles in the past as well as ice ages with no influence by man. This cycle will probably continue and I'm not sure there's a whole lot we can do about it except to adapt to it. If our current warming trend is another of these natural warming cycles then our solutions should address that instead of greenhouse gases or other causes. FWIW, a space umbrella could be a good solution if solar variation is one of the main culprits. Somewhere I remember someone actually suggesting that we simulate volcanic activity by pumping material into the atmosphere to cool the planet in the same way that most of the ice ages are believed to have come about. IMO, this is an incredibly unsafe approach to the problem and a space umbrella would be a much better option to achieve the same goal.

Reading through the thread I get the impression that many have "concluded" that carbon IS the cause of global warming. What will your proposed solutions amount to if carbon is not a primary cause?

I suspect patriotism is a primary motivation with religious and social rationalizations. In societies where government and law is founded in religion then patriotism itself would stem from religious belief to some degree. I think social reward would play a role as a rationalization in these cases. Yes, I have heard of the Tamil Tigers and suspect as well that patriotism to the cultural sect of these individuals is one of the primary factors for their action. I would agree that social reward plays a role in the motivation and/or rationalization. I still do not feel social reward is a primary motivation since the act itself terminates ones standing in that society. Such reward probably does factor in to rationalizing the act for the benefit of the bomber's friends and family.

I have always believed that the planet is warming but am generally of the opinion that it is caused by solar variation and increased animal populations across the globe. This seems to be consistent with previous warming cycles. Climate scientists at the University of Rochester, the University of Alabama, and the University of Virginia report that observed patterns of temperature changes (‘fingerprints’) over the last thirty years are not in accord with what greenhouse models predict and can better be explained by natural factors, such as solar variability. OTOH, even if we are not causing any measurable warming we are causing quite a bit of pollution which cannot be good for us or the plants and animals we ourselves depend on for life. We should make efforts in all areas to clean up our act, even though it will likely have no change on our warming cycle. Alternate energy sources, wind, solar, wave generators and nuclear technology could go a long way in this effort. In regards to warming, if you can't stand the weather you better learn how to because there's a lot more to it than we can currently attempt to control with our current technological ability. We should explore what things we can do to make adaptation to future climate conditions more bearable.