ewmon

Congratulations Mr/Ms ydoaPs, and best wishes for your little one! Even so small, they are born with a lot of fight in them. Remember the "miracle babies" of the Mexico City earthquake. I can't believe it's been almost 30 years! Moontanman expressed my sentiments exactly. Simply love them, love them, love them! When I saw that my hand is almost the same size as the hand in photo #4, I realized that ydoaPs Jr is shown almost actual size on my screen! Wow!

The crux of the matter is that both sides (Jews and Muslims) have their own religions (Judaism and Islam) that consider certain tracts of land as holy to them, and so, they want to own and control those tracts. Unfortunately, there is a tract of land in Jerusalem that both sides consider as holy. The Jews call it the Temple Mount, and the Muslims call it the Noble Sanctuary. For centuries, the Muslims have owned and controlled this tract of land, and their Dome of the Rock currently sits there. Understandably, this is completely unacceptable to the Jews . Personally, I think that the Muslims are being a bit piggish (no insult intended), seeing as how they consider three tracts of land as holy — Mecca, Medina and Jerusalem, whereas the Jews only have Jerusalem (unless you include New York City and Miami — jk!).

I find it absolutely hilarious that some words are acceptable and some words aren't, especially considering why. After William the Conqueror began ruling England in 1066, his French words (along with new English words derived directly from Latin) were considered acceptable, and Anglo-Saxon words were considered base. In a sense, good ol' Bill and his French nobles talked about feces, urine, sexual reproduction, etc perfectly fine. The previous kings of England had their own perfectly acceptable four-letter Anglo-Saxon words for the same things. Even until relatively recently (1993), it was considered vulgar to say or print "penis" until John Bobbitt's wife Lorena cut his off and threw it away! Someday, the same may be true about "vagina", hopefully without any loss of, or damage to, any body parts. (Don't worry, John's penis was found and reattached during a 9½-hour operation. Whew!) PS — William the Conqueror is also the reason why we "shouldn't" end sentences with prepositions — because Bill and his nobles didn't, but those vulgar Anglo-Saxons did (Ugh!). So, go ahead and end your sentences with prepositions if you want to.

Poor 7, we've forgotten divisible by 7. Here's something fascinating I just found — I found it here.

This is an unusually-worded problem. Did you notice that 30% of 3y = (30/100)∙3∙y = 3∙(30/100)∙y ? It sounds like you have been studying the Associative Property of Multiplication. This property means that, because (30/100) and 3 and y are all multiplied together, you can shuffle them around (that is, "associate" them) in any order. And knowing that 30% of y = x, — also written as (30/100)∙y = x — then ... (what?)

For centuries, humans have used beavers, that is, rodents of the Castor genus, as a source of food. This includes the animal's tail, and as this castoreum-producing gland resides "near the base of the tail", I suppose castoreum ended up in some beaver-based food through lack of attention and ... Hey who put raspberries in the beaver tail stew? (What I want to know is who thought of grinding rocks into a powder and sprinkling it on a baby's butt to see what happens? Or corn starch?)

Then there's something called Proto-Human Language, which is supposed to be the ultimate ancestor of all languages.

Very interesting. Crocodiles are apparently smarter than they seem, and from this photo, the crocodile also seems to use sticks to camouflage itself as a log.

You can find much information online about historical linguistics. Of course, because oral language began in the prehistory of human existence, there's more guesswork the further back you look. That is, "prehistory" means before recorded data. It looks like you want to study the tree of Indo-European languages, which has its roots in Proto-Indo-European language (aka PIE). Distinctive sounds are called phonemes, and you can find most of the phonemes used in the world's language in the International Phonetic Alphabet (aka IPA). First words might equate to words described as "ultraconserved words". You might enjoy this Ted Talk on how language transformed humanity.

Alcohol is a poison so, in fermentation, it can only reach a concentration before it kills the yeast. This means that you're dealing with a much lower concentration, by which I mean that it's diluted with water, plus there's a lot of dissolved and suspended matter (the yeast itself, other chemicals consumed/produced by yeast, etc). I think all that water would present the greatest obstacle to overcome in order to use organic alcohol as a fuel.

Maybe the very first life form was not encapsulated (as amoeba etc are); I mean, why couldn't the world's oceans act as one life form ... one huge one-celled organism, without the cell walls, of course? If it was the first life form, there wouldn't yet be any malignant life forms to defend oneself from. I see cell walls and all their transport systems as just an unnecessary complexity for the first instance of life.

The short answer is that, because a positive number of a negative amount equals a negative amount, such as (positive) three –10's equals –30, then a negative number of negative amounts must equal the opposite — a positive number — such as negative three –10's equals +30. Another way of looking at it goes like this — 8 × 8 = 64 which is (10 – 2) × (10 – 2) which is 10 × 10 + 10 × –2 + –2 × 10 + –2 × –2 which is 100 + –20 + –20 + 4 which is 100 – 20 – 20 + 4 which is 64 (and not 100 – 20 – 20 – 4 which is 56) You can do the same for 2 × 2 as being (10 – 8) × (10 – 8) and get the answer of 4. I hope that one or both of these explanations helps.

Arrogance = excessive self-importance Genius = great mental capacity and inventive ability I'm sorry, but I don't see any common ground among them. Someone can have genius without arrogance and can have arrogance with genius. In fact, I would say that someone with genius would tend towards humility, and that someone without genius might have arrogance as compensation for lack of genius. Hmm......

A benign violation (at 12:20)?

On "races" ... Do you think that, maybe, the rather common xenophobic idea of us-versus-them caused people to take spouses from within their own "tribes" (or whatever), and we ended up with "breeds" (that is, "races"). The more the "breeds" were distinguishable from one another, then the greater the xenophobia, resulting in more inbreeding, etc, etc. Could geographic isolation also have played a role, such as the Sahara Desert isolating sub-Saharan Africans from the rest of the world, or the Indian Ocean isolating Aborigines from rest of the world, etc? It seems to me that inbreeding would not be effective until humans developed settled (or isolated) civilizations because, to me, nomadic life would continue to cause inter-tribal mixing (that is, "mongrels"), thus no us-versus-them xenophobic mentality. I guess I'm saying ... technology → settlements → xenophobia → interbreeding → breeds/races