Genecks

I think it means that kids are learning the system, becoming more intelligent by doing so, and making the standards raise because of their behavior. Then again, it depends on many factors. I don't think a hasty generalization will do. Anyway, if educators have a problem with students being unlearned, maybe educators should teach the students more than work them. There are always going to be people who don't know what someone else does. Educators need to compensate for these differences. I'm glad that the educator was willing to find out the information right away. Now that information is known, the next step would be fixing the problem. We can't rely on institutions to make sure everyone is at the same level.

Science, religion, and philosophy do mix. You're claiming that they don't mix at all, thus they never mix. Yet the philosophy of mind (spirit) is of importance to neuroscience, cybernetics, and many other topics. Also, the way the universe works (the absolute, etc.) relates to physics, which often try to understand the universe in numbers (or a Pythagorean view). Although philosophers may have created views that have contributed toward science, religions have created theories, too. These theories that could contribute to science should not be thrown out all together. More than anything, philosophy covers ethics, politics, religion, and science. Have you not heard of the philosophy of science? What makes a theory a theory? What makes a hypothesis a hypothesis? Should we use euthanasia? Should we not use euthanasia? What do religions think about euthanasia? Can we persuade religions to except science? Is there something in their religion's philosophy that might allow science to be accepted in their lives? I don't really see you giving any examples. I see details, but this unseen reality has me confused. I have no way of understanding the things your perceive, nor do I understand your grounds. Matter of fact, I don't believe an opinion is grounds enough to take out a forum. Understood. Anything that takes away from the idea of science making a scientific forum is a 'bad thing.' I don't really understand what you mean by "nasty." If you're talking about debates that simply turn into chaotic quarrels without logic, then you're talking about debates with lack of proper argumentation. Good for you? Yet it seems some of these people aren't too happy with your decision. Yet you've failed to give decent details and examples. Also, what's the possibility that it is helping the forum? Have you given any examples of what a 'decent' or 'not nasty' argument is? Why did you build the board in the first place? Did you have a set standard? This is where the problem exists. You are moving a section that is important and contributes to science to the margins of the Internet. You are trying to this a more secular board around science. Yet science did rise from philosophy. Putting something on the margins implies that it should not be seen or heard. Yet a small amount of people are stating this: Moderators and admins. I believe the majority of persons would be willing to keep the board on. I haven't seen many comments from others. Some of the comments on the board seem to be a negative reaction to this action. Therefore, there may need to be adjustments. Yet I believe that the P&R board should exist. It will allow people to understand philosophy and science and things that revolve around it. I suggest that it is reinstated, because it is a part of this forum that should remain active; and it is of interest to many. I propose that more moderators are created for the P&R board. A science based forum may seem like a good idea, but moving a section of importance implies that the board is to become more secular; and that is a problem.

Science, religion, and philosophy do mix. You're claiming that they don't mix at all, thus they never mix. Yet the philosophy of mind (spirit) is of importance to neuroscience, cybernetics, and many other topics. Also, the way the universe works (the absolute, etc.) relates to physics, which often try to understand the universe in numbers (or a Pythagorean view). Although philosophers may have created views that have contributed toward science, religions have created theories, too. These theories that could contribute to science should not be thrown out all together. More than anything, philosophy covers ethics, politics, religion, and science. Have you not heard of the philosophy of science? What makes a theory a theory? What makes a hypothesis a hypothesis? Should we use euthanasia? Should we not use euthanasia? What do religions think about euthanasia? Can we persuade religions to accept science? Is there something in their religion's philosophy that might allow science to be accepted in their lives? I don't really see you giving any examples. I see details, but this unseen reality has me confused. I have no way of understanding the things your perceive, nor do I understand your grounds. Matter of fact, I don't believe an opinion is grounds enough to take out a forum. Understood. Anything that takes away from the idea of science making a scientific forum is a 'bad thing.' I don't really understand what you mean by "nasty." If you're talking about debates that simply turn into chaotic quarrels without logic, then you're talking about debates with lack of proper argumentation. Good for you? Yet it seems some of these people aren't too happy with your decision. Yet you've failed to give decent details and examples. Also, what's the possibility that it is helping the forum? Have you given any examples of what a 'decent' or 'not nasty' argument is? Why did you build the board in the first place? Did you have a set standard? This is where the problem exists. You are moving a section that is important and contributes to science to the margins of the Internet. You are trying to this a more secular board around science. Yet science did rise from philosophy. Putting something on the margins implies that it should not be seen or heard. Yet a small amount of people are stating this: Moderators and admins. I believe the majority of persons would be willing to keep the board on. I haven't seen many comments from others. Some of the comments on the board seem to be a negative reaction to this action. Therefore, there may need to be adjustments. Yet I believe that the P&R board should exist. It will allow people to understand philosophy and science and things that revolve around it. I suggest that it is reinstated, because it is a part of this forum that should remain active; and it is of interest to many. I propose that more moderators are created for the P&R board. A science based forum may seem like a good idea, but moving a section of importance implies that the board is to become more secular; and that is a problem. We can't create a war by having science and religion as seperate things. We do need to discriminate between both, but we do need both to understand each other in the same place. We need a way for people to understand and accept each other. We can't hide things from each other, because they'll eventually cross.

I haven't been around in a while, but I'd like to know why some of the other forums were closed. I don't understand why positions and status of things on the forum have changed. Could someone give a link within certain threads that discuss the reason for certain forum boards closing? To tell you the truth, I see the religion board as important. However, I'd like to take a different view at it. Lately, I've been studying religion, politics, and philosophy. Being that I'm a science major, I've learned that these three things play into how people go about science. In other words, they shape the ethics of science and what people are allowed to do. Now, you might be able to say, "Screw religion. Throw everything in politics," and that wouldn't be such a wrong way of going about things. However, I do think that somewhat misrepresents science and religion. Certain medical science topics of becoming of concern to some persons. I believe either way you look at it, you're going to have the ethical discussions on a science forum. What would I do? I've been spending some time at Philosophyforums.com, so I have an idea of how religion and philosophy works. Since religion can fall under the category of philosophy, you could create a different forum. This would create a compromise and allow religion, philosophy, and science to be discussed and related. The way people had it before was philosophy and religion: I believe those topics are simply to themselves. However, there is a way to make these more relevant to a science board. Create a board on this: Philosophy and Science. People could always argue about the term 'philosophy' being indefinte, but ethical, religious, etc. things could be thrown in there. You could target the philosophy of science, ethics, religion, etc. Such a board would allow religious, philosophical, and other discussion to be entertained. However, if things go right, they would be related to science. Or better yet... Philosophy in relation to science

I was forwarding an email to myself from one account on the Internet to the next, and I noticed the email was able to quickly foward itself. When a person is forwarding an email, does the server upload the email to another server? In other words, does not the speed of my Internet connection matter but instead the speed of the email server's connection?

It was a conspiracy against...

This might seem like a pointless thread, but I like to seek the wise council and hope they could give some insight, input, and/or advice. For those of you who aren't American, there is a test in America that allows people to earn college credit for passing a test. It's a nice way of flying out of courses if a person has previous experience. However, if a person screws up the first time, then he or she can only take the test again after 6 months has passed from the previous testing date. So, if any of you are in America and think you've got some decent experience, you might be interested in taking it. (Each test costs about $60 USD. An affordable way to get college credit.) The examination contains 75 questions to be answered in 90 minutes. But back to the topic: I've noticed that I'm coming to my sophomore year of college, and I'm getting really sick of taking liberal arts courses. I want to take human anatomy and physiology, but I'm unable to because a chemistry prerequisite is required. I wanted to take chemistry during the summer, but my college administration changed this year. They changed the way courses work, and I was unable to take a certain math course if I were to take chemistry instead. I was pissed. I wasn't the only one pissed. Also, the admins took out the college library for a year to remodel it. It still exists, but there's no quiet place to study. *end rant* My knowledge in chemistry is lacking and needs to be refreshed, but I learned I could take this CLEP test; and this test would serve as a prerequisite. Yet I don't know how long it's going to take for me to refresh my knowledge of chemistry. My knowledge of chemistry will be of the utmost importance in order to pass this test with a minimum score. Therefore, I've decided to ask some the mad scientists here what they think about the topics covered in this test: Link for more information about the Chemistry CLEP. Structure of Matter I'd have to say I'm lacking on the structure of matter: Geometry of molecules, ions, and coordination complexes; structural isomerism; dipole moments of molecules; relation of properties to structure. I've never been able to understand the 3D structure of an atom. I figure it'd be necessary. It's all theoretical, of course. So, I'll keep that in mind while studying it. However, the main reason for creating this thread comes to what you think about these topics. Would you consider many of these topics to be intermediate or beginner? Let's say you were to start all over again to learn chemistry. How long would it take you to learn those topics? How would you go about learning them again? I figure I'll check out a few college texts from the make-shift 40x40 foot library, study them, and do the problems in the books. If I needed any help, I'd diversify the topics on the web to different forums. It's a technique I use sparingly. I don't know much about nuclear chemistry of physics. I suppose post-WWII ethics stopped people from teaching it in public high school. Some of my knowledge about physics and chemistry comes from engineering and electronics, so I'm not going to have a large problem with those topics. Math and balancing equations isn't going to be too difficult. It seems, however, that there may be more to this test than meets the eye. I had communicated with the director of science at my college. He said that throughout the four years the test has been available, only four people have taken the test. Only one person has passed. I figure that's quite a low statistics and not representative of the majority of people who have taken the test, but still interesting. Experimental Chemistry About the largest problem I might have would be the lab equipment. I have no idea as to what range of lab equipment the test will quiz me on. I have no idea as to how much chemistry equipment there can be. I assume there are certain amounts, and I could go around the college and create an inventory; but I don't know if knowing what the college has is enough information. I figure the test will be biased toward some type of equipment. - What kind of equipment is typical for any beginner? - Are there certain pieces of equipment people work up to? Has anyone here taken this test. If you were to look at the website and pick up certain topics, which do you think would be the most difficult to do? Why would you consider them to be the most difficult? Thank you for taking the time to read this.

Something that I haven't been able to understand is how the cost of getting liposuction is cut in half when a person decides to go to Mexico instead of having it done in America. And I'm not asking for a biased opinion about the danger involved unless it relates to anethesia. However, I am questioning why it costs so much more to get a liposuction procedure done in America than it is in Mexico? What makes the drastic cost difference? The medical equipment? The economics? The politics? I haven't been able to understand why this drastic cost difference exists. Does anyone here have an analyzed reason as to why the costs differ?

I see the image that is available on that website. However, I can not discriminate what is shown in the pictures because of the 'messy' atmosphere. I'd like to see a video of it in action.

Serial cables? 8 MB of ram? Hmm.. I don't know if that can be done... You'd need a very low-grade OS.

It's been on for a month now. I'm sorry for whatever act I did. When will the warning go away?

I just played with google's spreadsheet thing at google labs. Does anyone know where the files are saved? I'm sure there is a link location or something. There must be a way to start linking these files without inviting people. Just curious if anyone's played with it and tried to hack it.

I'd like to try it on my eggs.

I'm going to play Surfin' USA a lot more. I need a surf board.

Use ABBYY fine reader next time Blike.

Neat video. Someone close the thread. How do you really expect them to get thermite bombs on the plane? Most people believe it wasn't the fuel at all; it was the collision force.

This makes a lot more sense to me: http://qtparted.sourceforge.net/ and http://www.linuxdevcenter.com/pub/a/linux/2006/05/08/dual-boot-laptop.html Alright. I think i know what I have to do now.

I just posted something in computer help and 5 posts were created at once. It was crazy. I'll leave the errors there. Maybe there is some problem.

So let me get this straight: Most linux installers have the capability to act like partitionmagic and partition a drive with info on it into multiple logical drives? That's still news to me. I'll try it out. I was taught that a person had to start from scratch and partition ahead of time. Afterwards, a person could then set up Windows and Linux. But if this is true, then I shouldn't have a problem loading Kubuntu or Fedora Core 5 on the hard drive with XP still on it.

I was using Kubuntu last time. But I don't know if I can dual-boot. I'll check it out. By the way, I don't have the windows boot DVD. No, I have the restore dvd. It's somewhat limited but will create things onto the C drive. In other words, it won't let me partition the HDD. That's why I'm trying to find some way to manipulate the way it will reformat windows back onto the HDD. I figured using a start-up cd to partition ahead of time (and leaving a logical drive for linux) would allow me to install windows, too. Either way, the Windows restore DVD does not allow me to partition. I know the basics of partitioning, but I'm questioning things. Maybe I should do more than type. Eh.

I recently sold a few books of mine on eBay's Half.com. I made a net income of $50 USD. The sad thing is that I expected more money because I didn't think shipping would cost so much. However, I learned that one should ship media mail instead of expidited. Media mail would have made my capital grow by $10.00. A picture of my earnings.

This is news to me. Last time I checked, a person had to start from scratch unless he or she used Partitionmagic. Which distributions have the installer?

I want to partition my hard drive into two sections: one for Linux and one for Windows XP Home. I only have the Restore (reformat) DVD for Windows. I must restart the computer with the DVD-rom in the disc-drive to load Windows onto the hard drive. However, I'm not given an option to partition the hard drive. I was wondering how I could do the following: 1. Erase Windows from my system. 2. Partition the hard drive for Linux and Windows. 3. Trick the Windows reformat CD into loading Windows onto its own partition. 4. Put Linux on a different parition. 5. Create a dual-boot. I suppose I could create a start-up CD. Afterwards, I could erase Windows and split the drive into different partitions. But how would one control which drive the Restore DVD puts Windows onto? Perhaps splitting the drive into 'C:' and 'X:' would solve my problems. If the Restore CD is picky and consistent, then it might put Windows back onto the C: drive. Yet the Restore DVD erases the information on the HDD. However, I'm not sure if it erases the MBR or destroys the partitions created. How would I handle my problem were the Restore DVD to destroy the partitions I made?

Nosebleeds may be caused by not blowing one's nose and getting most of the dry mucus (boogers) out.

You're right. I forgot about that. But I live in Illinois; it's illegal to light fireworks here. There may be some things happening around town on the Fourth of July. I'll look into it.