Phi for All

Are you saying the Chinese are like a cancer?

I think you're wrong after all. Rules are only limiting if you view them that way. They also provide a framework for you to plan exactly how you can be successful within them. Rebelling may make you feel superior to the system but imagine how great it would be to *use* the system's rules to get what you really want anyway. Rebels seem glamorous but find negative consequences everywhere. You don't need to be a sheep and follow the system; be innovative and use the system to *beat* the system. Good consequences will follow. That .2 represents some extra effort that admissions boards are looking for. For GPAs it's all math to them. As others have said, your brother's participation in the science bowl may have been the tie breaker if they could only send a letter to one of you.

Too often young humans mistake rebelliousness for independent thinking and uninhibited spirit. The trick is to play by the system while realizing it doesn't lessen your ability to be true to yourself.

I miss Sayonara3's responses to creationists. It was always fun watching the creationists go around the horn throwing all their favorite dung to see if anything would stick. Sayo would calmly dodge each gob like a Shao-lin monk on Red Bull, all the while deftly debunking their claims, correcting their misconceptions and throwing subtle insult-shurikens they were just too dumb to recognize. Eventually though, the creationists would exhaust their reservoirs of crap, only to start right back at the beginning like nothing had ever been said. Even the Master got tired of the eternal laziness.

Yes, that you're the ugly brother. j/k Are your brother's grades better or worse? Did he do a lot of clubs? What did he do differently?

Who are you and what have you done with the tree?

Another thing to be wary of when using analogy are the conclusions you draw from it. If you're using analogy to argue a point, you run the risk of fallacious logic if your analogy starts to override the real subject. Example: eagle2121: "I feel sort of sluggish today." falcon9393: "Well, the human body is like a car. It needs good fuel to keep it going. If you put cheap gasoline in it it's going to run bad, even sluggishly. You must have eaten something bad for you, that's why you feel this way." See how the conclusion drawn here isn't necessarily the case? eagle2121 could be suffering from the onset of some disease or other illness, but you've concluded otherwise because of your analogy.

You're not the kind of person who would defend himself to avoid a beating by a bunch of murderous kindergarteners? You're not attacking *them*, look at the picture. They're coming after *you*, Ghandi!

This has got to stop. I want the ISP for the Kaytie11 account contacted to make sure this is not some 40-year-old pervert discussing puppies and froggies and boobies (oh my). We are not here for the... titillation of others. Thread closed.

Now I remember why I stopped posting in Politics. It was because of people placing these types of generalized assumptions on me based on a specific and particular opinion I held. I consider them an affront, and particularly hypocritical in your case, Pangloss, considering how you hate people ascribing motives and thoughts to you that you did NOT express.

An Obama-Hillary ticket?

Not if it was just a leg you were using....

My district caucus gave him 7 votes to Hillary's 3. I was very unhappy about the turnout, just 41 people for a really large area.

That's the link I read. Is the Broken Window Fallacy (economic) saying that the logic in the Broken Window Theory (social) is fallacious? If so, I fail to see the correlation between the two. In fact, if this is the case, it would seem BW fallacy is a Strawman fallacy since BW theory has nothing to do with economics.

Normally I send a private message requesting that a member refrain from text speak on a science forum, but you have turned off that capability. We have lots of members from around the world and English is a second language to many. Clear communication is critical here so please, no more text speak. You'll find that no one will take your comments seriously if you continue, and many Mods will simply delete your posts. Thanks for understanding.

I think the questionnaire assumed that 3-4 feet was enough to kick a 5-year-old. Any higher and you'd miss them. The questionnaire leaves out what they told the kids about us. If they told them we were coming to their house to steal their TVs we wouldn't stand a chance. Do you have any kids? Have you been on a kindergarten playground? Fearless 5-year-olds exist.

I'm out of touch with today's education requirements, but in business, if I saw someone's resume and saw that they pulled themselves out of a nosedive and managed to work hard to overcome past mistakes, I'd actually hire that person over an equally qualified person who had no problems. Someone who perseveres through adversity and overcomes huge obstacles is a wiser, more accomplished person that appreciates the benefits of what they've achieved.

My comment was a bit flip, mostly because you used the phrase, "Why is this even worth talking about?" I don't like it much when someone tries to undermine the validity of something I've invested the resources in to discuss here. And it seemed like a knee-jerk reaction because you stated that the turbulence messing with the radar was an actual fact, something that even the FAA and the military are only wondering about. You claimed to have read the whole thread but you seemed to have missed that fact. They want to do studies, remember?

Correction: half a pile of money. And CBS chose him to interview as a counterpoint. Do you suppose they'd have used his statement if his rate sheet claimed differently? Thanks for the "(apparently)"s. It would have been PC of you to only assume cronyism and corruption are my gripe. Have you ever put together an RFP for a major (6-figure +) contract? It involves a ton of work and research and no one gets paid unless the proposal is accepted. This process keeps competition high and normally forces participants to think of lean and effective measures for completing the work. Sloppy doesn't get paid and gets a black mark for the next RFP. It's a good system that awards good work. The bidding process is greatly eroded when bidders feel someone has an inside track. This alone is pretty bad but when no-bid contracts are awarded the whole process is reduced to a sham. I've put together RFPs and I've done outsourced work for major companies that felt they could increase productivity by farming out work their company wasn't focused for, or that could be done more cost-effectively than using their own people. There is absolutely no reason to outsource if you aren't saving money or increasing productivity. Cheney started outsourcing much of the military's non-combat functions when he was SecDef under Bush I. The problem here is that normal market conditions assume that no single buyer or seller is big enough or has so much clout that they can adversely shape the market. Cheney's maneuver suddenly made the US military the largest and most influential consumer on the planet. Add no-bid contracts to the equation and now there is no savings, there is no confidence in the bidding process, and productivity is compromised by lack of normal market incentives. I dislike mega-corporations in general for much the same reasons. They stifle market creativity and competition. So when a mega-corp like H gets a no-bid contract from the world's largest consumer, I don't think it's conjecture to say that this is NOT a good trend. This is more like market monopoly. The whole reason?! I doubt that with every fiber of my being. I think the Dopeler Effect had more to do with it. Wow. Nice assumption about the situation requiring no-bid contracts. And by nice I mean bad. If I liked either major party I could see the argument for partisanship, but I don't. I am one of those weirdo fiscal Republican / social Democrat types. I think the Bush I / Clinton / Bush II legacy will be that they all sold this country out to big business without competition, globalization through force instead of example, and privatization without sound reason. I'm tending to agree. WWII was unique in that we were coming out of the Great Depression so it was easy for the economy to begin booming. I did a double-take when I saw the word fallacy associated with the Broken Window theory. And being a big proponent of Broken Window, I'm quite frankly appalled. Broken Window has virtually NOTHING to do with economics except as an indirect result. Broken window is about stopping crime, not about who's buying what from whom.

*sigh* I'll post them as I find them: GSM Consulting would have been a great contractor for the oil well fires Haliburton made over 2.5 billion dollars on. From Bob Grace, president of GLM Consulting: Savings: $1,250,000,000

I suspect HumanBeast is working for AngryHarry. We'll see in subsequent threads, I guess.

I just thought of something. If the blades turn because of the wind, how is their turbulence stronger than the wind?

This is what I meant. And there are plenty of companies available to handle the military's specific needs, and at a far better price because of the bidding process. But because the contracts were written the way they were, no single company other than Haliburton could have fulfilled them. Imo, the fault lies there, requiring one company that could do it all. Usually when you give all your business to one company you get some pretty big savings. The administration seemed anxious to get us over there before anyone could really object that the no-bid contracts funneled all those funds only to to H and all their subsidiaries.

25. I actually thought of using one kid as a weapon on the others before that question came up. I swing a mean 5-year-old. I'm sure my age was a big factor. Of course, for the morality bit, I had to consider the kids as a lethal threat, much like a babysitter does.

That's what concerns me. There have been farms next to bases that don't have problems (most of them, from what I read). Now the industry is booming, generating more requests for licenses already this year than all of last year. Is the proliferation at fault? It could be, either because the sheer number is producing unprecedented effects or because [WARNING, POSSIBLE PC COMMENT] someone is losing too much energy revenue to these windy pioneers [still unsure why market pressure comments are considered "PC"] And how is the turbulence created different from the high winds these areas usually produce? Ask the Illinois militia. They've been trying to take back the terra haute for years.