There are definitely people that look better one way or the other. A groomed beard can cover up features that are less than appealing. It's not bad to try to make yourself look better although I'd say obsessing about your looks is a problem. Find a look that suits you and run with it.
I wonder how many guys they had to film before they found one that looked good before and after and also got good responses from family.

Before and After: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bcf9NMHGLUI

Sorry for the lag...still trying to surface for air after the flood.

It must be a Safari issue. Comments are not shown and the buttons are indeed greyed before and after typing.

Firefox is operational. I hate Firefox...and Safari for that matter. Oh darn.

My best to you and yours.

Thank you as always.

Before and After: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kOXhYU1zhp8

We had a cloudless sky yesterday, so I managed to grab a book and get a few hours in the sun.

People were vehemently opposed to these policies in the past. But now they are starving in the camps, and they are just thinking about how to survive the next day – they don't have a place to sleep, they don't have a place to be, they have lost their source of income, they have no idea how they will feed themselves in the future. So it's in that situation that the government pushes ahead with this plan. When people recover, they will find out what had been decided, but by then the damage will already be done.

Sounds just like parts of Greece, but it's from Herman Kumara, head of Sri Lanka's National Fisheries Solidarity Movement. Their government eagerly seized the moment when a tsunami layed waste to significant parts of the coastland, pressing the local plebs into a situation where they can no longer provide resistance against plans to turn their land into a Mekka for the rich.

Basic shock therapy, as seen in numerous other countries before and after. Nothing new. But it's worth remembering these cases when looking at the financial waterboarding of Greece.

For a Venus Flytrap

The process continues until all that's left of the insect is its hard exoskeleton. (Unlike humans and other vertebrates, who have an internal rigid skeleton made out of calcified bone tissue, insects and arachnids use a more flexible, external exoskeleton to both protect and form the framework for their bodies.) Once the nutrients are depleted from the acidic bath, the plant reabsorbs the digestive fluid. This serves as a signal to reopen the trap, and the remains of the insect are usually either washed away in the rain or blown away by the wind.
See more @ http://science.howstuffworks.com/life/botany/venus-flytrap4.htm

Also before and after video http://youtu.be/pFGoZMld_Gs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m42fb_v965s for before and after comparisons.

Well, she's right that Trickle-down Economics doesn't work but with this clip being trimmed before and after, I really have no idea what her point was.
She could be going on to say anything at all..

@kceaton1
@JiggaJonson

I think there's a big difference between instant fire-able offences (drinking on the job) and mediocre teaching. My mother is a teacher and she definitely talks about a dichotomy between those who try and those who don't.

Unfortunately the system they have in QLD, Australia for end of high school exams is that the teachers can set the exam themselves for their students rather than any form of independently set examination. This means there is a huge incentive, for say Math, to teach to a specific test, then give the exam with largely the same questions but the numbers changed.

There is performance tracking at a school level and principals are incentivised to create good results but often this can be achieved with rote learning rather than genuinely understanding the subject matter due to the lack of externally set examinations.

Meanwhile, while unions ensure that risk of job loss is low, principals can transfer teachers to far away schools with poor conditions easily, and since performance can be fudged, your ability to retain a specific position is largely determined by your personal relationship with said principal.

As far as students being able to address bad teachers directly, how? As you mentioned Jigga, they will likely not be taken seriously if they complain as some will assume it's as a result of work load rather than teaching performance. The only way you can really measure it is student performance objectively measured by externally set examination.

Yes, it's not a perfect measure. Student performance may be determined by the cohort or the effectiveness of teachers in lower grades. That's why you test them before and after to measure progress rather than raw performance. You can also look at average results over 3-4 years to avoid specific class bias and to allow room for improvement.

As far as standardised measures, a good test for say Math will require broad knowledge rather than specific facts as the questions that could be asked would be widespread and would test understanding rather than rote learning. For subjects with wider and less specific knowledge areas like say English or History you avoid advantaging specific knowledge by giving a wide range of options for essay questions.

I agree with a lot of this.

What I'd dispute is whether we know know for certain it is largely man-made. Again I would defer to NASA where it specifies it is "very likely due to human activities" that is the consensus. I study statistics and the hypothesis/ significance testing you could perform to test time periods before and after human activity would be very rigorous in determining a trend change, and there is certainly no lack of data.

As far predicting the benefit/harm and the most cost effective policy alternative if one is required, I agree it's debatable. There are organisations such as the Copenhagen Consensus that argue for technology based solutions such as stratospheric aerosol injection or carbon capture rather than pure taxes/reduced emissions.

My own (layman) take here is that mitigating a potentially large unknown is pragmatic. At the very least until such technologies are proven to be effective and feasible in reversing the trend. European colonists destroyed ecosystems through introducing but a handful of non-native species to a previously isolated habitats. I think it goes without saying we should not be naive about the unforeseen impacts of a global change like this and taking a conservative approach is warranted.

both before and after make my ears hurt.

OK, I see your points but....
1)with the plunger right there in it's holder, I never let it get close to spilling over, what a mess that would be (and there is a heat vent right there, UGH!)

2)I try to be careful plunging and not splash at all, but you do have a good point here, it would be cleaner, especially for those that get crazy plunging.

3)I leave the plunger in the toilet and flush again (at least once), to rinse it off some before removing it at all, then place it in it's holder. Granted, that's a bit nasty, but it never smells, and I give it a spray of bleach too. Every so often, while it's dry, I take it outside and wash it in the yard where the sun will sterilize everything.

The plastic seems to require you to clean before AND after, by hand at first BEFORE you can plunge (edit: with your face right next to the clog!)...and that's impossible if it's overflowing! Then what?!? A plunger can be cleaned up after at your leisure (better be before the wife needs the toilet though) and with scrubbing bubbles and/or bleach if that's your preference.

It may be strong enough to survive 'plunging' with your hands, but I certainly don't want to be the one to test that, or to find out it wasn't! It looks like if you don't get a perfect seal (so a perfect dry and clean rim first) it could easily detach. UGH!

Disposing the plastic requires you to take it to the garbage bag (or the bag to it) and then to take out that bag, which may or may not mean dripping it through your home, depending on your bathroom garbage. (mine has no bag)

All that said it's an interesting idea, but I think I prefer the plastic plunger. To each his own though.

Since it was called for a dupe by the uploader himself I'll say it *isdupe since the other has the main content without the text bookmarks and the stuff right before and after in this version don't add to it...

I've heard reports from several men who had sex before and after and said there was zero difference in sensation.

I circumcised my boys but not at all because of aesthetics, nor to "look like me", and especially not for any kind of religious reason.

We weren't dead-set against leaving them un-cut. In fact, we initially figured we'd just let them be natural.

One reason we decided to go ahead with it is we heard about lots of uncircumcised men have issues that require them to have it done later in life (e.g., phimosis, etc.), but the bigger reason was recent (at that time) studies showed strong evidence that circumcised men are at substantially lower risk for serious life-threatening diseases such as HIV and penile cancer (that results from HPV).

>> Yep, it's fucking barbaric. It is genital mutilation of children, period.

Talk about misinformation from a bunch of barbarians.

It's more barbaric to be completely close-minded, backward-thinking, and ignorant as to why there might possibly exist valid reasons to provide your children an almost 100% chance to avoid a plethora of penis-related problems and life-threatening diseases for their entire life in exchange for what's really a very minor procedure when done soon after birth.

The reasons against it? "It's fucking barbaric." Because... why again? "It just is," I'm sure is the best possible response.

The reasons in favor of it? Don't be so glib. Read the research.

Science Daily from Jan 2010:

Other epidemiological studies have shown that male circumcision is associated with significant reductions in HIV acquisition in men.

The strongest evidence for a cause-and-effect relationship between circumcision and HIV risk reduction came from three randomized-control trials in sub-Saharan Africa, where the circumcision rate is relatively low and the HIV infection rate is relatively high. All three demonstrated a more than 40 percent reduction in HIV acquisition among circumcised men.

The largest of these three studies -- in Rakai, Uganda -- was led by Dr. Ronald H. Gray, an epidemiologist at Johns Hopkins and the scientific paper's senior author. Dr. Gray's group collected penile swabs from all of the circumcision trial study participants, which provided the data for the new TGen-Johns Hopkins study.

The new study found that circumcision -- the removal of the foreskin, or prepuce, from the penis -- eliminates an area of mucous membrane and dramatically changes the penile bacterial ecosystem. Significantly, TGen's analysis of more than 40 types of bacteria, using a 16S rRNA gene-based pyrosequencing approach, suggests that the introduction of more oxygen following circumcision decreases the presence of anaerobic (non-oxygen) bacteria and increases the amount of aerobic (oxygen-required) bacteria.

American Cancer Society:

HPV can also cause cancer of the penis in men. HPV infection is found in about half of all penile cancers. It’s more common in men with HIV and those who have sex with other men.

There is no approved screening test to find early signs of penile cancer. Because almost all penile cancers start under the foreskin of the penis, they may be noticed early in the course of the disease.

...

The 2 main risk factors for genital HPV infection in men are having many sex partners and not being circumcised.

The risk of being infected with HPV is strongly linked to having many sex partners.

Men who are circumcised (have had the foreskin of the penis removed) have a lower chance of getting and staying infected with HPV. Men who have not been circumcised are more likely to be infected with HPV and pass it on to their partners.

Facts like these are "the REAL reasons" my sons are circumcised.