Oh one last thing. I visited my friend at Valparaiso University years ago and asked why there was 1 bathroom either male or female (not both, I had to run across the building).

Apparently they all used to be male bathrooms because everyone knows women can't be engineers. So they had to convert some.

It's like that. Women had no place to go in the building. If you say some dude that looks like a lumberjack because he's on T who has a vagina has to go to the women's or vice versa, a very feminine person with a penis has to go to the men's, they are not going to be comfortable doing that. And it's essentially making it like it was at the old engineering buildings. There's no place for them.

@newtboy has already explained the difference very well, so there's nothing for me to add other than I'm glad you weren't teaching any real science, otherwise we'd have a bunch of engineers building bridges or doctors curing patients on the basis of "this one guy did it this way before and it worked for him!"

Ha, "coolest" billboard!

I always love to see when engineers build simple systems that can help millions of people get basic things like shelter, potable water, medicine, etc. Also nice to see a secular organization doing it.

>> ^Yogi:
You guys thought this was good? I think it's indicative at the pointless bullshit we're taught roboticly in class when we could be learning things about the real world. For instance I failed a History class in High School, because I just didn't care about the subject matter. The teacher pulled me aside and gave me a book called "The People's History of the United States."


So the whole idea of learning about the world so as to reduce one's ignorance about it is refuted by you failing a class you did not even try to pass? Sorry but it does not work that way. Geometry is not from the real world? Latin isn't? so biologists name species from something they pulled out of their asses? engineers build things using fantasy formulas? He did not even divide 'real world' (whatever that means) learning from academic learning. The whole point is learning for the sake of learning no matter what type of learning it is. Not because you just need a grade, or because the field is 'hot' or because studying X will not give me money so I should just focus on Y, or not trying to learn because 'I will never use it so why bother?' etc.

And true history learning is more about critically comprehending and analyzing past events and ideas, and less about robotically learning dates. Many history professors of mine, treat dates as secondary.

This was done for Donkey Kong at the UCSC engineering building last year. There is a you tube video of them doing it, but it's not a high quality video. Look here to see the result and a link to the you tube video of the postits going up in case you want to see: http://www.soe.ucsc.edu/~inio/dk/