mhmmm...i can dredge sense out of what he said....i was talking about how he seemed blank eyed, and looked like he was parroting something 'shiny' he heard.


>> ^budzos:

>> ^Confucius:
Kudos to him for sticking up for teachers so much....but uh...anyone else have the feeling hes just stringing together words and hoping they make sense?
and ......watch the whole video...this reporter blows

No. What he's saying is something I say a lot lately about different things not relating to education. This "MBA" world view that money (AKA job security) is the only motivator to do a good job is "paternalistic" nonsense. Teachers need job security, but job security is not what makes a good teacher a good teacher. Job security allows good teachers to remain focussed on being good teachers.
The best way to motivate people is to give them something worth doing.

Fair enough. That is your opinion.

"Goodbye."

>> ^UsesProzac:

I call the ninja edits cowardice and a lack of conviction and I find it more damning than if you kept your "outbursts" there for the world to see.
>> ^bareboards2:
I'm just curious -- did anybody actually go look at those examples of my horridness towards blankie? Does anyone other than UP and blankie think that I wrote anything really off base, wrong, or inaccurate?
I have actually written much worse things than the two examples blankie happened to dredge up. Things that were actually calling people names and hurtful.
And the fact that I have shame and do remove things I have written in the heat of the moment? I think that speaks well of my character, rather than the reverse.
You can call that "hiding my tracks" or you can call that remorse and an attempt to remove offensive material so it won't hurt anyone anymore.
I am quick to apologize, and I apologize sincerely. If I have done something wrong.

I call the ninja edits cowardice and a lack of conviction and I find it more damning than if you kept your "outbursts" there for the world to see.

>> ^bareboards2:

I'm just curious -- did anybody actually go look at those examples of my horridness towards blankie? Does anyone other than UP and blankie think that I wrote anything really off base, wrong, or inaccurate?
I have actually written much worse things than the two examples blankie happened to dredge up. Things that were actually calling people names and hurtful.
And the fact that I have shame and do remove things I have written in the heat of the moment? I think that speaks well of my character, rather than the reverse.
You can call that "hiding my tracks" or you can call that remorse and an attempt to remove offensive material so it won't hurt anyone anymore.
I am quick to apologize, and I apologize sincerely. If I have done something wrong.

I'm just curious -- did anybody actually go look at those examples of my horridness towards blankie? Does anyone other than UP and blankie think that I wrote anything really off base, wrong, or inaccurate?

I have actually written much worse things than the two examples blankie happened to dredge up. Things that were actually calling people names and hurtful.

And the fact that I have shame and do remove things I have written in the heat of the moment? I think that speaks well of my character, rather than the reverse.

You can call that "hiding my tracks" or you can call that remorse and an attempt to remove offensive material so it won't hurt anyone anymore.

I am quick to apologize, and I apologize sincerely. If I have done something wrong.

While I mostly agree, I think you'd be hard-pressed to find atheists that approach the WBC level of kook. That's a special kind of crazy.

>> ^shinyblurry:

You ever been on youtube? I'm not going to get into a battle of nutjobs here, but I'd be happy to direct you to a couple privately.
>> ^Deadrisenmortal:
Shiny, I am not saying that you are wrong here but I am wondering if you can provide any specific examples of atheist kookiness? Now remember, this can't be general kookiness, it must be kookiness that is specific to atheism.
Please provide the source where possible.
Thanks
>> ^shinyblurry:
>> ^ponceleon:
Where's shiny to tell us how loving and wonderful Christians are?

What, you don't think there are any atheist kooks out there? I just don't have the poor taste to try to make a spectacle out of atheism by dredging up the lunatic fringe. I have the intelligence to realize that those people don't represent atheists as a whole.

You ever been on youtube? I'm not going to get into a battle of nutjobs here, but I'd be happy to direct you to a couple privately.

>> ^Deadrisenmortal:
Shiny, I am not saying that you are wrong here but I am wondering if you can provide any specific examples of atheist kookiness? Now remember, this can't be general kookiness, it must be kookiness that is specific to atheism.
Please provide the source where possible.
Thanks
>> ^shinyblurry:
>> ^ponceleon:
Where's shiny to tell us how loving and wonderful Christians are?

What, you don't think there are any atheist kooks out there? I just don't have the poor taste to try to make a spectacle out of atheism by dredging up the lunatic fringe. I have the intelligence to realize that those people don't represent atheists as a whole.

Shiny, I am not saying that you are wrong here but I am wondering if you can provide any specific examples of atheist kookiness? Now remember, this can't be general kookiness, it must be kookiness that is specific to atheism.

Please provide the source where possible.

Thanks
>> ^shinyblurry:

>> ^ponceleon:
Where's shiny to tell us how loving and wonderful Christians are?

What, you don't think there are any atheist kooks out there? I just don't have the poor taste to try to make a spectacle out of atheism by dredging up the lunatic fringe. I have the intelligence to realize that those people don't represent atheists as a whole.

>> ^ponceleon:
Where's shiny to tell us how loving and wonderful Christians are?


What, you don't think there are any atheist kooks out there? I just don't have the poor taste to try to make a spectacle out of atheism by dredging up the lunatic fringe. I have the intelligence to realize that those people don't represent atheists as a whole.

The current Panama Canal by comparison is 77 km (48 mi) long
(the US/Mexico border is (3,138 km or 1,950 miles)

The estimated cost for the new Panama Canal (announced in July 2009 by the Belgian dredging company Jan De Nul) is approx 100 million dollars

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panama_canal

Some quick Math:
$100,000,000 div by 77km is $1,298,701.30 per km
$1,298,701.30 x 3,138km equals $4,075,324,679.40
and of course, add inflation over the 10 years or so it would take plus unseen overtures and you've got a 5-7 billion dollar project.

PS - just let me know if my math is faulty, although I'd like to be, I'm not a mathematician

Also: How much money does the US spend on it's War Machine?
Click here to find out: http://costofwar.com/en/

Edit: I'm not saying to build it, I'm just quoting the numbers

Sorry to dredge up bad memories. Was not my intention... or was it??

The problem with this video is that it presents a political standpoint as cold science, yet the data upon which the point is based are deeply flawed.

For example, the claim that muslims make up 20% of the world but that muslims only account for 1% of peer-reviewed papers is incongrous; many muslims don't live in muslim countries, but their scientific output is ignored. By the same reckoning, Jews are bad scientists because Israel only produces a relatively small number of patent applications per year (about 100,000 in 2002, compared to 250,000 for Turkey and about the same number granted as Saudi Arabia, for example). Once you put it in those terms, the absurdity of this cherry-picking should become apparent - jews have the highest nobel prizes per capita of any ethnic group, but that fact is ignored by this rather convenient form of analysis. Incidentally, Turkey apply for much more patents per capita per head than the US, for example, so does that mean you'll admit you're wrong?

Quote: "If you can show me a country that practice a sincerely devout version of islam while soaring in reason, philosophy scientific advances, free speech, human rights, equality, freedom, tolerance and justice you might have had some reason to say the correlation is bullshit and the argument is just simplistic prejudice" - don't bother replying, just winding you up.

Furthermore, the article fails to take into account other factors that could contribute to this scientific underachievement: for example, how Islamic countries compare to other countries with similar GDPs? A few contributors have claimed that islamic countries are rich, but this is not actually true. The islamic state with the highest GDP is Kuwait(followed by UAE) - both of these countries have about the same average income as that bastion of richess, um, Ireland. Most of the others are in the poor house: Oman and the Saudis pull in the same as the Greeks, and the rest straddle Ukraine. Hardly money to burn on particle accelerators.

Of course religion is overtly obstructive to scientific progress - just google 'texas school board'; that's not the point made in this video, probably because the main determinant of scientific prowess is actually how much money you spend on it.

Speaking of scientific lucidity, all of the stats I cited were from Gapminder.org, who dredged them from UN reports.

They're like the sounds of two dogs barking the alphabet

http://videosift.com/video/Mitchell-and-Webb-Talent-Dredge

Your video, Mitchell and Webb - Talent Dredge, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

2 large carrots, diced
2 medium onions, diced
3 sticks celery, chopped
2 sprigs thyme
3 sprigs rosemary
1 cup all-purpose flour for dredging
2 pints Guinness stout
3 cups "Bea" stock (can substitute cow-stock if Bea stock is unavailable)
1 small "Bea", cut into bite-sized cubes

Salt and Pepper to taste

Dredge "Bea" chunks in flour, sautee in hot pan until brown on all sides.
Add onion, carrots and celery, sautee until onions start to clarify.
Add hot "Bea" stock, Guiness and herbs to pan, heat to a high simmer.
Reduce heat, cover and simmer until "Bea" is fork tender- approx. 1 to 1.5 hours.
Uncover and simmer until thick.

Serve with mashed potatoes and plenty of Guinness.

Happy St. Patrick's Day!

In a word, no.

In two words, please no.

This will clutter the whole structure of the comments, where we already can include links to any images we want to share. Putting actual images in the comments would be a bad move, I think.

I think @xxovercastxx is on to something about abbreviating comments though - if a comment is over a certain length a mechanism like the ignore feature could be cool, so part of it was hidden by javascript and you didn't have to dredge through it if it's just statist rubbish anyway (or any other crap).

@lucky760 is this perhaps possible to do easily? There's a free *hug* in it for you...