jcd11235

Apparently, someone thought it would work okay for skydiving. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

Hypothetically, let's say someone, who we'll call Fred, spent 10-15 years with a primary job involved doing something less than legal, though not necessarily less than ethical or less than moral. For example, let's say that Fred started out smuggling Cuban cigars into the US, and eventually worked his way into owning and managing a 6 plane smuggling operation. Let's say Fred originally got into the smuggling business because he was tired of spending money on overpriced, counterfeit Cohibas. He found that by taking a job on the black market, he could provide local consumers with genuine (higher quality) Cohibas and Montecristos for about 30% less than they had been paying for fakes, all while making a respectable profit and not getting busted. During his time working in the black market, Fred picked up all sorts of valuable skills and capabilities that are also valued and useful in the legal job market, such as bookkeeping and basic accounting, computer networking, supervisory and management skills, logistical management, etc. If Fred decides to give up the black market and work a legal job, how can he list on his resumé the skills and qualifications that he acquired while working his illegal occupation? Fred doesn't want to advertise the fact that he ran an illegal smuggling operation, but he also wants to be able to claim the qualifications that he has acquired through over a decade of hard work. Let's assume Fred does not want to lie on his resumé, even if he can't volunteer the complete truth. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

I saw one of those (~8 ft. gator) myself a 2-3 weeks ago, in the Little Econlockhatchee River. I didn't get any pics, though. I've lived in Florida since 2000, and that's the first gator I've seen outside of captivity. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

Things must be different here then because the customer experience is the same for both card types - we use a PIN for both DC & CCs. So do you mean the card goes in one of them old voucher impression machines? In the US, debit cards utilize a PIN, and credit cards require a signature. Internet purchases typically require an additional security code instead of a PIN or signature. Debit cards can typically be used as credit cards, with the cardholder signing or entering the security code instead of entering a PIN. I have a debit card that offers 1% cash back on all signature and internet purchases, but it offers nothing on PIN based purchases. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

I have shown you at least five different abstracts for support. I have shown you links that make good arguments about social impact, greater addiction rates, youth perception, apparent legitimacy that legalization will bring and health decline and increased crime rates. All of them smaller arguments that are part of my central argument against legalization. The articles you previously posted (before your HowStuffWorks link) were extremely weak in terms of relevance and support for your argument. Actually, my argument has largely been that alcohol is worse than commonly used illegal drugs. Of course, when that is taken into consideration, the decrease in alcohol related crime since the repeal of Prohibition supports an argument that legalization works. Comparisons of drug abuse rates in the US and countries that have less stringent drug laws also supports such an argument. It offers evidence that their relaxing of laws didn't work. I haven't seen you cite any sources that provide such evidence. I did see you try to use a country that didn't legalize drugs as evidence that legalization is ineffective, but I didn't give it much credence, since your conclusion didn't logically follow from the information. Right. And, that argument is still largely unsubstantiated. That does not provide evidence that legalization is ineffective. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

read post 159! I've read all of the posts in this thread. Re: collapse speeds I'll assume that you've actually timed the collapses yourself, and not relied on Alex Jones or others' stated times. I'll also assume that you timed the collapses using multiple sources of footage for each building, to help ensure that the video speed had not been altered. As I'm sure you are aware, if the collapse times are to be used as evidence that the conclusions of the official investigations are incorrect, care must be taken to ensure that the correct collapse times are obtained. At the occurrence of which specific event, for each of the three buildings, did you start your chronograph? Similarly, what event signified the end of each collapse, motivating you to stop your chronograph? Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

You really didn't read the linked article in post 133 of this thread, did you? If you are going to proclaim being after the truth, then you have to be willing to acknowledge valid explanations. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

Consider it explained (For those unable to access YouTube, the gist of the video is that the speed at which the buildings collapsed was exaggerated, and were not "freefall speeds.") So, there was no evidence of controlled demolition, and the buildings didn't really come down at "freefall speeds." What else do you have? It seems like the 9/11 conspiracy folks aren't after the truth, they're after 9/11 truthiness. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

I'm confident that billvon is not the one avoiding science. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

Well then I guess html is playing a joke on me because when I goto edit there is no in the string. At the very end of your url, there is a line break at the very end. I removed it when I made my Clicky above. Interestingly, appears as four characters in kelpdiver and your posts, but, when editing, only appears as an invisible line break. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

You seem to have missed the link in post 133 of this thread, which incidentally, came from the "peer reviewed" journal to which you linked. There was no evidence of controlled demolition bringing down WT1, WT2, or WT7. None. The buildings didn't collapse into their own footprints. There was no seismographic evidence of controlled demolition related explosions, despite several seismographs operating in close enough proximity to have detected such explosions. There was no reported evidence of collapse due to controlled demolition within the rubble as it was being cleaned up, despite use of workers with enough experience with controlled demolition cleanup to be able to recognize such evidence. Occam's Razor supports the official explanation of the building collapses, or one very, very similar to it. It's not a search for truth when legitimate answers are discarded because they don't fit well with the conspiracy theory (and, no, the official explanation is not a conspiracy theory). Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

You are aware that alcohol can cause many health risks that aren't fatal, right? Alcohol is also just as addictive (often more) as most recreational drugs, right? In other words, it has as much or more potential for abuse as/than recreational drugs that are currently illegal. Alcohol is still the worst (excepting tobacco). Unfortunately, you've failed to support your argument with evidence. Yes I have. A lot of the support I posted uses both Netherlands and Switzerland. Netherlands is closing down their coffee shops more and more and switzerland : … You seem to have missed the point of such a comparison. For example, the Netherlands has less stringent drug laws than the US has, yet drug abuse is worse in the US. That doesn't offer evidence that prohibition is the best way to prevent drug abuse. Likewise, I think you'll find that, generally, countries that have lower minimum drinking ages than the US also tend to have lower rates of alcohol abuse. Our current state of knowledge seems to indicate that the best way to prevent drug and alcohol abuse is through education (with facts, not the bogus propaganda that governments and non-government entities, e.g. Partnership For a Drug Free America, currently, and in relatively recent history, provide in the US) and harm reduction. Prohibition does not work. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

From the site: "HAPPY APRIL FOOLS' DAY! THIS IS A JOKE. LIGHTEN UP, PEOPLE." Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

Maybe he just wasn't prepared for a typical case of American blind justice. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

Indeed. 404 Not Found I cut and pasted the url from his post. Not my fault the link doesn't lead anywheres. Clicky Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

Why? Do you need further explanation? Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

Your grading policy seems to be as arbitrary as your unsubstantiated interpretation of "the Law of Nations." Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

I think most posters, including myself, have indicated support of fewer regulations for guns and marijuana. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

Um, what reasoning was that? The "international law" interpretation has yet to be substantiated in any manner in this thread, not even post #105. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

Other Constitutional scholars disagree with you. Nice strawman. No one is claiming that the framers intended to "incorporate by reference" the entirety of Vattel's treatise. What they clearly and obviously intended was to give Congress the authority to pass legislation that would allow them (i.e. Congress) to implement and enforce the Law of Nations as they deemed necessary and proper. Further research on my part suggests that, not only were the framers familiar with Vattel's work, they also used it as a primary reference when they drafted the Constitution. Furthermore, I've encountered references to the SCOTUS referencing Vattel in some decisions. In other words, it is highly improbable that the framers used the title of Vattel's treatise without intending to reference that text. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

Not necessarily true. {1,2,3} is a subset of {1,2,3,4,5}. {1,2,3,4,5} is also a subset of {1,2,3,4,5}. A treaty can enumerate laws binding to all participating countries. Being reasonably precise in their language, it is highly unlikely that the framers would use "the Law of Nations", written in a manner consistent with a proper noun, in a section where interpretation of the phrase as the proper title of Vattel's treatise is more consistent with the context of the section than an interpretation of the phrase as "international law". Furthermore, interpreting the phrase as a reference to international law, instead of the treatise of the same name, introduces unnecessary contradictions between Article I and Articles II & VI. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

Psssst … touring UPT is interesting, but the PD tour is the most impressive among Deland manufacturers. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

I would argue that the latter is a subset of the former. treaty noun (pl. -ties) a formally concluded and ratified agreement between countries. international law noun a body of rules established by custom or treaty and recognized by nations as binding in their relations with one another. Can you think of any examples of international law that are not derived from the authority of one or more treaties? Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

I don't see how the result is wrong. TomAiello would have us believe that the framers did not mean what they stated explicitly, and instead expected us to use our necro-psychic powers to figure out that the Law of Nations referred to international law, since, obviously, the framers wouldn't discover the term treaty until the wrote Article II. I expect to see such tin-foil hatter interpretations of the Constitution on some libertarian websites. It's surprising to see someone like you, Andy9o8, argue such a position. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

Because they didn't understand what treaty meant, right? Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!