jcd11235

I think you're responding to the wrong person, unless your intent was to preach to the choir. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

Pssst … I'm not the sample in the example. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

Is it not normal to see people (note plurality) exceed the speed limit by 20 mph in California? I've never driven anywhere that the normal flow of traffic was a single speed rather than a range of speeds. Of course, I've admittedly never driven in California. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

Don't really even have to go that far. Just play the video on your computer, pause it at the scene you want a picture of, and do a computer screen capture. And yes, the quality isn't very good, but you'll have a snap shot of what you're wanting. Windows: http://graphicssoft.about.com/cs/general/ht/winscreenshot.htm Mac: http://www.apple.com/pro/tips/secretcapture.html To the OP, if you post your in the 'Photography Forum' you'll get much more technical answers. Someone might even offer to do it for you. :^) ltdiver I don't know about Windows, but screen capture is disabled during DVD playback (via DVD Player) on the Mac. A third party app such as VLC must be used to play the DVD in order to take a screenshot. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

That's two separate considerations. First, is the faster driver within the law due to their speed. Second, is a slower driver within the law if they fail to move over to allow faster traffic to pass. From the info provided in the above link, it would appear that in such a situation, neither driver would be operating within the law. First: No. (read the example). Second: That's the question I'm asking. Both are above the speed limit, but the 'slower driver' is going with the normal flow of traffic. I fail to see how a driver would be operating within the law if they fail to yield the left lane to faster traffic, going only by the information provided in the link posted above. If you want a definitive interpretation of California's vehicle code, you should contact an attorney in that state. Law or not, it's a demonstration of poor form as a driver to fail to yield to faster traffic in a fast/passing lane. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

Care to elaborate? D A couple examples: Sitting in a classroom listening to a lecture, ADHD is very much a disability. It can be very difficult, sometimes virtually impossible, to stay focused. On the other hand, when participating in a brainstorming session, the same tendency for the mind to wander on tangents can actually be helpful in terms of coming up with creative ideas, thinking outside the box (to use an overused cliche). Also, when there is a strong interest in something, ADHD sufferers can sometimes find themselves intensely focused for relatively long periods of time when given the opportunity to work/play/do research in that particular field. Disclaimer: I'm a formally diagnosed ADHD sufferer. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

That's two separate considerations. First, is the faster driver within the law due to their speed. Second, is a slower driver within the law if they fail to move over to allow faster traffic to pass. From the info provided in the above link, it would appear that in such a situation, neither driver would be operating within the law. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

Obama did not inherit a budget surplus like (GW) Bush did. Obama inherited a record budget deficit, as well as two poorly managed ongoing wars. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

There are no beliefs to act upon; it's an absence of spiritual belief. I've been writing an atheist manifesto. Here's the first chapter: So how do you like it so far? You realize that you're increasing the potential of Protestant Atheists, right? Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

By all means, explain the difference. We're involved in the same war we started in 2003. On the other hand, WWI and WWII had a noticeable and obvious intervening break in hostilities, even if one argues that said break was merely an intermission in a single war. Of course, feel free to prove me wrong. It would be easy; all you need to do is link to the Congressional authorization for use of force for each of the OIF's, of which you seem to be claiming there are at least five. Absent of those, it's the same war now that it was when it began in 2003. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

You're asking the wrong person, although I doubt (but do not know) they faced any serious consequences. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

I didn't post anything that could remotely be interpreted as such. Try reading my posts before paraphrasing them, please. The first gulf war in early 1991, in response to Iraq's invasion of Kuwait, was Operation Desert Storm. Our 2003 invasion of Iraq is Operation Iraqi Freedom, or OIF, renamed from Operation Iraqi Liberation, or OIL. We have not yet completed OIF, despite what you may have read on a banner hanging behind Bush on an aircraft carrier parked just off the coast of the US. We're still stuck in the same ill advised war. Everybody lost in Iraq. The Iraqis lost a stable government and much of their infrastructure, as well as untold thousands of civilian lives. The US has lost thousands of military lives, billions of dollars, as well as credibility and respect among the rest of the world. Where did you possibly get the idea that we won? Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

Clinton went after al Qaeda, and brought many members to justice for previous attacks on US interests, without the need for large scale military force. The Republicans gave him all sorts of grief over it. His successor took office and ignored his warnings of al Qaeda being a threat to the US, virtually ignoring them until the 9/11 attacks. Of course now the history revisionists want to claim that it has been the Republicans who have been tough on OBL and al Qaeda. It's rather ironic that Reagan and GHW Bush willingly funded al Qaeda and other terrorist groups as freedom fighters. Speaking of revisionist history... why don't you tell me how 'clinton went after AQ' after the following? 1993 - WTC1 1995 - Bombing in Saudi Arabia 1995 - Khobar Towers 1998 - US Embassy bombings in Africa 2000 - USS Cole Do a search. It been discussed previously in the forums. He went after those responsible in the proper manner, as police action, not a full scale war. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

Nor does your inability to understand the concept of sample size make the claim false. Hint: the sample size is not one, as you have claimed. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

Wow. You completely ignored every point I made in my posts. You also seem to have missed the news when the US military acknowledged that detainees in US custody were victims of homicide. Try to keep up with the facts. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

Your contributions to this thread certainly haven't demonstrated your ability to differentiate between the two terms. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

well, as pointed out to you, if you're going to hold that claim, than you can't go spouting off in other threads about other people's personal opinions being merely anecdotal. You seem to be having trouble understanding what sample means in comparison to anecdote. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

If you're claiming the observations are strictly anecdotal, that would be incorrect. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

Not if suicides are included. au.geocities.com/googla007/gun-deaths-ownership2.jpg It appears there is a linear relationship between percentage of households with guns and intentional firearm related deaths. If anything, Switzerland appears to have (very slightly) fewer such deaths than would be predicted by a linear regression model, although I would have to do the regression to verify that. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

It's a small sample, not merely an anecdotal observation. Had I made the claim based on a single class, or a single professor, that would have been anecdotal. However, with a sample of several dozen classes/professors taken without the question in mind, it's a small sample. Is the sample large enough to determine what percentage of professors are liberal versus conservative, or what percentage of professors attempt to push their own political ideology on students? No. Is the sample size large enough to reject a null hypothesis of college classes being taught primarily by liberal professors attempting to indoctrinate students in their liberal ways? Yes. Did I do such a study? Not formally. However, even informally, I can easily see that the null hypothesis is inconsistent with observations. Claiming such a collection of observations are merely anecdotal is like saying that experience counts for nothing unless it is done as part of scholarly research. For example, someone who has worked several years as an auto mechanic could be justified claiming that one make of automobile tends to be more reliable than another make, based on his experience of seeing far fewer of them in the shop for unscheduled maintenance, even though their rates of ownership and pricing are similar. That same mechanic would not be justified claiming that make A is 89.742% more reliable than make B based on those same observations. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

Don't forget murder. The Army itself has labeled 34 prisoner deaths as homicides, but in more than half of those no charges were brought. In close to half of the 98 cases it surveyed, Human Rights First reported, the cause of death remains officially undetermined or unannounced. "In dozens of cases," the report says, "grossly inadequate reporting, investigation and follow-through have left no one at all responsible for homicides and other unexplained deaths." Commanders, starting with President Bush and Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld and extending through the ranks, have repeatedly declined to hold Americans accountable for documented war crimes. Source Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

Clinton went after al Qaeda, and brought many members to justice for previous attacks on US interests, without the need for large scale military force. The Republicans gave him all sorts of grief over it. His successor took office and ignored his warnings of al Qaeda being a threat to the US, virtually ignoring them until the 9/11 attacks. Of course now the history revisionists want to claim that it has been the Republicans who have been tough on OBL and al Qaeda. It's rather ironic that Reagan and GHW Bush willingly funded al Qaeda and other terrorist groups as freedom fighters. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

It doesn't appear our invasion and occupation of Iraq has earned us respect from anyone, nor does it appear to have instilled fear in our enemies. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

What does 9/11 have to do with OIF? And what is OIF1 supposed to imply? Are there already plans for OIF2? People fighting an invading and occupying army seems pretty logical to me. Trying to draw a connection between 9/11 and Iraq, OTOH, does not seem logical at all. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

BS...I already said that I believe there will to be a day when Christian influece will be void of this world....it has nothing to do with what I want to see....I couldn't careless how many religious people there are.... You need to carefully read what I wrote...then think about it for awhile. ...nevermind I'll just decipher it for you. I believe ALL religions can lead to The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit (the Son being Jesus) AKA GOD....The Trinity. FYI...Baptists ARE Protestants..... I'd be interested to hear your explanation of how Buddhism, Taoism, Druidism, and Wicca, to name just a few religions, lead to the father, the son, and the holy spirit. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!