You know something is going to be funny when it has a statement like
the following:
"when you use contraception you are not only sinning you are
cock-blocking the Almighty"
http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/408347/february-14-2012/contraception-crusade
~~
Yeah, I think it follows life events too. The move to San Jose in jan was
rough so I think this will be the year of do-nothing vacations.
One of our best was exploring Tokyo. Last August we explored Germany by car but
these days I'm not up for anything but non-mindful activities
On Feb 15,
Ron Paul and Jon huntsman are my top matches ... Interesting.
On Feb 15, 2012, at 11:24 AM, Maureen wrote:
>
> Cool site. I don't agree with the way they phrase of some of the
> questions, but that's pretty universal with me and opinion polls.
>
> I did a system for electronic stock proxy
it *says* that complex thought involves more areas of the brain than that,
so the results are a bit puzzling. But I know -- CFSAMMYDOESNTLIKEIT
Unless I hear a better reason than that, as far as I am concerned it's an
unexplained fact. Interesting maybe. I've already told you how to prove
it's bi
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 9:55 PM, Dana wrote:
>
> Dude. It doesn't matter what I think. It doesn't even matter why they did
> it. Three standard deviations is statistically significant. The funding
> might show bias if you can document it. Maybe. Since you can't seem to read
> the sentences in thi
You can start here
http://www.amazon.com/dp/0307453421/ref=as_li_tf_til?tag=washpost-books-20&camp=0&creative=0&linkCode=as1&creativeASIN=0307453421&adid=1BVPCPMAZESPRHXFP17B
Here's a shorter article. Murray is up to his same routine, the gross
misuse of stats to prove a racially charged point.
here's a different view. At by the way, there is in fact a partial version
on Google Books; it just doesnt come back in the first page of results for
whatever reason. Call me spoiled ;)
http://douthat.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/02/14/what-charles-murray-gets-right/
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 7:29 PM, D
that's pretty interesting. And no, it's not on Google books, but I read the
NY Times review.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/12/books/review/charles-murray-examines-the-white-working-class-in-coming-apart.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 7:15 PM, Dana wrote:
> Maybe? I'd have to l
oh... it's matrix algebra? I used to like that stuff. And I don't remember
anything about it either. OK good enough.
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 7:14 PM, Larry C. Lyons wrote:
>
> Without going into detail, it involves power analysis, and I remember
> darned little of the matrix algebra course I too
Maybe? I'd have to look at it to know whether I could. Is this something
that's on google books? NM I'll look myself.
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 7:11 PM, Larry C. Lyons wrote:
>
> Forgot to mention the really difficult part is correctly figuring out the
> range of those results. A good well control
Without going into detail, it involves power analysis, and I remember
darned little of the matrix algebra course I took years ago.
On Wednesday, February 15, 2012, Dana wrote:
>
> ok thanks realized after I sent the email that you were talking to Tim,
but
> i am glad to hear that I do indeed sem
Forgot to mention the really difficult part is correctly figuring out the
range of those results. A good well controlled study will have a very
narrow range. A study that has problems with reliability, sample size, etc,
will have a very wide range. Another way to look at it is if the range of
diff
ok thanks realized after I sent the email that you were talking to Tim, but
i am glad to hear that I do indeed semi-remember this stuff. I m kinda
curious about the calculation they did a thousand times if you are able to
formulate a description. But it doesn't need to be right now. Take your
time
You are not the only one. On my desk at home is a notebook with all my
notes for the next version of my meta-analysis application. 150 pages and
counting - most of which are botched formulae for calculating statistical
power effect sizes and converting obtained probability values to effect
sizes.
Dude. It doesn't matter what I think. It doesn't even matter why they did
it. Three standard deviations is statistically significant. The funding
might show bias if you can document it. Maybe. Since you can't seem to read
the sentences in this study, I am afraid I can't accept that as fact on
your
You can't learn can you?
The study was an intended insult. It defies logic. People change there
minds all the time or do you truly believe they can't. If a liberal
radio station gave someone money to prove their point would you call
it science? Yes you did.
The only thing they proved was that s
what not really -- the meaning of standard deviations? If so yeah you are
right, I think but what Maureen and I said is an ok 10 words or less
version.
In this case p=0.011 so theoretically if they did everything else right,
these results should replicate 99% of the time. And not, 1%.
I re
Not really. It depends on the stats that are used. When looking at
statistical results, the way to interpret statistical significance is as
follows. Let's say the researchers found the two groups showed a
significant difference of p < 0.05 . This means that if you replicated
the study an infinite
It's called confirmational bias, and there are people on this list on
both sides of the political spectrum with the worse cases of it I have
ever experienced.
But it's nothing new. Look at how they treated the first person to say
the earth was not the center of the universe, even after he proved
just to be totally obsessive, here's the link and the heart of the
statistical validation. Note: p=0.011, which based on some semi educated
googling, indicates, according to the pretty little chart here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_normal_distribution#Standard_deviation_and_confidence_i
I know this is what some people enjoy as a vacation...but after the second
day I'd have been totally bored! :-)
Some of my best vacations were things like Disney World/UNiversal/Cirque
Soleil/SeaWorld/shopping in 4 days, Curacao where we explored with our own
car and Antigua where we went on tour
LOL!!
Brilliant response :)
http://abhimanyudubey.files.wordpress.com/2011/12/trollface.jpg?w=207&h=170
On 15 February 2012 15:38, Sam wrote:
>
> OK, I just read it and it says nothing. Just an inconclusive
> assumption that can be a guide for further research.
>
> On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 2:1
pretty sure that's right
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 5:03 PM, Maureen wrote:
>
> Depends on the standard deviation. You can draw valid conclusions for
> n < 100 if standard deviation < 2.
>
> On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 4:54 PM, LRS Scout wrote:
> >
> > The sampling of 90 people is really really smal
that's true. It's more a study than 2 people. But really big studies are in
the thousands. You can't call it definitely proven without a shadow of a
doubt. However, if the sample was properly chosen, it doesn't matter, at
least theoretically. I am not going to swear that randomization best
practic
Depends on the standard deviation. You can draw valid conclusions for
n < 100 if standard deviation < 2.
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 4:54 PM, LRS Scout wrote:
>
> The sampling of 90 people is really really small.
~|
Order the Adob
The sampling of 90 people is really really small.
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 7:29 PM, Dana wrote:
>
> feel free to run away, Sam, but you still haven't showed me any basis at
> all for the crap you've been talking.
>
> On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 4:18 PM, Sam wrote:
>
> >
> > I give up and feel the f
feel free to run away, Sam, but you still haven't showed me any basis at
all for the crap you've been talking.
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 4:18 PM, Sam wrote:
>
> I give up and feel the fool for not heeding this advice sooner:
>
> Dont argue with idiots. They drag you down to their level and beat
I give up and feel the fool for not heeding this advice sooner:
Dont argue with idiots. They drag you down to their level and beat
you with experience
.
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 7:07 PM, Dana wrote:
>
>>
>> Yes it is. It's the same study done three times. Two people, 90 people
>> and 28 people
yeah and that would be a valid reason to dis it, if that was what happened.
But he just keeps saying how offended he is by what whosis said, and as far
as I can tell, whosis is only an author because he generated the
hypothesis. If he were in a position to fudge the results, even but he
wasn't
>
> Yes it is. It's the same study done three times. Two people, 90 people
> and 28 people.
>
Ah, here's the heart of the problem. No, Sam, it isn't. It's -- I'd call it
two studies and an experiment I guess -- that tested the same hypothesis.
According to your nomenclature here, all trials for t
On 2/15/2012 4:38 PM, Dana wrote:
>
> That's not the usual meaning of predetermined, Sam. You might want to look
> these big words up before you use them.
Indeed. I believe he is objecting on the assumption that the results
were going to show exactly what they did, no matter what, and the
sci
I was referring to all of them, but since you seem to think everything
I post is a derogatory reference to you, here's a link:
http://www.mentalhealth.com/icd/p22-pe01.html
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 1:21 PM, Sam wrote:
>
> I wonder which members you are referring to with that comment.
>
> On Wed,
Because lefties have the right of mind and righties have what's left.
heyuk.
On 2/15/2012 1:52 PM, Eric Roberts wrote:
> his theory...why do you have a problem with the fact that he was on target
> with his theory that people of differing political inclinations are wired
> differently?
~
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 4:38 PM, Dana wrote:
> Maybe this is a vocabulary problem.
I think it goes much deeper.
> See, the scans of one of each, sure,
> that has only anecdotal validity. It's still science, for certain meaning
> of "science", because you get journal articles about individual
All the studies were done by Geraint Rees. Same study, different people.
Maybe this is a vocabulary problem. See, the scans of one of each, sure,
that has only anecdotal validity. It's still science, for certain meaning
of "science", because you get journal articles about individual patients,
b
I wonder which members you are referring to with that comment.
.
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 4:13 PM, Maureen wrote:
>
> Maybe we should "commission" a scientist to study the members of this
> list and see what their brains show, keeping in mind that they can
> only scan hardware, not the software.
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 4:09 PM, Dana wrote:
>
> you're still conflating. You are not talking about the study Larry posted,
A high school dropout commissioned Geraint Rees because:
I
decided to find out what was BIOLOGICALLY WRONG with people who
DON'T AGREE WITH ME and see what scientists had t
Maybe we should "commission" a scientist to study the members of this
list and see what their brains show, keeping in mind that they can
only scan hardware, not the software.
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 1:09 PM, Dana wrote:
>
>> to scan the brains of two prominent UK politicians one staunchly
>>
you're still conflating. You are not talking about the study Larry posted,
Sam, all of these insults later.
Again:
> It turns out Firth was a guest editor on the daily BBC Radio 4 news
> programme Today and
>
> COMMISSIONED neuroscientist Geraint Rees
>
> to scan the brains of two prominent UK
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 3:34 PM, Dana wrote:
>
> confused. And you're still not answering my question. Where does it say
> that Firth commissioned the study
Again:
It turns out Firth was a guest editor on the daily BBC Radio 4 news
programme Today and
COMMISSIONED neuroscientist Geraint Rees
>
> Obviously you didn't read it.
>
Obviously you didn't understand it.
> You have a blood vessel in your forehead that's about to pop. I am not
> the enemy. Calm down. I think you should get help.
>
No, Sam, I don't. I have decided that if you insist on putting your
ignorance on display,it's n
sorry vague generalities don't cut it.
Specifics please.
What are the issues you have with the studies?
Sample Size,
Methodology,
Analysis,
what Sam?
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 2:38 PM, Sam wrote:
>
> OK, I just read it and it says nothing. Just an inconclusive
> assumption that can be a guide
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 3:00 PM, Dana wrote:
>
> I am defending it because a study in a peer-reviewed journal has a decent
> claim to representing, however imperfectly, some part of the truth, whether
> Sam likes it or not.
Obviously you didn't read it.
> And you know what, I just tried to show
I am defending it because a study in a peer-reviewed journal has a decent
claim to representing, however imperfectly, some part of the truth, whether
Sam likes it or not.
And you know what, I just tried to show you a graceful way out of this
conversation, but if you don't want to take it I am fee
You have a real bad attitude problem.
Why do you defend with such anger a study you know nothing about?
Because you think they study claims you're smarter? It doesn't. It
claims nothing.
.
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 2:31 PM, Dana wrote:
>
> and actually, you're right. I am angry because you are w
OK, I just read it and it says nothing. Just an inconclusive
assumption that can be a guide for further research.
.
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 2:17 PM, Larry C. Lyons wrote:
>
> Sam you need to educate yourself before commenting. All you do is make
> yourself look foolish.
>
> So as I said what i
and actually, you're right. I am angry because you are wasting my time and
I am allowing it. Just be quiet and admit you have no idea how to evaluate
the validity of the sample, and add that you question its findings. This is
what wikipedia calls WP:IDONTLIKEIT. You are the CF equivalent. Is that
they may in fact agree with me, Sam; this is Britain where they don't use
the same definitions as you do. But it doesn't matter whether they agree
with me. What does the study say, Sam? And by the way, "more fearful" does
not necessarily mean "biologically inferior." Sometimes fear is a survival
t
Cool site. I don't agree with the way they phrase of some of the
questions, but that's pretty universal with me and opinion polls.
I did a system for electronic stock proxy voting and security was a
huge issue. Would love to be able to share my views on security for
online voting.
Did you know
And where does it say that he paid Rees to do the study...
-Original Message-
From: Larry C. Lyons [mailto:larrycly...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2012 1:17 PM
To: cf-community
Subject: Re: Fox News? Really can this be called a News channel?
Sam you need to educate yoursel
Wow. You are so angry and you blame it on me.
Do you truly believe people that don't agree with you are biologically inferior?
.
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 2:07 PM, Dana wrote:
>
>>
>> Let me point an arrow at it, Sam --->a more comprehensive study, using
>> scans from 90 people
>>
>
>
>> So we h
Sam you need to educate yourself before commenting. All you do is make
yourself look foolish.
So as I said what is wrong with the study?
Sample Size?
Methodological Issues?
Data Analysis?
and no snarky answers please, just answer the question.
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 2:14 PM, Sam wrote:
>
Both of this years lead Oscar winners have published scientific
papers on neuroscience. Weve covered Natalie Portmans work on
frontal lobe development in children before, but it turns out Colin
Firth has also just co-authored a study on structural brain
differences in people with differing poli
>
> Let me point an arrow at it, Sam --->a more comprehensive study, using
> scans from 90 people
>
> So we have predetermined results and a paid scientist.
> Any idiot with common sense can tell you this study is stupid and flawed.
Well the idiot I am listening to is certainly saying that, bu
Yup...she discovered a new molecule that can store intense amounts of energy
http://www.geek.com/articles/geek-cetera/5th-grader-plays-with-nitroglycerin
-2012027/
Her teacher brought it up with a friend of his who is a research scientist.
When he published a paper on it, he included her as a co
I forget who makes it, but there is a breakfast cerail call Ancient Grains
that has it and a couple of other non-wheat grains in it...very yummy...
-Original Message-
From: Ras Tafari [mailto:rastaf...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2012 12:41 PM
To: cf-community
Subject: Re: T
Sigh.
1. I don't care if he finished high school, if the study results have some
validity, and no I have not done a chi-square analysis on this.
2. I think you are possibly skewing Mr Firth's idea quite a little
3. He didn't commission the study; where did you get that?
4. It may be a stupid the
Are you still pretending this is legit?
.
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 1:53 PM, Larry C. Lyons wrote:
>
> Makes sense, any decent researcher will do that. Recently I heard of
> one major chemistry paper that was based on what a fifth grade kid
> came up with. She ended up getting credit as an author
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 1:55 PM, Dana wrote:
>
> nope, British, but otherwise: "a large group of young adults."
>
> per Mind Hacks: "two prominent UK politicians one staunchly liberal and
> the other a confirmed conservative"
Keep reading:
Rees decided to develop the idea into a more comprehe
It was University College in London...and I posted it...not Larry ;-)
-Original Message-
From: Dana [mailto:dana.tier...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2012 12:46 PM
To: cf-community
Subject: Re: Fox News? Really can this be called a News channel?
it's a different study, assu
He didn't commission it either...he brought up the idea on a radio show and
the scientist heard about it and thought that it would be an interesting
study. Even if he did commission it (unless I missed it in the article, it
didn't say he did in the article anyhow), he wasn't actually part of the
nope, British, but otherwise: "a large group of young adults."
per Mind Hacks: "two prominent UK politicians one staunchly liberal and
the other a confirmed conservative"
You are conflating. Apparently the the Current Biology study got the first
germ of the idea from Firth and that is why he g
Makes sense, any decent researcher will do that. Recently I heard of
one major chemistry paper that was based on what a fifth grade kid
came up with. She ended up getting credit as an author of the study.
Als its not the first time in history that it has happened. Spectrum
jumping, which wireless
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 11:37 AM, Gruss Gott wrote:
> It's a bit over done. No, a lot over-done.
Hard to overdo the humor here. I don't think it accurately represents
everyone in either the home school camp or the creationist camp, but it
does represent a minority in each camp and it's frack
it's a different study, assuming it actually happened, isn't it? I wasn't
sure what I thought of Sam's source, but if the Smithsonian says it
happened I guess it did. However, per Mind Hacks, the Colin Firth one is
two British politicians, and the study Larry is citing involved a group of
American
Yeah, A guy that didn't even finish high school said:
I
decided to find out what was biologically wrong with people who
dont agree with me and see what scientists had to say about it.
So commissioning a study to confirm a stupid theory that returns your
predisposed results seems a little over th
+1 for quinoa (keen-wah)
On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 7:57 PM, Eric Roberts
wrote:
>
> I love millet and Quinoa
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Erika L. Rich [mailto:elr...@ruwebby.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2012 2:41 PM
> To: cf-community
> Subject: Re: The Best Wheat Flour Substitute
Are you trying to say that the right doesn't attack the intelligence of
people? If they are not questioning the intelligence they are calling
anyone that can put coherent sentences together an elitist...
-Original Message-
From: Sam [mailto:sammyc...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February
http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/science/2011/06/colin-firth-actor-writer-aca
demy-award-winner-scientist/
Wow...I stand corrected...but he actually only gave the scientists the idea.
The Coauthor thing was crediting him for the idea. He didn't actually do
the study. So to say it is his study is
Whenever I tell you to "ask yourself" it's a joke because I know you
won't understand the question.
.
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 12:55 PM, Dana wrote:
>
> I am going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you are making
> some sort of strange joke.
>
~
That applies to extremism in any form.
.
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 12:34 PM, PT wrote:
>
> On 2/15/2012 8:50 AM, Larry C. Lyons wrote:
>
>> What I am struck with about this work is how it may explain why
>> conservatives and progressives find it so difficult to communicate
>> with each other. All
I am going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you are making
some sort of strange joke.
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 8:45 AM, Sam wrote:
>
> No really, it's the Actor that co-wrote this research for a radio show.
>
>
> http://mindhacks.com/2011/04/10/the-oscar-for-best-neuroscience-rese
On 2/15/2012 8:50 AM, Larry C. Lyons wrote:
> What I am struck with about this work is how it may explain why
> conservatives and progressives find it so difficult to communicate
> with each other. All too often they are talking past one another.
> These results may explain why.
It also touches
One of the many foodie things I find weird, fascinating and kinda cool
about Portland is that there are 2 pizza places within walking
distance of my house where you can get both gluten-free pizza and
gluten-free beer. Not much of a fan of either, but it is cool to have
options.
Judah
~~~
Find your match. =-p
http://www.americanselect.org/
The only reason I am mentioning this is because the CEO is coming to the
university to have a panel discussion on the organization. One of the
topics, probably the biggest, will be security issues for online voting.
It sounds interesting
Has anyone mentioned almond flour? I've used it for muffins.
In general I stay away from all grains, whole, sprouted, or otherwise. I.e. no
quinoa, no buckwheat, no nothin.
Interestingly since I've been doing that I've definitely noticed some general
health improvements.
My diet is basica
Now that I'm back in the states it's interesting to view your vacation-self ...
And a good reminder that it's good to get away and totally unplug.
Our routine was:
* wake up, eat breakfast while watching ocean
* swim one mile in the spa pool ( few people, no kids )
* use spa facilities to show
Thanks.
.
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 11:13 AM, Ras Tafari wrote:
>
> idk, i havent ever had a problem with sam, sure he says some shit,
> everyone does.
>
> id miss ya sammy
>
~|
Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now!
http://w
No really, it's the Actor that co-wrote this research for a radio show.
http://mindhacks.com/2011/04/10/the-oscar-for-best-neuroscience-research-goes-to/
If you want to discredit all of my sites because it doesn't fit you
view at least recognize a publicity stunt disguised as hate speech
when y
It's a bit over done. No, a lot over-done.
On Feb 14, 2012, at 8:39 AM, Jerry Milo Johnson wrote:
>
> I thought the abbreviated version a little mean. The whole thing together
> is definitely funnier for me.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 11:14 AM, C. Hatton Humphrey
> wrote:
>
>>> Fr
Is the point
A.) That Wikipedia isn't always accurate or
B.) That politicians say things in exchange for money or
C.) That the US tries to influence others to its policy views?
Because none of that seems surprising unless I'm missing something ...
On Feb 14, 2012, at 8:14 AM, Jerry Barnes
idk, i havent ever had a problem with sam, sure he says some shit,
everyone does.
id miss ya sammy
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 10:58 AM, Jerry Barnes wrote:
>
> "Don't get me started on the anti-vax crowd. 4 kids are now out of my kid's
> school because they're sick with whooping cough - parents r
"Don't get me started on the anti-vax crowd. 4 kids are now out of my kid's
school because they're sick with whooping cough - parents refused to
vaccinate."
There you go again. Shifting the discussion (btw - whooping cough wasn't a
big deal until the US stopped enforcing immigration - which is
Don't get me started on the anti-vax crowd. 4 kids are now out of my
kid's school because they're sick with whooping cough - parents
refused to vaccinate.
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 9:45 AM, Jerry Barnes wrote:
>
> "Both NPR and PBS have reported on investigations on major sponsors in the
> past.
Yes...because the author's name is the same as an actor, it must be the
actor. I guess that means I must have a sister name Julia? This is the
same lack of logic and intellectual integrity that brings us "The Nazis were
socialists...look it's in their name...If it's in their name it must be
true
On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 5:36 PM, Vivec wrote:
> no dude seriously? things are that bad with the IRS now?
>
> People who *are* targeted for taxes must feel really unlucky then LOL!
The amount of IRS paperwork required to exist as a business in the US is
ridiculous. Much worse if you live in Cal
Yanno, at the risk of fueling your misconceptions, Sam, I have to go with
Larry here. You don't seriously think that, do you? You always go for
cheapo debate points, and that makes it very hard to actually talk to you.
He backed up his statement, and since you didn't want to back down you used
th
"Both NPR and PBS have reported on investigations on major sponsors in the
past. When has Faux Snooze done so?"
In the past? Before they took corporate sponsors maybe? And please don't
try to put me into a postion to defend Fox News. It's not going to happen.
Anyway Larry, sometimes stories g
Sam get real. If you cannot come up with a valid critique of the
study, and I've given you the sources, then say so.
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 9:28 AM, Sam wrote:
>
> That's a study by the actor Colin Firth for a radio show. Do you
> really want to site a neurological study co-authored by an Oscar
That's a study by the actor Colin Firth for a radio show. Do you
really want to site a neurological study co-authored by an Oscar
Winner as proof of your silly claim?
.
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 8:50 AM, Larry C. Lyons wrote:
>
> OK Sam what is the criticism of the research. Here's the original
>
OK Sam what is the criticism of the research. Here's the original
study. As I mentioned its been replicated elsewhere and also with non
university samples and the results hold.
So after reading the study, please tell us why its crap? Myself and
many neuroscientists would be most interested in hea
I forgot to add,
Point well taken Dana, I will tone it down.
On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 10:09 PM, Dana wrote:
>
> No. I don't argue with Larry for much the same reason I don't argue with
> you. Both of you have your minds made up and are utterly convinced that you
> are right. Life is just too sho
Exactly Dana. I have every respect for reasonable people. I can relate
to conservatives the onew sho think and I am willing to listen and
respect reasonable people. I have no respect for those on the left or
right, or middle who have substituted ideology for rational thought.
On Tue, Feb 14, 2012
Data are data. That study has been replicated in England, Europe and
in the US with both students and non students on and off campus. If
you are offended perhaps its time to look at yourself and decide why
you are so overly sensitive.
On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 9:26 PM, Sam wrote:
>
> Here we go ag
Except haven' you noticed something Sam those pieces I post are from
Politico.com, not exactly a bastion of liberalism. Look who owns it,
Albritton Communications. Its owned by form Bush I admin people, and
the ceo was in Bush II's cabinate. It may be left wing in your mind
but then again from the
Thanks Larry, I'll check it out.
Erika,
I use different flours depending on what I am trying to do. Disclaimer, I
don't do much baking at this time.
I use chickpea flour for breading and frying.
Any type of baking is going to require a variety of flours along with
xanthan gum. The problem wi
96 matches
Mail list logo
