BUSH HAS WON!!!!
POSTED BY: Anarko
UPDATED: Wednesday, December 29, 2004 10:18
VIEWED: 18245
PAGE 8 of 9
as fortold in b.c. these are the last days. the antichrist is leading the world and the whore of babylon did burn.
p
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
as fortold in b.c. these are the last days. the antichrist is leading the world and the whore of babylon did burn.
p
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
"If your samples *are* your population, you are no longer sampling. You can still calculate mean, and deviations, and the normal statistics. But when your samples *are* your population, there is no confidence level. It is 100% by definition and all means of it."
If you are taking measurements of a continuous property, even if you measure the entire population, you still have error bars (due to error of the measurement) - hence you must state your measurement (for example an arithmetic mean) AND your error and AND confidence that your measure is somewhere within the error.
Yes, you are right. But those errors belong in the Gauge RxR domain, not the sampling domain. Errors in measurement methods and tools can are usually fairly systemetic and can, most often, be easily controlled or accounted for.
Like Fireflyfans.net?
Haken needs a new development system. Donate.
http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=5&t=3283
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by lissa:Quote:
Originally posted by Mantichorus:
"There's an old cat saying, which has particular relevance here; it goes something like this: 'We are all gonna die!'" -Cat, Red Dwarf.
i sort of love you right now. can the cat please be prez? at least then we'd all be dressed well in our graves.
~lissa, spwhore
Well, I've got a new one now, lissa...
"My God. He's like a trained ape... well, you know the rest."
--------------------------------------------------
"To do just the opposite is also a form of imitation." -Georg Christoph Lichtenberg, Aphorisms.
--------------------------------------------------
"Blessed is the man who, having nothing to say, abstains from giving us wordy evidence of the fact." -George Eliot, Impressions of Theophrastus Such.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
BUSH WON !!! KERRY SUCKS !!! 4 more years baby !!!!!
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
President Bush is a little to liberal for my taste, but hopefully in his second term with more Republicans in the Senate we'll finally get the Human Life Amendment passed. Although probably after 2006, when the GOP gets 61 members in the Senate.
This what that needed amendment will say:
Section 1: The right to life is a paramount and most fundamental right of a person.
Section 2: With respect to the right to life guaranteed to persons by the Fifth and Fourteenth Articles of Amendment to the Constitution, the word "person" applies to all human beings, irrespective of age, health, function, or condition of dependency, including their unborn offspring at every stage of their biological development including fertilization.
Section 3: No unborn person shall be deprived of life by any person; provided, however, that nothing in this article shall prohibit a law allowing justification to be shown for only those medical procedures required to prevent the death of either the pregnant woman or her unborn offspring as long as such law requires every reasonable effort be made to preserve the life of each.
Section 4: Congress and the several States shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Sounds nice in theory, in practice it doesn't apply. A fertilized egg FIRST develops into a proto-placenta, nothing human about it there. Then along the way any number of problems can cause the development to run amok, creating nothing more than a blob of more-or-less undifferentiated cells. Just 'cause a cell has the right DNA and the POTENTIAL to become a human does not mean it will always do so. The fact that somewhere between 20 and 30% of all pregnancies spontaneously abort indicate that development OFTEN goes awry seriusly enough to terminate even within the protected envirnment of the womb.
And then there is the other end of the human life spectrum- the brain-dead, for example, appear to have nothing left of the spark that makes people aware, much less human. Would you not allow organ transplants, even to save other lives?
And what about the death penalty? What about drug companies that knowingly sell drugs with no real benefit, but very real risks?
In your mind there is a clear, bright line between human and non-human, between "deprive" and non-deprivation. Real life generally does not present us with such sharp demarcations but with a spectrum of situations and decisions.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Conscience:
President Bush is a little to liberal for my taste, but hopefully in his second term with more Republicans in the Senate we'll finally get the Human Life Amendment passed. Although probably after 2006, when the GOP gets 61 members in the Senate.
This what that needed amendment will say:
Section 1: The right to life is a paramount and most fundamental right of a person.
Section 2: With respect to the right to life guaranteed to persons by the Fifth and Fourteenth Articles of Amendment to the Constitution, the word "person" applies to all human beings, irrespective of age, health, function, or condition of dependency, including their unborn offspring at every stage of their biological development including fertilization.
Section 3: No unborn person shall be deprived of life by any person; provided, however, that nothing in this article shall prohibit a law allowing justification to be shown for only those medical procedures required to prevent the death of either the pregnant woman or her unborn offspring as long as such law requires every reasonable effort be made to preserve the life of each.
Section 4: Congress and the several States shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
Ya lost me on the fertilization part on Article 2. Does that mean Big Brother gets to watch to make sure I don't use a condom or have some sort of "accident"?
Big Brother can't catch a few unsavory folks throughout the world how would they police that? Also..where does that put the whole "Right to Privacy/Who wants to be a porn star?" fantasy?I'm all for women's rights when it comes to their bodies. I am against abortion being used as a form of birth control, but ultimately..if a woman doesn't want to have the child it's her choice. The last thing we need is one more "unwanted" child brought into this world and shuffled off to the department of social services.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
And what about Section 3? Who's to say what "resonable effort" means?
To me, this will make the doc reluctant to make a decision that will save one resulting in a higher mortality rate. After all, docs get sued far too often as it is.
I'm certain that there are far more problems than this with this amendment, but I don't have the time right now to rip it apart.
Lastly, I almost say that this post was a joke by the way Conscience said GW was too liberal. Who the hell would call GW liberal? The man's a right-wing war-monger.
----
"Canada being mad at you is like Mr. Rogers throwing a brick through your window." -Jon Stewart, The Daily Show
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
SignyM,
I think the problem is that the tendency is to put hopes into a fertilized egg. But people can't separate their feelings for 'what might be' with what actually is. So they relate to a lump of cells as if it were a real, individual presence, instead of that fact that it might only become one, some day.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME