It is possible for a doctor to be a jerk to patients and the people he/ she works with and still make a lot of money. True or false?It would be possible to become a doctor and have almost no people skills. True or false?
Absolutely !! Some Doc's have a great/good bedside manner but, they lack other skills.
As a RN, I would prefer a Doc to be a proficient Doc vs. a Doc with charm.
The debate of Health Reform does need some adjustments but, the Doc's really are against it because they will receive a base salary, depending on their specialty. But, this is a totally different response to your question.It would be possible to become a doctor and have almost no people skills. True or false?
Absolutely true!
I don't mind so much with a very skilled surgeon as the outcome of surgery is more important than his/her bedside manner, nasty though it is. BUT with a physician! I saw a sleep specialist who wanted paying BEFORE I saw him (I'm not surprised as I wouldn't have paid him after I saw him!) He was rude, gave me no help, suggested I did a cognitive behavioural course costing $500 which would not have taught me anything new, then wrote a rude letter to my GP saying I had a ';negative affect.';
Up his bum!
not a good idea. chances are- if you are asking this question, you are considering to be a doctor strictly for the money, dont do it. you wont be happy with your choice if you dont want to deal with the people
very true. I have worked with doctors that have had no bedside manners and were horrendous to work with period! These doctors still made plenty of money though and tended to work in hospital settings.
Friday, February 12, 2010
Are these statements true or false and why? If a figure is a rectangle, then it cannot be a rhombus?
If a figure is a rhombus, then it cannot be a rectangle?Are these statements true or false and why? If a figure is a rectangle, then it cannot be a rhombus?
False, a rectangle is a rhombus, i believe.
Rhombus is parallel sides and equal sides.
Rectangle is parallel sides and can have equal sides.
Therefore, a rectangle can be a rhombus.Are these statements true or false and why? If a figure is a rectangle, then it cannot be a rhombus?
false; a square is both a rhombus and a rectangle.how to cut hair
False, a rectangle is a rhombus, i believe.
Rhombus is parallel sides and equal sides.
Rectangle is parallel sides and can have equal sides.
Therefore, a rectangle can be a rhombus.Are these statements true or false and why? If a figure is a rectangle, then it cannot be a rhombus?
false; a square is both a rhombus and a rectangle.
Would you say the following two statements are true or false?
Society in general regards people who talk to God as holy. But society in general regards people whom God talks to as insane. Do you agree or disagree with this?Would you say the following two statements are true or false?
Even religious people think they're nuts!
If you're a clergyman or a nun you can get away with it. For the rest of mankind it's a straightjacket.Would you say the following two statements are true or false?
I agree, but I have something to say to 14 black scholar:
In the holy texts of nearly every religion, god gives proof to those with whom he speaks, tablets, miracles and the like, when someone comes up to me and says they've spoken to god, I ask for proof, show me a tablet that couldn't have been carved by human hands, part the storm drain over there, turn that stick into a snake, something, if god is with you, let god prove himself to witness' other than the one! Let him prove himself en-mass, big head in the sky style, not privately to one person without giving them proof!
One person can be crazy, and books can be written by one person. Let god prove himself to hundreds of people right here, right now, in this day and age, leaving evidence to convince others who weren't present! I'll believe when there's reasonable evidence to compel me.
You see their is no way to win with atheists because they are so close minded.
If someone experiences something considered to be paranormal they will quickly point out that person is hallucinating and that he is deluded.
Numerous atheists have stated they would believe in God if he would just show himself. Yet God has shown himself to so many people but, atheists quickly dismiss it by saying this person is deluded.
In short their is no way to win with atheists.
If you experience something paranormal they will quickly call you deluded.
You see here is the problem I have with atheists. They believe in naturalism and if it is true that means your brain by a random process that isn't very interested in making you intelligent. All it cared about is making babies. Okay that means since you were formed by a naturalistic process that was not intelligently designed well you would have to believe your brain is functioning properly without any proof that it is. Because you are using the brain to see if your brain is functioning properly. Which is circular reasoning you have to be intelligently designed to claim with certainty that your brain is functioning properly and that your truth claims corresponds with reality because is naturalism is true you cant trust your brain because no one designed it intelligently it just formed by random chance with no concern if your Cognitive abilities were able to form true beliefs concerning reality . So for atheist to claim they are a naturalist they cant be because they cant account for anything in the natural world and their cognitive abilities are in question because they believe it formed by a random process. You can take what they are saying seriously because they cant prove or disproves if their cognitive abilities correspond with reality. So naturalism refutes itself.
Societies with a more spiritual view of life will see those that talk to God as holy. Those that are culturally based on the mental and omit the spiritual will see those that talk to God as insane because they do not understand spiritual things. Also, we would have to judge what people are saying God is telling them. God will not tell you to go out and kill your aunt or mother.
I disagree with the first part and agree with the second.
disagree with both.
I agree with I'm not mike, I think it is the other way around, although I think they are both a little touched
Yes.
I disagree with the question as you posted it.
Yes, that's true (in a very general sense).
And there is a reason for that.
Who cares what society thinks? I'm a God pleaser, not a man pleaser.
i agree. altho it might not be true, but society does think this.
Isn't it the other way around?
Yes, and if the are Jesus that is very bad!
Even religious people think they're nuts!
If you're a clergyman or a nun you can get away with it. For the rest of mankind it's a straightjacket.Would you say the following two statements are true or false?
I agree, but I have something to say to 14 black scholar:
In the holy texts of nearly every religion, god gives proof to those with whom he speaks, tablets, miracles and the like, when someone comes up to me and says they've spoken to god, I ask for proof, show me a tablet that couldn't have been carved by human hands, part the storm drain over there, turn that stick into a snake, something, if god is with you, let god prove himself to witness' other than the one! Let him prove himself en-mass, big head in the sky style, not privately to one person without giving them proof!
One person can be crazy, and books can be written by one person. Let god prove himself to hundreds of people right here, right now, in this day and age, leaving evidence to convince others who weren't present! I'll believe when there's reasonable evidence to compel me.
You see their is no way to win with atheists because they are so close minded.
If someone experiences something considered to be paranormal they will quickly point out that person is hallucinating and that he is deluded.
Numerous atheists have stated they would believe in God if he would just show himself. Yet God has shown himself to so many people but, atheists quickly dismiss it by saying this person is deluded.
In short their is no way to win with atheists.
If you experience something paranormal they will quickly call you deluded.
You see here is the problem I have with atheists. They believe in naturalism and if it is true that means your brain by a random process that isn't very interested in making you intelligent. All it cared about is making babies. Okay that means since you were formed by a naturalistic process that was not intelligently designed well you would have to believe your brain is functioning properly without any proof that it is. Because you are using the brain to see if your brain is functioning properly. Which is circular reasoning you have to be intelligently designed to claim with certainty that your brain is functioning properly and that your truth claims corresponds with reality because is naturalism is true you cant trust your brain because no one designed it intelligently it just formed by random chance with no concern if your Cognitive abilities were able to form true beliefs concerning reality . So for atheist to claim they are a naturalist they cant be because they cant account for anything in the natural world and their cognitive abilities are in question because they believe it formed by a random process. You can take what they are saying seriously because they cant prove or disproves if their cognitive abilities correspond with reality. So naturalism refutes itself.
Societies with a more spiritual view of life will see those that talk to God as holy. Those that are culturally based on the mental and omit the spiritual will see those that talk to God as insane because they do not understand spiritual things. Also, we would have to judge what people are saying God is telling them. God will not tell you to go out and kill your aunt or mother.
I disagree with the first part and agree with the second.
disagree with both.
I agree with I'm not mike, I think it is the other way around, although I think they are both a little touched
Yes.
I disagree with the question as you posted it.
Yes, that's true (in a very general sense).
And there is a reason for that.
Who cares what society thinks? I'm a God pleaser, not a man pleaser.
i agree. altho it might not be true, but society does think this.
Isn't it the other way around?
Yes, and if the are Jesus that is very bad!
A false dilemma entails a confusion between opposites and negatives. Is this statement true or false?
Please think about this critically before answering.A false dilemma entails a confusion between opposites and negatives. Is this statement true or false?
is true, because a false dilemma cause false opposites and negatives and if you got no dilemma, you got no opposites and no negatives and .. what about are we talking here?A false dilemma entails a confusion between opposites and negatives. Is this statement true or false?
It is true. If there isn't a dilemma, you have a clear-cut choice and clearly laid out opposites/negatives.
What say?
It's true when this dilemma is a false dichotomy. Your statement is too vague to make much more of it, though.
is true, because a false dilemma cause false opposites and negatives and if you got no dilemma, you got no opposites and no negatives and .. what about are we talking here?A false dilemma entails a confusion between opposites and negatives. Is this statement true or false?
It is true. If there isn't a dilemma, you have a clear-cut choice and clearly laid out opposites/negatives.
What say?
It's true when this dilemma is a false dichotomy. Your statement is too vague to make much more of it, though.
Please help on these 5 True or False Accounting questions?
1. Keeping personal and business records separate is an application of the business entity.
2. Assets such as cash and supplies have value because they can be used to acquire other assets or be used to operate a business.
3. The relationship among assets, liabilities, and owner鈥檚 equity can be written as an equation.
4. The accounting equation does not have to be in balance to be correct.
5. The sum of the assets and liabilities of a business always equals the investment of the business owner.
Please help on these 5 True or False Accounting questions?
1) True
2) True
3) True O.E. + Liabilities = Assets
4) False, they always have to balance!
5) False, The sum of the O.E. and Liabilities have to equal the assets.
2. Assets such as cash and supplies have value because they can be used to acquire other assets or be used to operate a business.
3. The relationship among assets, liabilities, and owner鈥檚 equity can be written as an equation.
4. The accounting equation does not have to be in balance to be correct.
5. The sum of the assets and liabilities of a business always equals the investment of the business owner.
Please help on these 5 True or False Accounting questions?
1) True
2) True
3) True O.E. + Liabilities = Assets
4) False, they always have to balance!
5) False, The sum of the O.E. and Liabilities have to equal the assets.
How might I be able to establish credit? I was told that paying a phone bill is one way. True or False?
I'm trying to buy a certified Honda Civic by Fall '07 and I need to establish credit, I was just wondering if paying my cell phone bill is one way without having to get a credit card or loan.How might I be able to establish credit? I was told that paying a phone bill is one way. True or False?
No, paying cell phones don't help you establish credit.
Chances are,that in a year and a half if you have no credit, you won't be able to establish enough credit by getting a few $500 credit cards to qualify for a 15K car loan. Having a credit card is probably a good idea but make sure you don't max it out. So, what should you be doing? Give the lender reasons, other than credit, to give you a bunch of money.
Start saving for a down-payment: a cash investment in the vehicle (at least 20%) shows a commitment to paying back the money they lend.
Show stability: having a long term job and long time residence helps by showing the lender that you have a stable income and they will be able to find you if you don't pay. Also, some lenders have programs for first time buyers that require at least one year at current job and residence.
Have utility bills in your name helps. Also, if you rent, get a reference from your landlord showing that you pay your rent on time every month.
If all else fails and you have parents or grandparents with good credit you can get them to co-sign.How might I be able to establish credit? I was told that paying a phone bill is one way. True or False?
Being late in paying a bill will generally negatively affect your credit. I'd suggest going to your bank and setting up a credit card that's paid automatically directly from your checking account (different from a debit card in that this one will establish your credit). It's a good choice if you're responsible enough to not overspend.
To establish credit you need to get credit.
That means you need to get a credit card. I know it is sort of hard to get one because then they ask you if you have any credit.
First try getting a credit card from stores e.g Macy's, Old Navy, Ashley Stewart, Payless etc. Also some banks when you open an account with them would give you a card.
Secondly, hold on to your hat, You need to purchase, buy, rent, consume something using the credit card and pay it back in time.
Thirdly, wait for a few months (5-6) then apply for a credit report.
The last stage is tedious but it must be done.With out this there is no car. I know the car might not be there for that long, but think of it this way better cars are being made ever day.
Good luck!!
Thats true but keeping up on all your bills is good to
There are several ways to establish credit. One way is to get a credit card (just a low limit one would be fine) - unfortunately, with no credit, it's hard to find one without an annual fee or start-up costs. I would go to orchardbank.com or first premiere credit card. We have one of each and they are wonderful people.
If you aren't firm on that Honda Civic (which is a bad choice in my opinion) You might also want to try to finance your vehicle through ford or toyota they seem to be easier on people with little or no credit. Depending on how old you are, I might want a safer vehicle than that. Maybe even a Kia???
Paying a phone bill doesn't go on your credit. You need something that will show up on your credit report.
Go here: http://financialplan.about.com/cs/credit鈥?/a> for more information, they are a great site.
Keep in mind that this won't happen overnight. It takes time to establish credit. Make sure you use your new credit card and charge things on it. Keep a small balance on it, never pay it off completely..
I hope this helps and good luck!!
keeping up with your bills makes can repair bad credit and paying off loans or furniture
There are so many ways to establish credit. There is no one single FAST way to do it though. For my suggestion, let's assume you're starting at the very beginning.
First, you should have your own checking account. Whatever you do - DO NOT bounce any checks! Second, apply for a Target guest card (I use this example because Target is local to me, and they've always been able to help my own credit). If you're approved for this card, once you receive it, all you really need to do is charge on it once, then pay the bill off as soon as it arrives. You don't even have to use it again if you don't want to (Or if you're afraid of overextending yourself again). The next thing I would do is to get a major credit card - Master Card, Visa, American Express, Discover. And once again, charge on it once, pay it off immediately, and never use it again if you don't want to (or again feel there's risk of overextending yourself) So far, you're making yourself the banks WORST customer - That's right, WORST. As long as you carry no balance and pay your bill in full, you're building up good credit, and not paying the banks any interest! Sounds crazy, doesn't it? Moving on... My recommendation is to then get a car loan for a small amount. Even if you have the cash to buy it outright, get the loan as an excercise. Again, make your payments ontime all the time, and if able to, pay a little extra each month. It will shorten the term of your loan, and reduce the total amount of interest you pay over time. Try to space each of these activities out, keeping in mind that too many inquiries too close together can make you look desperate for money. I recommend doing the checking account and Target guest card first and near the same time, and wait for 4-6 months before going for that major credit card, then waiting another 4-6 months before applying for the lar loan. Soon, you'll find yourself in good shape with terrific credit!
If you develop poor credit as a result of bouncing checks or credit card delinquency, you should also pull your credit record from all three reporting agencies - experian, Transunion and equifax. I used www.myfico.com. Once you have these, look at how each of them is reporting, and take note of any outstanding debts - pay them off and ask that they report back to the associated agencies. In addition, follow up on this once a year, or more often. What I found is that when bad credit is made right with the debtor, in many cases, they do NOT always follow up and correct it with the reporting agencies, sometimes leaving inconsistent information on your credit report, which can count against you when applying for some of the other things mentioned earlier.
One last thing - Home ownership is one of the BIGGEST investments you'll probably ever make. Again, make payments on time everytime. And if things begin looking bleak, DO NOT ALLOW a foreclosure process to be completed. SELL first! AND, avoid ever filing for bankruptcy whenever possible, as this can hurt you for a LONG time if it ever happens to you!
Good luck!
Yes, paying any bill on time is a good way to establish a credit record. Another ';low risk'; option is a kind of secured credit card you can get where the card has a limit of say $300, and you pay the $300 up front so it works more like a debit card. The lender is taking no risk, and you are building a credit record. Do you have a bank account? Go to that bank and explain what you are trying to do, they will be happy to help.
That is true about the phone bill, but it probably won't be enough to do a whole lot. You can also get a line of credit at most clothing stores and use it when you need to buy things to wear, just make sure you pay it off every month so you don't have the interest. You'll probably still not have much credit by 2007 though. It takes time and management to get really good credit.
No your cell phone bill is not a good way to establish credit.......most likely you will not be able to get that car on your own........you will need a co-signer for a loan........after your loan is paid off you will then have established credit......or if you have credit cards and you pay those on time for 2 years you will usually have a good credit score........good luck........its alot harder than it seems!
1. Paying your bills on time.
2. Paying down your debt to credit ratio.
3. Establishing credit by applying for credit.
4. Contact credit bureaus for any discrepancies found on
your credit report.
The best way to establish credit is to go to very small loan companies. Borrow $200 and pay it back in five months. That type of thing. I established my credit that way years ago, when I first turned 18. If you are always on time, or pay it off quickly, that increases your credit score. You'd be surprised what small loans can really do for your credit. Make sure you always pay all bills that report to the credit agency before the due date.
No, paying cell phones don't help you establish credit.
Chances are,that in a year and a half if you have no credit, you won't be able to establish enough credit by getting a few $500 credit cards to qualify for a 15K car loan. Having a credit card is probably a good idea but make sure you don't max it out. So, what should you be doing? Give the lender reasons, other than credit, to give you a bunch of money.
Start saving for a down-payment: a cash investment in the vehicle (at least 20%) shows a commitment to paying back the money they lend.
Show stability: having a long term job and long time residence helps by showing the lender that you have a stable income and they will be able to find you if you don't pay. Also, some lenders have programs for first time buyers that require at least one year at current job and residence.
Have utility bills in your name helps. Also, if you rent, get a reference from your landlord showing that you pay your rent on time every month.
If all else fails and you have parents or grandparents with good credit you can get them to co-sign.How might I be able to establish credit? I was told that paying a phone bill is one way. True or False?
Being late in paying a bill will generally negatively affect your credit. I'd suggest going to your bank and setting up a credit card that's paid automatically directly from your checking account (different from a debit card in that this one will establish your credit). It's a good choice if you're responsible enough to not overspend.
To establish credit you need to get credit.
That means you need to get a credit card. I know it is sort of hard to get one because then they ask you if you have any credit.
First try getting a credit card from stores e.g Macy's, Old Navy, Ashley Stewart, Payless etc. Also some banks when you open an account with them would give you a card.
Secondly, hold on to your hat, You need to purchase, buy, rent, consume something using the credit card and pay it back in time.
Thirdly, wait for a few months (5-6) then apply for a credit report.
The last stage is tedious but it must be done.With out this there is no car. I know the car might not be there for that long, but think of it this way better cars are being made ever day.
Good luck!!
Thats true but keeping up on all your bills is good to
There are several ways to establish credit. One way is to get a credit card (just a low limit one would be fine) - unfortunately, with no credit, it's hard to find one without an annual fee or start-up costs. I would go to orchardbank.com or first premiere credit card. We have one of each and they are wonderful people.
If you aren't firm on that Honda Civic (which is a bad choice in my opinion) You might also want to try to finance your vehicle through ford or toyota they seem to be easier on people with little or no credit. Depending on how old you are, I might want a safer vehicle than that. Maybe even a Kia???
Paying a phone bill doesn't go on your credit. You need something that will show up on your credit report.
Go here: http://financialplan.about.com/cs/credit鈥?/a> for more information, they are a great site.
Keep in mind that this won't happen overnight. It takes time to establish credit. Make sure you use your new credit card and charge things on it. Keep a small balance on it, never pay it off completely..
I hope this helps and good luck!!
keeping up with your bills makes can repair bad credit and paying off loans or furniture
There are so many ways to establish credit. There is no one single FAST way to do it though. For my suggestion, let's assume you're starting at the very beginning.
First, you should have your own checking account. Whatever you do - DO NOT bounce any checks! Second, apply for a Target guest card (I use this example because Target is local to me, and they've always been able to help my own credit). If you're approved for this card, once you receive it, all you really need to do is charge on it once, then pay the bill off as soon as it arrives. You don't even have to use it again if you don't want to (Or if you're afraid of overextending yourself again). The next thing I would do is to get a major credit card - Master Card, Visa, American Express, Discover. And once again, charge on it once, pay it off immediately, and never use it again if you don't want to (or again feel there's risk of overextending yourself) So far, you're making yourself the banks WORST customer - That's right, WORST. As long as you carry no balance and pay your bill in full, you're building up good credit, and not paying the banks any interest! Sounds crazy, doesn't it? Moving on... My recommendation is to then get a car loan for a small amount. Even if you have the cash to buy it outright, get the loan as an excercise. Again, make your payments ontime all the time, and if able to, pay a little extra each month. It will shorten the term of your loan, and reduce the total amount of interest you pay over time. Try to space each of these activities out, keeping in mind that too many inquiries too close together can make you look desperate for money. I recommend doing the checking account and Target guest card first and near the same time, and wait for 4-6 months before going for that major credit card, then waiting another 4-6 months before applying for the lar loan. Soon, you'll find yourself in good shape with terrific credit!
If you develop poor credit as a result of bouncing checks or credit card delinquency, you should also pull your credit record from all three reporting agencies - experian, Transunion and equifax. I used www.myfico.com. Once you have these, look at how each of them is reporting, and take note of any outstanding debts - pay them off and ask that they report back to the associated agencies. In addition, follow up on this once a year, or more often. What I found is that when bad credit is made right with the debtor, in many cases, they do NOT always follow up and correct it with the reporting agencies, sometimes leaving inconsistent information on your credit report, which can count against you when applying for some of the other things mentioned earlier.
One last thing - Home ownership is one of the BIGGEST investments you'll probably ever make. Again, make payments on time everytime. And if things begin looking bleak, DO NOT ALLOW a foreclosure process to be completed. SELL first! AND, avoid ever filing for bankruptcy whenever possible, as this can hurt you for a LONG time if it ever happens to you!
Good luck!
Yes, paying any bill on time is a good way to establish a credit record. Another ';low risk'; option is a kind of secured credit card you can get where the card has a limit of say $300, and you pay the $300 up front so it works more like a debit card. The lender is taking no risk, and you are building a credit record. Do you have a bank account? Go to that bank and explain what you are trying to do, they will be happy to help.
That is true about the phone bill, but it probably won't be enough to do a whole lot. You can also get a line of credit at most clothing stores and use it when you need to buy things to wear, just make sure you pay it off every month so you don't have the interest. You'll probably still not have much credit by 2007 though. It takes time and management to get really good credit.
No your cell phone bill is not a good way to establish credit.......most likely you will not be able to get that car on your own........you will need a co-signer for a loan........after your loan is paid off you will then have established credit......or if you have credit cards and you pay those on time for 2 years you will usually have a good credit score........good luck........its alot harder than it seems!
1. Paying your bills on time.
2. Paying down your debt to credit ratio.
3. Establishing credit by applying for credit.
4. Contact credit bureaus for any discrepancies found on
your credit report.
The best way to establish credit is to go to very small loan companies. Borrow $200 and pay it back in five months. That type of thing. I established my credit that way years ago, when I first turned 18. If you are always on time, or pay it off quickly, that increases your credit score. You'd be surprised what small loans can really do for your credit. Make sure you always pay all bills that report to the credit agency before the due date.
I read somewhere that you can put siamese fighting fish in the same tank as goldfish? True or false?
Is it just certain types of golfish and is it a gender thing as well? i have 1 goldfish and would like to add a fighting fish to the tank, what do I do?I read somewhere that you can put siamese fighting fish in the same tank as goldfish? True or false?
Sure you can, but it's not a good idea.
1)Betta are warm water tropical fish. The need 75-85F temps. Lower temps result in lethargy, disease and early death. Goldfish are cold water carp types. They need temp below 73F, and ideally in the 65-68F range. Temps above 72 will result in oxygen deprivation, illness, and early death.
2)Betta tank mates should be fast swimmers, and not have showy fins. This pretty much rules out most gold fish.I read somewhere that you can put siamese fighting fish in the same tank as goldfish? True or false?
What you can do is put Betta in with other tropical fish. Especially those which are larger than him or swim a lot faster (since Bettas don't swim that well). After a few hours or days (at most), the Betta soon realises the other fish are not worth attacking and then lead a very 'normal' life with his other tankmates. In the streams of Thailand, bettas only need to protect their little corner of bubblenest so it really doesn't make any sense for him to kill anything in sight. Those who have lived in isolation will naturally be a little over-zealous, but they very quickly drop the act.
You should not put a betta and goldfish in the same aquarium because they require different water conditions to survive. Goldfish are coldwater whereas bettas are tropical fish. However they may still 'survive' in the same tank, although they will not thrive. Goldfish also tend to gobble food up whereas bettas are quite leisurely feeders so they may end up not getting anything to eat at all. If you really must have a betta, they can do relatively well in small tank set-ups or even a large bowl so that would be the better option for you.
Bad mojo, don't try it............. why would you want to do this?
I wouldn't put any other fish in the same tank as a Beta. Nothing good will result.
It depends. Is it a male fighting fish (betta)? If so, it can only be put in a tank with the shorttailed, common variety. You couldn't put a male betta in with fancy goldfish though, because it's instincts would lead it to attack the large finnage. If it is a female betta, it can be kept with any other docile fish.
you will end up with a dead goldifish most likely -- especially if the goldfish is male. male goldfish chase and nip -- thats not what a betta considers fun. goldfish are also poor swimmers and easy targets. there are lots of varieties of fancy goldfish -- they really are best with each other.
i love fighting fish......had them all my life.....and it depends on the fish.....if you want to i would suggest that you get one that is kep in a tank with other fish free swiming or in one of those cup things they are more likely too be okay.....i have had some that killed my gold fish and some that didn't
Listen to Ella above. I have Betta in all of my tanks with all types of fish. No Goldfish. Good Luck..%26gt;%26lt;%26gt;:)
As long as you goldfishes are bigger than the betta, it should be alright.
Anyway, betta's a unique fishes that only fight among it's own kind and won't disturb other spices.
They are even able to live in the same tank, if they are grown from the spawn, from small fries and with spacious enough tank. Most of the time, it's not advicible to put air-stone as it will ripple the water. When betta are old enough, water disturbance may cause them to starts fighting.
Enjoy!
I believe that the answer is false because if you put a Betta in a tank with another Betta then they will fight to the death until one of them is dead and the winner will proceed to eat the other Betta's corpse so I personally wouldn't recommend it.
Oh heck no! The beta fish will eat the goldfish...ALIVE!
no goldfish thrive in coldwater conditions, and bettas are tropical. dont do it
Sometimes this is true. The basic thing to remember when it comes to bettas (fighting fish) is that they have fin envy. They will attack any fish that has bigger fins than they do, so if you're trying to put him in a tank with a fancy goldfish with long pretty fins, this is probably not a good idea. However, if you're trying to put him in with a ten cent comet goldfish, he should be fine.
One thing you can do to kind if see what will happen is to leave the betta in the bag or cup that you brought him home in, and just set it to float on the top of the water for awhile before releasing him in the tank. See what he does. If he feels threatened, he will spread his fins out as big as they will go in order to intimidate the other fish. And he will zip around a lot, basically swimming like he's very mad. If you notice this, and it doesn't stop after a minute or two, I would avoid putting the two together.
Bettas can live with other fish though. I currently have a betta in a tank with plattys, guppies, and firebelly toads, and they get along fine. I've previously had them housed with neon tetras as well, but neons are fragile and hard to keep alive.
Good luck
Sure you can, but it's not a good idea.
1)Betta are warm water tropical fish. The need 75-85F temps. Lower temps result in lethargy, disease and early death. Goldfish are cold water carp types. They need temp below 73F, and ideally in the 65-68F range. Temps above 72 will result in oxygen deprivation, illness, and early death.
2)Betta tank mates should be fast swimmers, and not have showy fins. This pretty much rules out most gold fish.I read somewhere that you can put siamese fighting fish in the same tank as goldfish? True or false?
What you can do is put Betta in with other tropical fish. Especially those which are larger than him or swim a lot faster (since Bettas don't swim that well). After a few hours or days (at most), the Betta soon realises the other fish are not worth attacking and then lead a very 'normal' life with his other tankmates. In the streams of Thailand, bettas only need to protect their little corner of bubblenest so it really doesn't make any sense for him to kill anything in sight. Those who have lived in isolation will naturally be a little over-zealous, but they very quickly drop the act.
You should not put a betta and goldfish in the same aquarium because they require different water conditions to survive. Goldfish are coldwater whereas bettas are tropical fish. However they may still 'survive' in the same tank, although they will not thrive. Goldfish also tend to gobble food up whereas bettas are quite leisurely feeders so they may end up not getting anything to eat at all. If you really must have a betta, they can do relatively well in small tank set-ups or even a large bowl so that would be the better option for you.
Bad mojo, don't try it............. why would you want to do this?
I wouldn't put any other fish in the same tank as a Beta. Nothing good will result.
It depends. Is it a male fighting fish (betta)? If so, it can only be put in a tank with the shorttailed, common variety. You couldn't put a male betta in with fancy goldfish though, because it's instincts would lead it to attack the large finnage. If it is a female betta, it can be kept with any other docile fish.
you will end up with a dead goldifish most likely -- especially if the goldfish is male. male goldfish chase and nip -- thats not what a betta considers fun. goldfish are also poor swimmers and easy targets. there are lots of varieties of fancy goldfish -- they really are best with each other.
i love fighting fish......had them all my life.....and it depends on the fish.....if you want to i would suggest that you get one that is kep in a tank with other fish free swiming or in one of those cup things they are more likely too be okay.....i have had some that killed my gold fish and some that didn't
Listen to Ella above. I have Betta in all of my tanks with all types of fish. No Goldfish. Good Luck..%26gt;%26lt;%26gt;:)
As long as you goldfishes are bigger than the betta, it should be alright.
Anyway, betta's a unique fishes that only fight among it's own kind and won't disturb other spices.
They are even able to live in the same tank, if they are grown from the spawn, from small fries and with spacious enough tank. Most of the time, it's not advicible to put air-stone as it will ripple the water. When betta are old enough, water disturbance may cause them to starts fighting.
Enjoy!
I believe that the answer is false because if you put a Betta in a tank with another Betta then they will fight to the death until one of them is dead and the winner will proceed to eat the other Betta's corpse so I personally wouldn't recommend it.
Oh heck no! The beta fish will eat the goldfish...ALIVE!
no goldfish thrive in coldwater conditions, and bettas are tropical. dont do it
Sometimes this is true. The basic thing to remember when it comes to bettas (fighting fish) is that they have fin envy. They will attack any fish that has bigger fins than they do, so if you're trying to put him in a tank with a fancy goldfish with long pretty fins, this is probably not a good idea. However, if you're trying to put him in with a ten cent comet goldfish, he should be fine.
One thing you can do to kind if see what will happen is to leave the betta in the bag or cup that you brought him home in, and just set it to float on the top of the water for awhile before releasing him in the tank. See what he does. If he feels threatened, he will spread his fins out as big as they will go in order to intimidate the other fish. And he will zip around a lot, basically swimming like he's very mad. If you notice this, and it doesn't stop after a minute or two, I would avoid putting the two together.
Bettas can live with other fish though. I currently have a betta in a tank with plattys, guppies, and firebelly toads, and they get along fine. I've previously had them housed with neon tetras as well, but neons are fragile and hard to keep alive.
Good luck
God made sex because he could not find another way to make one person love another. True or False?
Sex and love are two very different things.
Love and blessings DonGod made sex because he could not find another way to make one person love another. True or False?
False, sex is to reproduce, to continue life, and has no connections with love other than that we have made it only right for lovers to have sex, in the human realm at least.
Love in itself is an emotional connection with someone else you care for, not a physical connection.God made sex because he could not find another way to make one person love another. True or False?
God didn't make sex. Sex is one way to reproduce, and it's one product of evolution. I have to add to Questioner's answer something: Sex is not just for reproduction, it's apparently starting to become a form of recreation nowadays.
False. Obviously you are unaware of the love a parent can have for a child, and vice versa, or the multitude of other non-sexual manifestations of love. The argument doesn't hold water.
True love is ';love and trust'; combined.
When you have to pay for sex.
They want the money ';up front,'; because
they don't trust you or love you.
When you make one person have sex with another.
That's rape. %26lt;}:-{(
i think He invented sex for reproduction. Love is suppose to be pure and are many kinds of love that don't involve sex: the love of a parent for his child, two brothers that care for each other or just two bff.
Ah no, sex is to make sure we make more people, not generate love. Love is different.
';Mu.';
The question is wrong because God almost certainly does not exist.how to cut hair
Love and blessings DonGod made sex because he could not find another way to make one person love another. True or False?
False, sex is to reproduce, to continue life, and has no connections with love other than that we have made it only right for lovers to have sex, in the human realm at least.
Love in itself is an emotional connection with someone else you care for, not a physical connection.God made sex because he could not find another way to make one person love another. True or False?
God didn't make sex. Sex is one way to reproduce, and it's one product of evolution. I have to add to Questioner's answer something: Sex is not just for reproduction, it's apparently starting to become a form of recreation nowadays.
False. Obviously you are unaware of the love a parent can have for a child, and vice versa, or the multitude of other non-sexual manifestations of love. The argument doesn't hold water.
True love is ';love and trust'; combined.
When you have to pay for sex.
They want the money ';up front,'; because
they don't trust you or love you.
When you make one person have sex with another.
That's rape. %26lt;}:-{(
i think He invented sex for reproduction. Love is suppose to be pure and are many kinds of love that don't involve sex: the love of a parent for his child, two brothers that care for each other or just two bff.
Ah no, sex is to make sure we make more people, not generate love. Love is different.
';Mu.';
The question is wrong because God almost certainly does not exist.
Is the toilet coriolis myth true or false?
Is the myth that toilets spin the opposite way in the northern and southern hemispheres due to the coriolis effect true or false?Is the toilet coriolis myth true or false?
This myth is actually false. Although the coriolis effect exists, it only acts over very large areas of land. This is why hurricanes and cyclones spin in different directions. Toilets are not large enough for the coriolis effect to actually affect anything. Besides, toilets are actually make to rotate a certain way to take care of gunk and all that other stuff.Is the toilet coriolis myth true or false?
The belief that the water draining a toilet will spin in the oppostie direction between northern and southern hemispheres is a myth. It is not true.
This myth is actually false. Although the coriolis effect exists, it only acts over very large areas of land. This is why hurricanes and cyclones spin in different directions. Toilets are not large enough for the coriolis effect to actually affect anything. Besides, toilets are actually make to rotate a certain way to take care of gunk and all that other stuff.Is the toilet coriolis myth true or false?
The belief that the water draining a toilet will spin in the oppostie direction between northern and southern hemispheres is a myth. It is not true.
Is the toilet coriolis myth true or false?
Is the myth that toilets spin the opposite way in the northern and southern hemispheres due to the coriolis effect true or false?Is the toilet coriolis myth true or false?
This myth is actually false. Although the coriolis effect exists, it only acts over very large areas of land. This is why hurricanes and cyclones spin in different directions. Toilets are not large enough for the coriolis effect to actually affect anything. Besides, toilets are actually make to rotate a certain way to take care of gunk and all that other stuff.Is the toilet coriolis myth true or false?
The belief that the water draining a toilet will spin in the oppostie direction between northern and southern hemispheres is a myth. It is not true.
This myth is actually false. Although the coriolis effect exists, it only acts over very large areas of land. This is why hurricanes and cyclones spin in different directions. Toilets are not large enough for the coriolis effect to actually affect anything. Besides, toilets are actually make to rotate a certain way to take care of gunk and all that other stuff.Is the toilet coriolis myth true or false?
The belief that the water draining a toilet will spin in the oppostie direction between northern and southern hemispheres is a myth. It is not true.
If you do not define your future then the future will define you. True or false?
I think that's true. People who do not make their own decisions do not shape their future. If anyone does not think about their decisions then they will not make an intelligent decision. The consequences of unintelligent decisions are not desired.If you do not define your future then the future will define you. True or false?
Kierkegaard certainly thought so. Even Nietzsche largely agreed (though they greatly disagreed about how to go about defining your future).
Arguably, that's the lesson of Vincent's character in Pulp fiction as well.If you do not define your future then the future will define you. True or false?
';Do not dwell in the past, do not dream of the future, concentrate the mind on the present moment. ';
Buddha
I agree
by Jim Francis
As a rule, the future develops from what you're doing right now.
The way you respond to people, events and surroundings affects your
life and your future. If you put out anger, you will get back
anger, and if you love, you will be loved. Everything that happens
to you is a reflection or an echo of your own inner attitudes and
feelings, even if buried deep within your subconscious.
The first step in creating the future is to decide exactly what you
want. Choose only one goal and stick with it. Mind power, like any
other kind of capacity, expresses intensely only when its energies
are focused to a fine point of concentration.
Kerryann, a student of huna, told me, ';Whenever I've really focused
on a goal it happens ... not always like I planned, but it
happens.'; Accordingly, unify your mind with your goal and feel that
you are one with it. By directing your attention to your desired
objective, it will come into manifestation much more easily.
Are You Ready To Change Your Future?
Are you ready to make your dreams and wishes come true? If yes,
take time now to write down your goal. Because your Low Self is
very concrete and literal, writing down your goal will show it that
you are doing something real and not just daydreaming.
If not sure what you want, just write down your ideas. At this
point you are simply brainstorming. Don't worry about coming up
with the perfect wording. Hesitation, worry or being critical will
only put your Low Self out of the picture.
Writing your ideas or your goal on paper will help eliminate the
things that really don't capture your imagination and will make any
vague points more definite. Mull it over for a few days, and it
will become very clear to you exactly what you want. By being very
sure of your goal, you are less likely to be distracted later on.
Kahuna methods teach that concentrated visualization is an
important step toward realization. Form a mental picture of your
goal and then repeat it out loud word for word three times, a
precise verbal statement of what you are working toward. The
stronger and clearer you make your mental image and goal statement,
the stronger and clearer will be the results.
Keep both your visualization and goal very focused. Avoid
distracting thoughts or images. Hold your mental picture firmly
until the manifestation is complete. Visualization and speaking
your future goal will act as a physical stimulus to impress your
Low Self, which will then send it to the High Self to be brought
into reality.
Most people find visualization easy. However, if you need to
develop skill in using mental pictures, you can practice with a
simple object, such as an apple. Look at the apple and slowly and
carefully observe its attributes. Close your eyes and inwardly see
the apple. Open your eyes and look at the color. Close your eyes
once more and visualize its shade of color in your mind's eye.
Move to visualizing something more complicated, such as a group of
objects on a table. Look them over, close your eyes and reconstruct
them in your mind. If necessary, open your eyes briefly to check
accuracy or to refresh your memory.
HOPE THIS ANSWERS YOUR Q.
LOVE
PLUTO
Kierkegaard certainly thought so. Even Nietzsche largely agreed (though they greatly disagreed about how to go about defining your future).
Arguably, that's the lesson of Vincent's character in Pulp fiction as well.If you do not define your future then the future will define you. True or false?
';Do not dwell in the past, do not dream of the future, concentrate the mind on the present moment. ';
Buddha
I agree
by Jim Francis
As a rule, the future develops from what you're doing right now.
The way you respond to people, events and surroundings affects your
life and your future. If you put out anger, you will get back
anger, and if you love, you will be loved. Everything that happens
to you is a reflection or an echo of your own inner attitudes and
feelings, even if buried deep within your subconscious.
The first step in creating the future is to decide exactly what you
want. Choose only one goal and stick with it. Mind power, like any
other kind of capacity, expresses intensely only when its energies
are focused to a fine point of concentration.
Kerryann, a student of huna, told me, ';Whenever I've really focused
on a goal it happens ... not always like I planned, but it
happens.'; Accordingly, unify your mind with your goal and feel that
you are one with it. By directing your attention to your desired
objective, it will come into manifestation much more easily.
Are You Ready To Change Your Future?
Are you ready to make your dreams and wishes come true? If yes,
take time now to write down your goal. Because your Low Self is
very concrete and literal, writing down your goal will show it that
you are doing something real and not just daydreaming.
If not sure what you want, just write down your ideas. At this
point you are simply brainstorming. Don't worry about coming up
with the perfect wording. Hesitation, worry or being critical will
only put your Low Self out of the picture.
Writing your ideas or your goal on paper will help eliminate the
things that really don't capture your imagination and will make any
vague points more definite. Mull it over for a few days, and it
will become very clear to you exactly what you want. By being very
sure of your goal, you are less likely to be distracted later on.
Kahuna methods teach that concentrated visualization is an
important step toward realization. Form a mental picture of your
goal and then repeat it out loud word for word three times, a
precise verbal statement of what you are working toward. The
stronger and clearer you make your mental image and goal statement,
the stronger and clearer will be the results.
Keep both your visualization and goal very focused. Avoid
distracting thoughts or images. Hold your mental picture firmly
until the manifestation is complete. Visualization and speaking
your future goal will act as a physical stimulus to impress your
Low Self, which will then send it to the High Self to be brought
into reality.
Most people find visualization easy. However, if you need to
develop skill in using mental pictures, you can practice with a
simple object, such as an apple. Look at the apple and slowly and
carefully observe its attributes. Close your eyes and inwardly see
the apple. Open your eyes and look at the color. Close your eyes
once more and visualize its shade of color in your mind's eye.
Move to visualizing something more complicated, such as a group of
objects on a table. Look them over, close your eyes and reconstruct
them in your mind. If necessary, open your eyes briefly to check
accuracy or to refresh your memory.
HOPE THIS ANSWERS YOUR Q.
LOVE
PLUTO
Please help on these 5 True or False Accounting questions?
1. Keeping personal and business records separate is an application of the business entity.
2. Assets such as cash and supplies have value because they can be used to acquire other assets or be used to operate a business.
3. The relationship among assets, liabilities, and owner鈥檚 equity can be written as an equation.
4. The accounting equation does not have to be in balance to be correct.
5. The sum of the assets and liabilities of a business always equals the investment of the business owner.
Please help on these 5 True or False Accounting questions?
1. True
2. True
3. True
4. False
5. False - The sum of the investment of the business owner and liabilities of a business always equals the assets. Please help on these 5 True or False Accounting questions?
A Business entiy principle is an accounting principle that requires that a business maintain its own set of records and accounts that are separate from other financial interests of its owners.
2. I think so ,but dont quote me on this.
3. Yes that can be writen as a equation.
4. I dont know??
5. maybe%26gt;??
2. Assets such as cash and supplies have value because they can be used to acquire other assets or be used to operate a business.
3. The relationship among assets, liabilities, and owner鈥檚 equity can be written as an equation.
4. The accounting equation does not have to be in balance to be correct.
5. The sum of the assets and liabilities of a business always equals the investment of the business owner.
Please help on these 5 True or False Accounting questions?
1. True
2. True
3. True
4. False
5. False - The sum of the investment of the business owner and liabilities of a business always equals the assets. Please help on these 5 True or False Accounting questions?
A Business entiy principle is an accounting principle that requires that a business maintain its own set of records and accounts that are separate from other financial interests of its owners.
2. I think so ,but dont quote me on this.
3. Yes that can be writen as a equation.
4. I dont know??
5. maybe%26gt;??
Easy mac is better when you add milk and butter. true or false?
i cant tell the difference.Easy mac is better when you add milk and butter. true or false?
False.Easy mac is better when you add milk and butter. true or false?
i dont use milk or butter. i use vegetable oil, or lard if thats all i have.
true better for u
It's supposed to be complete already.
If you have to add milk and butter...doesn't that negate the ';easy'; part of it?
I'd say if it adds extra effort, it makes it worse.
Therefore, only water goes into my generic Easy Mac (real stuff too pricey :( so poor...)
Oh hell yeah!!! Thats how I make it. Because with water.. EW. What happens is, the milk and the butter are creamy, so when you add the milk to the cheese before adding it to the MAC its creates a thicker cheese. Not like when you use water, its all loose and feels like you can drink it! And i like to chew more! lol. But yeah, and the butter is used for the MAC, so it won't stick to the pan, and cooks faster. AND, also add a little butter after you add the cheese and milk to the MAC, makes it even creamier. YUM!! I got the munchies now... OH YEAH, and I like to add unions too! Cook the onions first though, they taste sweeter cooked, and then place them in the MAC. Also, after that, serve with cilantro. TASTE GREAT!
I can! I have to use milk and butter or else I can't choke it down. My kids like the creaminess of the milk.
Hello:
Oh Hun,NOTHING will help easy mac taste better trust me! My little girl begged and begged and begged for me to buy that stuff and it was so vile that even she wouldn't eat it,and she inhales my homemade macaroni and cheese,so I knew that easy mac must be really bad if she wouldn't even touch it!
You would be better off making your own homemade macaroni and cheese or even buying an organic form of macaroni and cheese because easy mac has so many artificial colors,preservatives and it is loaded with so much sodium it is ridiculous!
Easy mac is so full of chemicals and ****, I don't think anyone could tell the difference. At least go for the regular Kraft mac and cheese; it's a little better for you.
better if there is both..!true...
Easy Mac is gross. Get Annie's organic mac and cheese. It's way better.
False.Easy mac is better when you add milk and butter. true or false?
i dont use milk or butter. i use vegetable oil, or lard if thats all i have.
true better for u
It's supposed to be complete already.
If you have to add milk and butter...doesn't that negate the ';easy'; part of it?
I'd say if it adds extra effort, it makes it worse.
Therefore, only water goes into my generic Easy Mac (real stuff too pricey :( so poor...)
Oh hell yeah!!! Thats how I make it. Because with water.. EW. What happens is, the milk and the butter are creamy, so when you add the milk to the cheese before adding it to the MAC its creates a thicker cheese. Not like when you use water, its all loose and feels like you can drink it! And i like to chew more! lol. But yeah, and the butter is used for the MAC, so it won't stick to the pan, and cooks faster. AND, also add a little butter after you add the cheese and milk to the MAC, makes it even creamier. YUM!! I got the munchies now... OH YEAH, and I like to add unions too! Cook the onions first though, they taste sweeter cooked, and then place them in the MAC. Also, after that, serve with cilantro. TASTE GREAT!
I can! I have to use milk and butter or else I can't choke it down. My kids like the creaminess of the milk.
Hello:
Oh Hun,NOTHING will help easy mac taste better trust me! My little girl begged and begged and begged for me to buy that stuff and it was so vile that even she wouldn't eat it,and she inhales my homemade macaroni and cheese,so I knew that easy mac must be really bad if she wouldn't even touch it!
You would be better off making your own homemade macaroni and cheese or even buying an organic form of macaroni and cheese because easy mac has so many artificial colors,preservatives and it is loaded with so much sodium it is ridiculous!
Easy mac is so full of chemicals and ****, I don't think anyone could tell the difference. At least go for the regular Kraft mac and cheese; it's a little better for you.
better if there is both..!true...
Easy Mac is gross. Get Annie's organic mac and cheese. It's way better.
True or false: It hurts more to run from your fears than it does to face them?
A lot of questions here are of the nature ';I'm scared of X . . '; stopping people from doing what they need to do. Do you believe that it hurts more to run from your fears than to face them?True or false: It hurts more to run from your fears than it does to face them?
Yes I definitely think it hurts more to run away from fears then to face them. If I run away from my fears they definitely never stop chasing me and hounding me. I will continuously beat myself up about his fear and I cannot let it go. I find that once I decide to face the fear and do something about it I am so relieved it is over. I then start to think how silly it ws to carry that bagage over my shoulder for so long when all I needed to do is to dive in and get it done. I feel it is aways better to try and try again rather then hiding and hoping things will just change or go away.True or false: It hurts more to run from your fears than it does to face them?
Thank you for picking me for best answer. I try to spend alot of time answering my questions honestly and respectfully. It means alot when I know someone has taken the time to listen to what I have to say.
True - Most of the time running from your fears keeps you running for a long time, facing them normally helps you to realize that there is nothing to fear or that the pain from facing it will stop once the confrontation is over.
I think they are equally pain-full. And if you face hem that doesn't necessarily mean that they will go away forever, but if you run from them then they definitely won't. So it sounds smart to take the chance.
Depends on the circumstances. I really wish people would stop asking such broad, general questions with a million possible answers.
When you come up against a fear, it is just that - COMING UP AGAINST IT!
The confrontation IS a contest and you will win or the fear will win.
Whichever side wins is strengthened by that win. If it is you who wins (by facing the fear) then YOU will become stronger. If the fear wins (and you run away from it) then IT will become stronger.
An added note is probably called-for here, though. The risk factor should be sensibly assessed regarding the action taken to confront the fear. While ';common sense'; should never be used as an excuse to continue avoiding facing one's fears, it should never be neglected or abandoned in the confrontation, either.
For instance, forcing one's self to stand in the path of an approaching tornado to overcome a fear of it would be ill-advised indeed! A better course fo action would be to, perhaps, watch videos of tornadoes and if you were really, strongly determined to raise your level of confront, perhaps a ';ride along'; with a team of competant, professionally-trained storm chasers.
It hurts more to run from them..when you stop to face them, your legs get a well deserved rest.
depends on the fears
in relationships it goes any shape or formed
illness in the long run if you run it may kill you but if you face it goes along why of healing inside out.
crime very true it will probably will still hurt if you do report it because it might happen again even may to you,
in life it is a gamble to have the guts to face fears but it is up to us to decide to run or stay to face our fears.....for me i face head on.
it hurts less to run, right then
in the long run, its best to face them
true
True. If you face your fear,then you would get over it and wonder, why was I so scared in the first place,but when you are running from your fear it can take over your mind for so long and you would never get over it with out facing it. So it is hurting you even more.
absolutely true! phobias can only be conquered when faced and overcome. living a life in fear of something is no way to live when you can just confront your fears and then lead a normal life, not being nervous or afraid of it anymore.how to cut hair
Yes I definitely think it hurts more to run away from fears then to face them. If I run away from my fears they definitely never stop chasing me and hounding me. I will continuously beat myself up about his fear and I cannot let it go. I find that once I decide to face the fear and do something about it I am so relieved it is over. I then start to think how silly it ws to carry that bagage over my shoulder for so long when all I needed to do is to dive in and get it done. I feel it is aways better to try and try again rather then hiding and hoping things will just change or go away.True or false: It hurts more to run from your fears than it does to face them?
Thank you for picking me for best answer. I try to spend alot of time answering my questions honestly and respectfully. It means alot when I know someone has taken the time to listen to what I have to say.
Report Abuse
True - Most of the time running from your fears keeps you running for a long time, facing them normally helps you to realize that there is nothing to fear or that the pain from facing it will stop once the confrontation is over.
I think they are equally pain-full. And if you face hem that doesn't necessarily mean that they will go away forever, but if you run from them then they definitely won't. So it sounds smart to take the chance.
Depends on the circumstances. I really wish people would stop asking such broad, general questions with a million possible answers.
When you come up against a fear, it is just that - COMING UP AGAINST IT!
The confrontation IS a contest and you will win or the fear will win.
Whichever side wins is strengthened by that win. If it is you who wins (by facing the fear) then YOU will become stronger. If the fear wins (and you run away from it) then IT will become stronger.
An added note is probably called-for here, though. The risk factor should be sensibly assessed regarding the action taken to confront the fear. While ';common sense'; should never be used as an excuse to continue avoiding facing one's fears, it should never be neglected or abandoned in the confrontation, either.
For instance, forcing one's self to stand in the path of an approaching tornado to overcome a fear of it would be ill-advised indeed! A better course fo action would be to, perhaps, watch videos of tornadoes and if you were really, strongly determined to raise your level of confront, perhaps a ';ride along'; with a team of competant, professionally-trained storm chasers.
It hurts more to run from them..when you stop to face them, your legs get a well deserved rest.
depends on the fears
in relationships it goes any shape or formed
illness in the long run if you run it may kill you but if you face it goes along why of healing inside out.
crime very true it will probably will still hurt if you do report it because it might happen again even may to you,
in life it is a gamble to have the guts to face fears but it is up to us to decide to run or stay to face our fears.....for me i face head on.
it hurts less to run, right then
in the long run, its best to face them
true
True. If you face your fear,then you would get over it and wonder, why was I so scared in the first place,but when you are running from your fear it can take over your mind for so long and you would never get over it with out facing it. So it is hurting you even more.
absolutely true! phobias can only be conquered when faced and overcome. living a life in fear of something is no way to live when you can just confront your fears and then lead a normal life, not being nervous or afraid of it anymore.
True or False: most of the time Faith ends up disappointing people?
Take baseball. Every year millions of true believers have Faith that this will be 'their year' in Major League Baseball. Yet out of the 30 teams only one can win the Championship so the vast majority of baseball's Faithful end up disapointed.
Same goes for Religion, and theres thousands of 'em. You do the math.True or False: most of the time Faith ends up disappointing people?
True.True or False: most of the time Faith ends up disappointing people?
';Some trust in chariots, and some in horses;
But we will remember the name of the L-RD our G-d.';
-Psalm 20:7
Having faith in a team, or a friend, or the stock market is doomed to
dis-appointment for these things are of the world and not of heaven.
Having True Faith in G-d assures our re-appointment, protection and deliverance.
you are confusing faith with unreasoned greed and ambition
Hebrews 11:13
All these people were still living by faith when they died. They did not receive the things promised; they only saw them and welcomed them from a distance. And they admitted that they were aliens and strangers on earth.
Hebrews 11:39 - 40
These were all commended for their faith, yet none of them received what had been promised. God had planned something better for us so that only together with us would they be made perfect.
Faith is only justified if you know the process and you've done the work.
You have faith you'll get paid this week because you've had no problem getting paid before for doing the same work you've just done.
As a rule, I think it's better to control you're use of words. I don't have faith I'm confident. I don't sin I make mistakes and am incorrect.
Your definition of faith is not the Bible definition of faith.
You are merely describing wishful thinking.
Bible faith is based upon the promise of God, who cannot lie.
';Now faith is assurance of things hoped for, a conviction of things not seen. ';
Hebrews 11:1
It is the people that disappoint, faith can not. In other words, your faith disappoints you in yourself, because you have to little faith! Which comes first, the believe in faith, or the faith of your believe?
Peace.
Faith is fine. Most of the time, it's PEOPLE who end up disappointing people, in my experience. It's not the end of the world; it's just human nature.
False. Faith cannot be blind. It has to be based on principles which have proven truthful in experiences in our lives.
Baseball teams %26amp; religion are two completely different subjects.
Oh and I expecting a story about someone with problems
who had a smile on his face because he had faith and nothing else..... and then one day the faith was not enough and the smile went ...
faith is good.diffrent faiths are different ways of reaching the one god who is the creator, not evolution.
False, most of the time Faith ends up producing a result we didn't want even though it might be better for us.
In many aspects of life, yes I agree but not where Christianity is concerned.
True
TRUE
Same goes for Religion, and theres thousands of 'em. You do the math.True or False: most of the time Faith ends up disappointing people?
True.True or False: most of the time Faith ends up disappointing people?
';Some trust in chariots, and some in horses;
But we will remember the name of the L-RD our G-d.';
-Psalm 20:7
Having faith in a team, or a friend, or the stock market is doomed to
dis-appointment for these things are of the world and not of heaven.
Having True Faith in G-d assures our re-appointment, protection and deliverance.
you are confusing faith with unreasoned greed and ambition
Hebrews 11:13
All these people were still living by faith when they died. They did not receive the things promised; they only saw them and welcomed them from a distance. And they admitted that they were aliens and strangers on earth.
Hebrews 11:39 - 40
These were all commended for their faith, yet none of them received what had been promised. God had planned something better for us so that only together with us would they be made perfect.
Faith is only justified if you know the process and you've done the work.
You have faith you'll get paid this week because you've had no problem getting paid before for doing the same work you've just done.
As a rule, I think it's better to control you're use of words. I don't have faith I'm confident. I don't sin I make mistakes and am incorrect.
Your definition of faith is not the Bible definition of faith.
You are merely describing wishful thinking.
Bible faith is based upon the promise of God, who cannot lie.
';Now faith is assurance of things hoped for, a conviction of things not seen. ';
Hebrews 11:1
It is the people that disappoint, faith can not. In other words, your faith disappoints you in yourself, because you have to little faith! Which comes first, the believe in faith, or the faith of your believe?
Peace.
Faith is fine. Most of the time, it's PEOPLE who end up disappointing people, in my experience. It's not the end of the world; it's just human nature.
False. Faith cannot be blind. It has to be based on principles which have proven truthful in experiences in our lives.
Baseball teams %26amp; religion are two completely different subjects.
Oh and I expecting a story about someone with problems
who had a smile on his face because he had faith and nothing else..... and then one day the faith was not enough and the smile went ...
faith is good.diffrent faiths are different ways of reaching the one god who is the creator, not evolution.
False, most of the time Faith ends up producing a result we didn't want even though it might be better for us.
In many aspects of life, yes I agree but not where Christianity is concerned.
True
TRUE
True or False. The sum of two numbers is always greater than the larger number?
Show the conjecture is false by finding a counterexample.True or False. The sum of two numbers is always greater than the larger number?
not if one of the numbers is negative.
i.e 5+(-2)=3True or False. The sum of two numbers is always greater than the larger number?
False for that number can be
1. Negative
2. Imaginary Number, i, which i = square root of -1
False, if one of the two numbers is negative.
not if one of the numbers is negative.
i.e 5+(-2)=3True or False. The sum of two numbers is always greater than the larger number?
False for that number can be
1. Negative
2. Imaginary Number, i, which i = square root of -1
False, if one of the two numbers is negative.
True or False? do u think a person can stick a soda can(coke regular) in there mouth?
i just had to ask this question. itz been in mi mind 4 a long time.i always question mi self about this.somehow idk, i just doTrue or False? do u think a person can stick a soda can(coke regular) in there mouth?
a can? I know this female who could swallow a 2 liter bottle!
2 dollah...make u hollaTrue or False? do u think a person can stick a soda can(coke regular) in there mouth?
I'll bet there are some people out there with nothing better to do. It's possible.
its possible
I believe it to be possible but not a smartthing to do.
that would be a hell of a big mouth
no i don't think that someone can do that
Most folks can't do it. I have seen a few who could get their mouth open wide enough to have one entire end of the can in their mouth, but I've never seen someone get the whole thing in their mouth and then close their lips.
Then again, it's an awfully big internet out there...
---------
...after a minute's searching, I'm back. From YouTube, here's a man sticking an uncrushed soda can in his mouth:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fv-mCAcxY鈥?/a>
If they have no teeth!
not the whole thing but if it's empty they could always step on it to make it smaller and manage to stick it in their mouth.
what a stupid question! who'd wanna and who cares?!
yes there is a video on youtube but firewalls will not allow me to post the link here
Yes! I've seen it being done!
Only if they have a VERY BIG mouth or if they crush the can first.
The Muse
I can wrap my mouth around a can but I couldnt get the entire thing in my mouth.
I can.. I do it like you are drinking it.. then wrap your mouth around the can and push backwards. I do not crush it at all. And I do not have a lot of time on my hands I played a lot of truth or dare in my lifetime
TRUE...I've seen my crazy friend do it with a beer can...She can put her entire mouth over the rim and top of the can, but NOT the entire can!
a can? I know this female who could swallow a 2 liter bottle!
2 dollah...make u hollaTrue or False? do u think a person can stick a soda can(coke regular) in there mouth?
I'll bet there are some people out there with nothing better to do. It's possible.
its possible
I believe it to be possible but not a smartthing to do.
that would be a hell of a big mouth
no i don't think that someone can do that
Most folks can't do it. I have seen a few who could get their mouth open wide enough to have one entire end of the can in their mouth, but I've never seen someone get the whole thing in their mouth and then close their lips.
Then again, it's an awfully big internet out there...
---------
...after a minute's searching, I'm back. From YouTube, here's a man sticking an uncrushed soda can in his mouth:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fv-mCAcxY鈥?/a>
If they have no teeth!
not the whole thing but if it's empty they could always step on it to make it smaller and manage to stick it in their mouth.
what a stupid question! who'd wanna and who cares?!
yes there is a video on youtube but firewalls will not allow me to post the link here
Yes! I've seen it being done!
Only if they have a VERY BIG mouth or if they crush the can first.
The Muse
I can wrap my mouth around a can but I couldnt get the entire thing in my mouth.
I can.. I do it like you are drinking it.. then wrap your mouth around the can and push backwards. I do not crush it at all. And I do not have a lot of time on my hands I played a lot of truth or dare in my lifetime
TRUE...I've seen my crazy friend do it with a beer can...She can put her entire mouth over the rim and top of the can, but NOT the entire can!
Is there enough optimism in our world or not? True or false? What do you think of the statement below?
I actually think that there is not enough optimism today. My thoughts slightly differ that I think that organizations and government will have to do more to help the progress of the country, whereas in the past it was up to the individual to pull themselves up by the bootstraps and make something better for themselves. I believe that to energize this country we need more positivity in music, art, architecture, and thought, it will be these individuals that will change the psyche of the country.Is there enough optimism in our world or not? True or false? What do you think of the statement below?
I agree with several of your statements. It is no longer possible to succeed with good intentions, hard work and patience. The government does have to support the quality of life of more people. And it's true that more positive thinking and actions in all the areas you name will help create a more positive society, and generate healing among the sick at heart, thereby healing and improving our whole world.
Wish I could do more to make it happen!Is there enough optimism in our world or not? True or false? What do you think of the statement below?
Positivity is not going to help you when you can't pay your bills, and the ';man'; keeps shutting off your hot water. In order to be ';energized';, you have to have nation that believes in something. When you live in a ';democracy'; were majority rules and the majorities beliefs and decisions are usually the wrong one, coupled with a totally incompetent government, it's pretty hard to believe in anything. Great Britain (when it ruled the world), the Roman empire and Nazi Germany were particularly energized nation because they had belief system they upheld above all else. That's what got things done.
There will never be any amount of Optimisim which can not be seen by all around, we must be the change in the world we wish to see, for you see this is the golden age we fight over gold(money) but truth be the economy is tore up because rich people have all the money in the bank so you see the economy wont pick back up because the rich man will lose his power if he has no money and be just like you and me so you see no one is happy because everyone is poor, we as Americans can not see past Materilism and money, so is the first law of greed.
However Optimism wont save us that is a false hope, you can be happy and belive everything is going to be ok then 5 seconds later the earth explodes, did optimisim save you?
I'm so sick of positivity I can't tell you how much.
I believe Optimism is a disease. I wish people could distinguish Idealism from Optimism and be Idealists instead of Optimists.
An Idealist knows the world is going to crap on his dreams and he works for them anyway. An optimist thinks the world will applaud his crap and is shocked when they don't.
Fcuk Optimism, embrace Idealism.
There isn't much optimism out there because things do not look good. There is nothing to be optimistic about. What we as a nation need to do is question the government, take a stand and fight for what is right. They are taking away our freedoms, and most people don't see that. Most people just go with the flow.
it was never as you say it was.
answer mine: http://ca.answers.yahoo.com/question/ind鈥?/a>
I agree with several of your statements. It is no longer possible to succeed with good intentions, hard work and patience. The government does have to support the quality of life of more people. And it's true that more positive thinking and actions in all the areas you name will help create a more positive society, and generate healing among the sick at heart, thereby healing and improving our whole world.
Wish I could do more to make it happen!Is there enough optimism in our world or not? True or false? What do you think of the statement below?
Positivity is not going to help you when you can't pay your bills, and the ';man'; keeps shutting off your hot water. In order to be ';energized';, you have to have nation that believes in something. When you live in a ';democracy'; were majority rules and the majorities beliefs and decisions are usually the wrong one, coupled with a totally incompetent government, it's pretty hard to believe in anything. Great Britain (when it ruled the world), the Roman empire and Nazi Germany were particularly energized nation because they had belief system they upheld above all else. That's what got things done.
There will never be any amount of Optimisim which can not be seen by all around, we must be the change in the world we wish to see, for you see this is the golden age we fight over gold(money) but truth be the economy is tore up because rich people have all the money in the bank so you see the economy wont pick back up because the rich man will lose his power if he has no money and be just like you and me so you see no one is happy because everyone is poor, we as Americans can not see past Materilism and money, so is the first law of greed.
However Optimism wont save us that is a false hope, you can be happy and belive everything is going to be ok then 5 seconds later the earth explodes, did optimisim save you?
I'm so sick of positivity I can't tell you how much.
I believe Optimism is a disease. I wish people could distinguish Idealism from Optimism and be Idealists instead of Optimists.
An Idealist knows the world is going to crap on his dreams and he works for them anyway. An optimist thinks the world will applaud his crap and is shocked when they don't.
Fcuk Optimism, embrace Idealism.
There isn't much optimism out there because things do not look good. There is nothing to be optimistic about. What we as a nation need to do is question the government, take a stand and fight for what is right. They are taking away our freedoms, and most people don't see that. Most people just go with the flow.
it was never as you say it was.
answer mine: http://ca.answers.yahoo.com/question/ind鈥?/a>
True or false, in the bigger picture, it took an infinite amount of time before we were born?
And we will be gone for eternity.
Will it then then seem like we never existed, in the bigger picture?
What are your thought on this?
Thanks.True or false, in the bigger picture, it took an infinite amount of time before we were born?
You are a fool to believe in reincarnation.True or false, in the bigger picture, it took an infinite amount of time before we were born?
Nagel looks at this question in his essay on death and his essay on the absurd. While life may seem absurd, it is not absurd to us. We need to see meaning in our lives no matter how meaningless they actually are. For example, It actually does not matter whether I do my philosophy paper or not, but it does matter to me because i want to get a good grade in Philosophy.
There is an eterinity before and after death, but the eternity after death is the eternity we are missing out on because our life's experience stop with death but before birth our experiences did not start yet. I would say that your statement is true that it took an infinite amount of time before we were born. But it is the eternity after our death that matter more to us because that is the eternity we are missing out on.
there is no point in wondering something like that because there is no way to alter the outcome. I would guess that there is an eternity before and after now (and that random combination of particles over the googolplexes of years will eventually cause reincarnation).
In the bigger picture your question is futile and meaningless.
True from your perspective it might seem that way. But there's really no evidence to support it.
False. Time is a man's life. It took NO TIME whatsoever.
You simply started existing. Don't you remember?
Time began on the day I was born, and it will end when I die.
True.
for the physical..
False for the Spiritual... we have always been here in one form or other..
Will it then then seem like we never existed, in the bigger picture?
What are your thought on this?
Thanks.True or false, in the bigger picture, it took an infinite amount of time before we were born?
You are a fool to believe in reincarnation.True or false, in the bigger picture, it took an infinite amount of time before we were born?
Nagel looks at this question in his essay on death and his essay on the absurd. While life may seem absurd, it is not absurd to us. We need to see meaning in our lives no matter how meaningless they actually are. For example, It actually does not matter whether I do my philosophy paper or not, but it does matter to me because i want to get a good grade in Philosophy.
There is an eterinity before and after death, but the eternity after death is the eternity we are missing out on because our life's experience stop with death but before birth our experiences did not start yet. I would say that your statement is true that it took an infinite amount of time before we were born. But it is the eternity after our death that matter more to us because that is the eternity we are missing out on.
there is no point in wondering something like that because there is no way to alter the outcome. I would guess that there is an eternity before and after now (and that random combination of particles over the googolplexes of years will eventually cause reincarnation).
In the bigger picture your question is futile and meaningless.
True from your perspective it might seem that way. But there's really no evidence to support it.
False. Time is a man's life. It took NO TIME whatsoever.
You simply started existing. Don't you remember?
Time began on the day I was born, and it will end when I die.
True.
for the physical..
False for the Spiritual... we have always been here in one form or other..
True or False: The President of the United States is a servant of the people first and foremost?
What do you think and why?True or False: The President of the United States is a servant of the people first and foremost?
True and false, together. Ours is a representative democratic republic with a Constitution. The Constitution defines the limits of the federal government and the power of elected officials. Once the people elect a president by the electoral college, he or she has a great amount of discretionary power, including being the Command in Chief of the military forces.
Every elected official and all members of the military take an oath to, ';....support and defend the Constitution of the United States';. The President doesn't take an oath to be a servant of the people.
The Tenth Amendment of the Bill of Rights states that powers not specifically designated to the Federal government belong to the states or the people.
So, it seems that he is not directly a servant of the people.True or False: The President of the United States is a servant of the people first and foremost?
True, he should absolutely be a servant of the people, and for the people.
He needs to balance the needs of the elected officials from different states that are representing their communities, cities, counties, and come to decisions that are better for the whole of all states, for America. United we stand, divided we fall.
Yes true in theory:
We hire him by the election campaign interview process: We fire him by voting for the other guy.
How'd you like to go though an interview process like that every time you applied for a job.
He SHOULD be.
Just like Jesus was a servant.
(Or am I gonna get sh*t from the atheist activists for making that comparison?)
http://patdollard.com/wp-content/uploads鈥?/a>
THAT'S THE IDEA, YES!
i am All for obama, i voted for him and it all sounds good.
but...... we will have to watch and wait!!!
but again that is supposed to be the idea, isn't??
A servant leader, not a servant. He is the commander in chief now, and leads.
I certainly think that it should be true, but in reality, it isn't at all.
you just became king obama's servant
True, The people put him in power and it's his job to protect and work on behalf of his country.
^I agree.how to cut hair
True and false, together. Ours is a representative democratic republic with a Constitution. The Constitution defines the limits of the federal government and the power of elected officials. Once the people elect a president by the electoral college, he or she has a great amount of discretionary power, including being the Command in Chief of the military forces.
Every elected official and all members of the military take an oath to, ';....support and defend the Constitution of the United States';. The President doesn't take an oath to be a servant of the people.
The Tenth Amendment of the Bill of Rights states that powers not specifically designated to the Federal government belong to the states or the people.
So, it seems that he is not directly a servant of the people.True or False: The President of the United States is a servant of the people first and foremost?
True, he should absolutely be a servant of the people, and for the people.
He needs to balance the needs of the elected officials from different states that are representing their communities, cities, counties, and come to decisions that are better for the whole of all states, for America. United we stand, divided we fall.
Yes true in theory:
We hire him by the election campaign interview process: We fire him by voting for the other guy.
How'd you like to go though an interview process like that every time you applied for a job.
He SHOULD be.
Just like Jesus was a servant.
(Or am I gonna get sh*t from the atheist activists for making that comparison?)
http://patdollard.com/wp-content/uploads鈥?/a>
THAT'S THE IDEA, YES!
i am All for obama, i voted for him and it all sounds good.
but...... we will have to watch and wait!!!
but again that is supposed to be the idea, isn't??
A servant leader, not a servant. He is the commander in chief now, and leads.
I certainly think that it should be true, but in reality, it isn't at all.
you just became king obama's servant
True, The people put him in power and it's his job to protect and work on behalf of his country.
^I agree.
True or False: It is unethical for a teacher to keep a $100 bill they find on the ground near their classroom?
I'm talking about a high school teacher on a campus with 4000 students.True or False: It is unethical for a teacher to keep a $100 bill they find on the ground near their classroom?
true, it is not the teachers, it isnt even really ';there room';. the school owns the building so the teacher should turn it in.True or False: It is unethical for a teacher to keep a $100 bill they find on the ground near their classroom?
No, it isn't unethical for the student to keep the money, why would it be for the teacher?
true, it is not the teachers, it isnt even really ';there room';. the school owns the building so the teacher should turn it in.True or False: It is unethical for a teacher to keep a $100 bill they find on the ground near their classroom?
No, it isn't unethical for the student to keep the money, why would it be for the teacher?
True or False, Photosynthesis is used by flowering plants to make energy by converting the sun's energy?
I read this question in a science book, and it stated that the answer is false. Don't flowering plants use photosynthesis?True or False, Photosynthesis is used by flowering plants to make energy by converting the sun's energy?
Overall the statement is true however the reason it could be false is because of the term ';make energy'; which has been used, according to the law of conservation of energy, energy cannot be created or destroyed it can only be changed in form, so in relation to the question, the plant doesnt make energy it absorbs light and this energy is captured and transferred to a molecule of glucose which is the main storer of energy, this can be broken down to release energyTrue or False, Photosynthesis is used by flowering plants to make energy by converting the sun's energy?
The answer is true.
Photosynthesis - a set of chemical reactions only a plant containing the pigment chlorophyll can perform. The plant takes energy from the sun that comes in contact with leaves in the form of light, combines it with carbon dioxide from the air and water from the soil to make a sugar called glucose. They use this as their food source and are the only living creatures on Earth that have this ability. Every other life form depends on plants for food supply.
generally, is the synthesis of sugar from light, carbon dioxide and water, with oxygen as a waste product. It is arguably the most important biochemical pathway known; nearly all life depends on it. It is an extremely complex process, comprised of many coordinated biochemical reactions. It occurs in higher plants, algae, some bacteria, and some protists, organisms collectively referred to as photoautotrophs.
I think its true
All plants use photosynthesis to some degree or another, even carnivorous plants like the venus fly trap. That's one of the defining features of plants.
Photosynthesis is the process by which plants, some bacteria, and some protistans use the energy from sunlight to produce sugar, which cellular respiration converts into ATP, the ';fuel'; used by all living things. The conversion of unusable sunlight energy into usable chemical energy, is associated with the actions of the green pigment chlorophyll.
The answer is correct because they don't make energy they make ATP or a form of sugar.
yes, wtf!
Overall the statement is true however the reason it could be false is because of the term ';make energy'; which has been used, according to the law of conservation of energy, energy cannot be created or destroyed it can only be changed in form, so in relation to the question, the plant doesnt make energy it absorbs light and this energy is captured and transferred to a molecule of glucose which is the main storer of energy, this can be broken down to release energyTrue or False, Photosynthesis is used by flowering plants to make energy by converting the sun's energy?
The answer is true.
Photosynthesis - a set of chemical reactions only a plant containing the pigment chlorophyll can perform. The plant takes energy from the sun that comes in contact with leaves in the form of light, combines it with carbon dioxide from the air and water from the soil to make a sugar called glucose. They use this as their food source and are the only living creatures on Earth that have this ability. Every other life form depends on plants for food supply.
generally, is the synthesis of sugar from light, carbon dioxide and water, with oxygen as a waste product. It is arguably the most important biochemical pathway known; nearly all life depends on it. It is an extremely complex process, comprised of many coordinated biochemical reactions. It occurs in higher plants, algae, some bacteria, and some protists, organisms collectively referred to as photoautotrophs.
I think its true
All plants use photosynthesis to some degree or another, even carnivorous plants like the venus fly trap. That's one of the defining features of plants.
Photosynthesis is the process by which plants, some bacteria, and some protistans use the energy from sunlight to produce sugar, which cellular respiration converts into ATP, the ';fuel'; used by all living things. The conversion of unusable sunlight energy into usable chemical energy, is associated with the actions of the green pigment chlorophyll.
The answer is correct because they don't make energy they make ATP or a form of sugar.
yes, wtf!
True or False? If you want to get a lot of answers to a question just begin it with the word ATHEISTS?
True or False, there must be lots more atheists than any other ';religion'; on R%26amp;S. *I know it is not really a religion but I just heard it called that on here, thought it was interesting to do so.True or False? If you want to get a lot of answers to a question just begin it with the word ATHEISTS?
Atheism is a religion. It makes statements about origins, destinations, and God.True or False? If you want to get a lot of answers to a question just begin it with the word ATHEISTS?
The reason for ';atheist'; being used so frequently is really more to do with the fact that christians know that if they want Intelligent and honest answers they are the people they need to ask!!
But you are also correct that atheists are far more numerous on here. Add christians and muslims together and they amount to just under a third of the world population the majority of the rest is made up of atheists and religions without gods!! So they are in the majority here!!!
Very true actually...but over time I've noticed that it depends on the time of day, sometimes at night there are more Atheists on here than Christians and sometimes at day there are more Christians on here than Atheists.
Completely true. In fact, you could end it with the word atheists, too... that's really the only reason I answered this one.
Partially true. I think the best is to ask an actual good question.
I've found that if you start your question out with: Christians only! or, Jehovah's Witnesses only! then all the atheists and non believers will come out of the wood work.
And you'll get even more if you misspell it.
You'll get more answers from us if you start your question with, ';Christians only!';
Tiki God wants to watch you burn
One thing is for sure, if you address the question to atheists you will get some intelligent answers.
yeah they come here in droves cuz their master satan loves it.
Atheism is a religion. It makes statements about origins, destinations, and God.True or False? If you want to get a lot of answers to a question just begin it with the word ATHEISTS?
The reason for ';atheist'; being used so frequently is really more to do with the fact that christians know that if they want Intelligent and honest answers they are the people they need to ask!!
But you are also correct that atheists are far more numerous on here. Add christians and muslims together and they amount to just under a third of the world population the majority of the rest is made up of atheists and religions without gods!! So they are in the majority here!!!
Very true actually...but over time I've noticed that it depends on the time of day, sometimes at night there are more Atheists on here than Christians and sometimes at day there are more Christians on here than Atheists.
Completely true. In fact, you could end it with the word atheists, too... that's really the only reason I answered this one.
Partially true. I think the best is to ask an actual good question.
I've found that if you start your question out with: Christians only! or, Jehovah's Witnesses only! then all the atheists and non believers will come out of the wood work.
And you'll get even more if you misspell it.
You'll get more answers from us if you start your question with, ';Christians only!';
Tiki God wants to watch you burn
One thing is for sure, if you address the question to atheists you will get some intelligent answers.
yeah they come here in droves cuz their master satan loves it.
True or False? Democrats hate Sarah Palin because she is more of a woman than they could ever be?
And does not fit their profile of a struggling victimized woman because she is succesful and happily married?True or False? Democrats hate Sarah Palin because she is more of a woman than they could ever be?
True, libs hate successful women!!!!True or False? Democrats hate Sarah Palin because she is more of a woman than they could ever be?
steve m has it covered but also she is drawing the women away from the Democrats at an alarming rate. they used to have a lock on them with the ';your body'; lib thing, but most women now know that for what it was. Another thing is women don't agree with her being called an idiot as she is a success and has a family and has had some pretty tough things to deal with in her life.
between her and the demise of ACORN the party is sinking quick and they don't know how to deal with it in an orderly fashion, so attack, attack, which is having an adverse effect.
There's an old saying, you can fool all thepeople all the time and some some of the time but you cannot fool ALL THE PEOPLE ALL THE TIME.
completely false and i'm not even a democrat. Palin is a moron, cut and dry. it's not because she is pretty or any other aesthetic reason..she's demonstrated no intellect or knowledge in areas that would be important for a vice president to do their job.
Since I do not view women as ';victimized'; unless they have been raped or something along those lines, your premise is erroneous. You are basing your inference on a false premise, and thus the answer to your question is false.
Ha ha. People, insult Palin all you want, because when she is elected in 2012 all you'll be able to do is cry! Ha ha ha ha ha ha! But yes, I don't think liberals like women that don't actually need to take from other people to move forward in life.
False. Democrats 'dislike' Sarah Palin because she is intolerant (Real America!), ignorant, parochial, an Evangelical bent on making her religious beliefs part of government, not at all qualified to be anywhere near the Oval Office and a self-serving egomaniac.
Liberals hate Sarah Palin because she represents the majority of women who are ';family first'; and nurturer. Liberals hate any woman who is not a femi-nazi, man hating dyke.
Sure - cause ';more of a woman'; is the very pinnacle of existence - far surpassing intelligence, meaningful work, or accomplishment by one's own work.
Yeah...if you say so...
True
Considering I am a man. I am happy being born the way I am.
I don't get Conservatives drooling all over her because and after all SHE IS A MARRIED WOMAN.
True....
check this...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UK4Oc-f5V鈥?/a>
pass it on...
False. Most women are Democrats.
Most definitely false. First of all I don't ';hate'; her, I simply she think she is a nimrod who is unfit to govern the country I love.
Democrat woman and Democrat gays will never look that good.
Most have no strong feelings either way for her. If you want to call that hate, okay, whatever.
haha, Sarah Palin? hahahahaha
True and libs hate the fact that she is confident about that.
liberal women hate her because she is a lady... something they are not
I think they hate her mostly because SHE'S A FUKKING LIAR!
I think it's because she shaves her legs and under her arms.
Of course she's more of a woman than I could ever be...I'm a man.
yes i hate when women are more of a woman than me, your logic is flawless
Yes.
No, they hate her because she's the only Republican who could win against Obama. That is, if they actually made her presidential nominee!
we don't hate her. we watch each one of her shows regularly. she has a real talent for comedy.
successful: had to leave her seat... or is it the definition of success to you?
True dat.
True, libs hate successful women!!!!True or False? Democrats hate Sarah Palin because she is more of a woman than they could ever be?
steve m has it covered but also she is drawing the women away from the Democrats at an alarming rate. they used to have a lock on them with the ';your body'; lib thing, but most women now know that for what it was. Another thing is women don't agree with her being called an idiot as she is a success and has a family and has had some pretty tough things to deal with in her life.
between her and the demise of ACORN the party is sinking quick and they don't know how to deal with it in an orderly fashion, so attack, attack, which is having an adverse effect.
There's an old saying, you can fool all thepeople all the time and some some of the time but you cannot fool ALL THE PEOPLE ALL THE TIME.
completely false and i'm not even a democrat. Palin is a moron, cut and dry. it's not because she is pretty or any other aesthetic reason..she's demonstrated no intellect or knowledge in areas that would be important for a vice president to do their job.
Since I do not view women as ';victimized'; unless they have been raped or something along those lines, your premise is erroneous. You are basing your inference on a false premise, and thus the answer to your question is false.
Ha ha. People, insult Palin all you want, because when she is elected in 2012 all you'll be able to do is cry! Ha ha ha ha ha ha! But yes, I don't think liberals like women that don't actually need to take from other people to move forward in life.
False. Democrats 'dislike' Sarah Palin because she is intolerant (Real America!), ignorant, parochial, an Evangelical bent on making her religious beliefs part of government, not at all qualified to be anywhere near the Oval Office and a self-serving egomaniac.
Liberals hate Sarah Palin because she represents the majority of women who are ';family first'; and nurturer. Liberals hate any woman who is not a femi-nazi, man hating dyke.
Sure - cause ';more of a woman'; is the very pinnacle of existence - far surpassing intelligence, meaningful work, or accomplishment by one's own work.
Yeah...if you say so...
True
Considering I am a man. I am happy being born the way I am.
I don't get Conservatives drooling all over her because and after all SHE IS A MARRIED WOMAN.
True....
check this...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UK4Oc-f5V鈥?/a>
pass it on...
False. Most women are Democrats.
Most definitely false. First of all I don't ';hate'; her, I simply she think she is a nimrod who is unfit to govern the country I love.
Democrat woman and Democrat gays will never look that good.
Most have no strong feelings either way for her. If you want to call that hate, okay, whatever.
haha, Sarah Palin? hahahahaha
True and libs hate the fact that she is confident about that.
liberal women hate her because she is a lady... something they are not
I think they hate her mostly because SHE'S A FUKKING LIAR!
I think it's because she shaves her legs and under her arms.
Of course she's more of a woman than I could ever be...I'm a man.
yes i hate when women are more of a woman than me, your logic is flawless
Yes.
No, they hate her because she's the only Republican who could win against Obama. That is, if they actually made her presidential nominee!
we don't hate her. we watch each one of her shows regularly. she has a real talent for comedy.
successful: had to leave her seat... or is it the definition of success to you?
True dat.
True or false? a chemical that regulate a plants response to the environment is called a phytochrome because?
it is produced in one location and has its effect in another part of the plant bod?True or false? a chemical that regulate a plants response to the environment is called a phytochrome because?
Plant hormones such as auxins,gibberllins.
Plant hormones such as auxins,gibberllins.
True or false:Movie sequels are never as good as the originial?
I'm just trying to get everyone's opinion on this.Thank you!True or false:Movie sequels are never as good as the originial?
I think it's somewhat true.
But the books are always better than the movies for sure!
=]True or false:Movie sequels are never as good as the originial?
depends on the movie, go to IMdB before seeing a movie and you should find out what it's about and read reviews on it. Star Wars sequels, many fans say that the original was the best, others like the newer ones. Lord of the Rings people say that the final installment was the best. Harry Potter varies I guess. Ocean's 11 i think was the best. Die Hard. I think they were all good. It all depends on what you're into. IF you want to see your favorite star in it again, go for it. for instance, i watch anything with Vince Vaugn in it no matter how horrible the rating on IMdB was because he's hilarious.
False...for the most part though, it might be true.
I thought ';The Empire Strikes Back'; was better than the original ';Star Wars'; movie...
I also liked ';Ace Ventura: When Nature Calls'; better than ';Ace Ventura: Pet Detective';
False. Definitely. Example: Batman The Dark Knight.
False
Just look at The Dark Knight
Terminator 2
Spiderman 2
just some examples...
True
truehow to cut hair
I think it's somewhat true.
But the books are always better than the movies for sure!
=]True or false:Movie sequels are never as good as the originial?
depends on the movie, go to IMdB before seeing a movie and you should find out what it's about and read reviews on it. Star Wars sequels, many fans say that the original was the best, others like the newer ones. Lord of the Rings people say that the final installment was the best. Harry Potter varies I guess. Ocean's 11 i think was the best. Die Hard. I think they were all good. It all depends on what you're into. IF you want to see your favorite star in it again, go for it. for instance, i watch anything with Vince Vaugn in it no matter how horrible the rating on IMdB was because he's hilarious.
False...for the most part though, it might be true.
I thought ';The Empire Strikes Back'; was better than the original ';Star Wars'; movie...
I also liked ';Ace Ventura: When Nature Calls'; better than ';Ace Ventura: Pet Detective';
False. Definitely. Example: Batman The Dark Knight.
False
Just look at The Dark Knight
Terminator 2
Spiderman 2
just some examples...
True
true
True or false: Putting people in jail, and fighting wars is more important than anything we do for ourselves.
It is costing trillions to fight needless wars, and jailing drug users. No wonder we are in a recession. Our priorities are wrong.True or false: Putting people in jail, and fighting wars is more important than anything we do for ourselves.
False to the initial question. One in 3 inmates are current incarcerated for minor drug possession charges at a cost in excess of $35000 per person per year. Drug prohibition is not only costing us billions per year to enforce and imprison, it is causing us a similar amount in lost revenue due to the money that could have been raised through taxation (similar to alcohol and tobacco).
Bombing the heck out of a country to capture their leader (who was never a threat to us) is akin to burning down your house to kill a fly. The money (and lives) could have been better spent (or, heaven forbid, SAVED).
Yes, our priorities are wrong. We are paying to rebuild a foreign country while our own collapses due to lack of adequate funding. We are jailing people for minor, victimless crimes while ';promoting'; freedom and liberty abroad. We whine about the senseless slaughter of 4000 people on 9/11, but don't bat an eye at the deaths of an estimated 1 million due to our actions in Iraq. The hypocrisy of this administration (and our government as a whole) is astounding.True or false: Putting people in jail, and fighting wars is more important than anything we do for ourselves.
True.....as the Govt c's it ! ! !
You are right our priorities are wrong. Unfortunately you and I are not making policy.
Those are 2 separate issues. I don't want drug dealers on the streets and committing crimes.
False in the most part, but some of that can't be avoided. I do agree that Iraq is a useless and ill-conceived war, but if someone actually attacked us directly, then it would be necessary to defend ourselves. And although the drug laws are ridiculous, we still need jails for those who have shown they cannot live in polite society.
If someone intentionally wanted to destroy the US, they could not develop a better plan鈥攐r execute that plan more successfully鈥攖han what the neocons and Bush Administration have accomplished.
America has been a country for a little over two hundred years - and we've been in ten major wars.
That adds up to a war for every generation ....
We are war minded people!
I am continually surprised by questions like this because there is an implication that the US are the ';good guys'; trying their best to clean up a lawless town. (the cowboy scenario). Their was a time in the past when it was like that. Long ago.
Not any more. Your true/false choice is simplistic.
You have become the thing you tried to kill.
Yeah, well if Ron Paul had won the Republican primary we would have a candidate who will end the Iraq war, not engage in other pointless wars, and stop locking up non-violent drug offenders. Too bad the American people dropped the ball on this one.
I rather make money.
False to the initial question. One in 3 inmates are current incarcerated for minor drug possession charges at a cost in excess of $35000 per person per year. Drug prohibition is not only costing us billions per year to enforce and imprison, it is causing us a similar amount in lost revenue due to the money that could have been raised through taxation (similar to alcohol and tobacco).
Bombing the heck out of a country to capture their leader (who was never a threat to us) is akin to burning down your house to kill a fly. The money (and lives) could have been better spent (or, heaven forbid, SAVED).
Yes, our priorities are wrong. We are paying to rebuild a foreign country while our own collapses due to lack of adequate funding. We are jailing people for minor, victimless crimes while ';promoting'; freedom and liberty abroad. We whine about the senseless slaughter of 4000 people on 9/11, but don't bat an eye at the deaths of an estimated 1 million due to our actions in Iraq. The hypocrisy of this administration (and our government as a whole) is astounding.True or false: Putting people in jail, and fighting wars is more important than anything we do for ourselves.
True.....as the Govt c's it ! ! !
You are right our priorities are wrong. Unfortunately you and I are not making policy.
Those are 2 separate issues. I don't want drug dealers on the streets and committing crimes.
False in the most part, but some of that can't be avoided. I do agree that Iraq is a useless and ill-conceived war, but if someone actually attacked us directly, then it would be necessary to defend ourselves. And although the drug laws are ridiculous, we still need jails for those who have shown they cannot live in polite society.
If someone intentionally wanted to destroy the US, they could not develop a better plan鈥攐r execute that plan more successfully鈥攖han what the neocons and Bush Administration have accomplished.
America has been a country for a little over two hundred years - and we've been in ten major wars.
That adds up to a war for every generation ....
We are war minded people!
I am continually surprised by questions like this because there is an implication that the US are the ';good guys'; trying their best to clean up a lawless town. (the cowboy scenario). Their was a time in the past when it was like that. Long ago.
Not any more. Your true/false choice is simplistic.
You have become the thing you tried to kill.
Yeah, well if Ron Paul had won the Republican primary we would have a candidate who will end the Iraq war, not engage in other pointless wars, and stop locking up non-violent drug offenders. Too bad the American people dropped the ball on this one.
I rather make money.
True or false: Through practice and training, is it possible to expand your vocal range?
If possible, please include references that back up your answer.True or false: Through practice and training, is it possible to expand your vocal range?
Sure, your vocal cords are muscles and it is possible to strengthen them, stretch them, whatever you want. Go see your Concert Choir Teaqdher (or chorus if that's what they call it in your area) and ask for some range exercises. He or she probably has a whole fist full they can give you.True or false: Through practice and training, is it possible to expand your vocal range?
True, I've done it. Not sure about the lower notes, but to get your vocal range higher try to open your throat as far as you can, that allows for your voice to go higher, eventually those notes will become natural and you'll be able to go higher
Sure, your vocal cords are muscles and it is possible to strengthen them, stretch them, whatever you want. Go see your Concert Choir Teaqdher (or chorus if that's what they call it in your area) and ask for some range exercises. He or she probably has a whole fist full they can give you.True or false: Through practice and training, is it possible to expand your vocal range?
True, I've done it. Not sure about the lower notes, but to get your vocal range higher try to open your throat as far as you can, that allows for your voice to go higher, eventually those notes will become natural and you'll be able to go higher
True Or False: Anything bad can be attributed to your party, while anything good is thanks to my party?
You said a mouthful there, mate!
There's so much hot air generated on Yahoo's political categories we probably melt a f*cking ice cap a night.
Ah, hey...True Or False: Anything bad can be attributed to your party, while anything good is thanks to my party?
False. Although it is because you can't write the sentence in the structure you want. Now if you like the same party as me then clearly it is true. Seriously though I am an independent. I'll admit I lean toward the Republicans. However I have voted for Democrats over Republicans(on State ticket) sometimes. They aren't all bad, but I go by the person and what I know of their views.True Or False: Anything bad can be attributed to your party, while anything good is thanks to my party?
Anything good that happens during the Obama administration will be credited to Obama. While everything bad will be credited to Bush.
False: Political Parties are liken parent's children. Sometimes they embarrasses you, and other times they provide proud moments. We love them but sometimes are not to be held for their individuals acts.
False. Only a simpleton would believe that.
.
False.
Damn Democrats.
False be honest these days both parties suck.
True.
Thats how it works in this country. Love it or leave.
Okay...what ever floats your boat!!
There's so much hot air generated on Yahoo's political categories we probably melt a f*cking ice cap a night.
Ah, hey...True Or False: Anything bad can be attributed to your party, while anything good is thanks to my party?
False. Although it is because you can't write the sentence in the structure you want. Now if you like the same party as me then clearly it is true. Seriously though I am an independent. I'll admit I lean toward the Republicans. However I have voted for Democrats over Republicans(on State ticket) sometimes. They aren't all bad, but I go by the person and what I know of their views.True Or False: Anything bad can be attributed to your party, while anything good is thanks to my party?
Anything good that happens during the Obama administration will be credited to Obama. While everything bad will be credited to Bush.
False: Political Parties are liken parent's children. Sometimes they embarrasses you, and other times they provide proud moments. We love them but sometimes are not to be held for their individuals acts.
False. Only a simpleton would believe that.
.
False.
Damn Democrats.
False be honest these days both parties suck.
True.
Thats how it works in this country. Love it or leave.
Okay...what ever floats your boat!!
True Or False: Anything bad can be attributed to your party, while anything good is thanks to my party?
You said a mouthful there, mate!
There's so much hot air generated on Yahoo's political categories we probably melt a f*cking ice cap a night.
Ah, hey...True Or False: Anything bad can be attributed to your party, while anything good is thanks to my party?
False. Although it is because you can't write the sentence in the structure you want. Now if you like the same party as me then clearly it is true. Seriously though I am an independent. I'll admit I lean toward the Republicans. However I have voted for Democrats over Republicans(on State ticket) sometimes. They aren't all bad, but I go by the person and what I know of their views.True Or False: Anything bad can be attributed to your party, while anything good is thanks to my party?
Anything good that happens during the Obama administration will be credited to Obama. While everything bad will be credited to Bush.
False: Political Parties are liken parent's children. Sometimes they embarrasses you, and other times they provide proud moments. We love them but sometimes are not to be held for their individuals acts.
False. Only a simpleton would believe that.
.
False.
Damn Democrats.
False be honest these days both parties suck.
True.
Thats how it works in this country. Love it or leave.
Okay...what ever floats your boat!!
There's so much hot air generated on Yahoo's political categories we probably melt a f*cking ice cap a night.
Ah, hey...True Or False: Anything bad can be attributed to your party, while anything good is thanks to my party?
False. Although it is because you can't write the sentence in the structure you want. Now if you like the same party as me then clearly it is true. Seriously though I am an independent. I'll admit I lean toward the Republicans. However I have voted for Democrats over Republicans(on State ticket) sometimes. They aren't all bad, but I go by the person and what I know of their views.True Or False: Anything bad can be attributed to your party, while anything good is thanks to my party?
Anything good that happens during the Obama administration will be credited to Obama. While everything bad will be credited to Bush.
False: Political Parties are liken parent's children. Sometimes they embarrasses you, and other times they provide proud moments. We love them but sometimes are not to be held for their individuals acts.
False. Only a simpleton would believe that.
.
False.
Damn Democrats.
False be honest these days both parties suck.
True.
Thats how it works in this country. Love it or leave.
Okay...what ever floats your boat!!
Spaghetti cooks more quickly in a pressure cooker because the boiling point of water increases. True or False?
Spaghetti cooks more quickly in a pressure cooker because the boiling point of water increases. True or False?Spaghetti cooks more quickly in a pressure cooker because the boiling point of water increases. True or False?
True.
The boiling temperature depends on the ambient pressure, and goes up with increased pressure. The reverse is true, and in high-altitude cities like Denver, boiling water may not get hot enough to cook some items. In fact, that was the original intent of the pressure cooker--to overcome low boiling temperatures in some high-altitude areas.Spaghetti cooks more quickly in a pressure cooker because the boiling point of water increases. True or False?
True.
Pressure cookers delay water boiling until a higher temperature than 212 F (100C) is reached. Higher temps mean faster cooking.
Any food, not just spaghetti.
True...
True.
The boiling temperature depends on the ambient pressure, and goes up with increased pressure. The reverse is true, and in high-altitude cities like Denver, boiling water may not get hot enough to cook some items. In fact, that was the original intent of the pressure cooker--to overcome low boiling temperatures in some high-altitude areas.Spaghetti cooks more quickly in a pressure cooker because the boiling point of water increases. True or False?
True.
Pressure cookers delay water boiling until a higher temperature than 212 F (100C) is reached. Higher temps mean faster cooking.
Any food, not just spaghetti.
True...
Are the following statements true or false?
if false, why?
1. Our constitution is derived from many sources, one of whom is John Locke because it is a contract between the rulers and the governed in which the rulers have power only with the consent of the governed.
2. The impact of Shay's Rebellion was it showed the strength of the Confederation government and the articles of confederation.
3. COngress can veto any act of a state legislature that is considers to be either unconstitutional, contrary to the interests of the united states, or a violation of the principles of federalism.
Whatever you can answer will be big help! thanks!Are the following statements true or false?
haha AP US History?
Yeah that class was really hard.Are the following statements true or false?
Stop trying to get people to answer your homework questions.how to cut hair
1. Our constitution is derived from many sources, one of whom is John Locke because it is a contract between the rulers and the governed in which the rulers have power only with the consent of the governed.
2. The impact of Shay's Rebellion was it showed the strength of the Confederation government and the articles of confederation.
3. COngress can veto any act of a state legislature that is considers to be either unconstitutional, contrary to the interests of the united states, or a violation of the principles of federalism.
Whatever you can answer will be big help! thanks!Are the following statements true or false?
haha AP US History?
Yeah that class was really hard.Are the following statements true or false?
Stop trying to get people to answer your homework questions.
Could you answer these true or false sociology questions?
1. T or F The major social institutions have no interconnections.
2. T or F Culture is only present in advanced societies.
Thanks for the help!Could you answer these true or false sociology questions?
they are both falseCould you answer these true or false sociology questions?
Well being that I graduated in Behavioral Science with a HEAVY concentration in Sociology let me take a crack at this! lol
The both are false.
1. No major social institution can properly function without interconnections. Think about social institutions as a living organism. Look up Comte, Hagel on this issue.
2. I think it would be fair to say that for a society to exist for any length of time a culture must be present. Culture could be defined as the presence of norms, values, folkways, rituals, anything that links a certain group of people together normally sharing the same ideas and reasons for existence.
1) False
2) False (There are at least a couple more factors present in advanced societies, like economics.)
1. F
2. F
False and False
false both of them
false
false
hope this helps
both are false
1 - F
2 - F
both false.
keep in mind, answering T/F questions are more about grammar than actual question content...look at number #2...when you see words like ';only'; or ';never';, it will 9 times out of 10 be false.
look for absolutes like that, and qualifying statements that override the entire point of the question to begin with, because nothing is black and white...especially in a sociology class.
1. F
2. F
hope this helps!!!
Both are false
F,F... i think..
That is a complete Sham!
Major Institutions have so much interconnection. Its unbelivable.
Haha, oh and the second one... Erm, I think iam 50-50 on that one. Could be true or false. But probably False in my opinion.
Hope it helped =]
the first one is incorrect, the second is correct.
I don't understand what you mean by interconnections. If you mean communications, that would differ depending on colleges, social services, Immigration, Alcoholics Anonymous, and so forth.
#2 is False because culture is present in all societies. Think about this that culture is transmitted to generations by beliefs, knowledge, and religon. You could say that the ghetto has a culture, Africa, Phillipines, Germany, France, and the like. Culture is not based on wealth, but what is the customary beliefs and social forms
2. T or F Culture is only present in advanced societies.
Thanks for the help!Could you answer these true or false sociology questions?
they are both falseCould you answer these true or false sociology questions?
Well being that I graduated in Behavioral Science with a HEAVY concentration in Sociology let me take a crack at this! lol
The both are false.
1. No major social institution can properly function without interconnections. Think about social institutions as a living organism. Look up Comte, Hagel on this issue.
2. I think it would be fair to say that for a society to exist for any length of time a culture must be present. Culture could be defined as the presence of norms, values, folkways, rituals, anything that links a certain group of people together normally sharing the same ideas and reasons for existence.
1) False
2) False (There are at least a couple more factors present in advanced societies, like economics.)
1. F
2. F
False and False
false both of them
false
false
hope this helps
both are false
1 - F
2 - F
both false.
keep in mind, answering T/F questions are more about grammar than actual question content...look at number #2...when you see words like ';only'; or ';never';, it will 9 times out of 10 be false.
look for absolutes like that, and qualifying statements that override the entire point of the question to begin with, because nothing is black and white...especially in a sociology class.
1. F
2. F
hope this helps!!!
Both are false
F,F... i think..
That is a complete Sham!
Major Institutions have so much interconnection. Its unbelivable.
Haha, oh and the second one... Erm, I think iam 50-50 on that one. Could be true or false. But probably False in my opinion.
Hope it helped =]
the first one is incorrect, the second is correct.
I don't understand what you mean by interconnections. If you mean communications, that would differ depending on colleges, social services, Immigration, Alcoholics Anonymous, and so forth.
#2 is False because culture is present in all societies. Think about this that culture is transmitted to generations by beliefs, knowledge, and religon. You could say that the ghetto has a culture, Africa, Phillipines, Germany, France, and the like. Culture is not based on wealth, but what is the customary beliefs and social forms
Eating sugar before you go to sleep makes you have crazy dreams. True or False?
Uh yeah. My mom always told me eating food with a lot of sugar before you go to bed makes you have really weird dreams. Anyone know if this is true or not?Eating sugar before you go to sleep makes you have crazy dreams. True or False?
I have eaten sugar stuff some days and non sugar stuff some days and gone to sleep and have not found any correlation between sugar food and weired dreams.
But sometimes the digestive system can influence the dreams.Eating sugar before you go to sleep makes you have crazy dreams. True or False?
Not true. At least, not for me. Food has no effect on whether or not I dream weird stuff.
It can yes, and so will chocolate and caffeine.
it just wont make you sleep
lol Yes it will.
thats just somethin they tell you to make u scared
I have eaten sugar stuff some days and non sugar stuff some days and gone to sleep and have not found any correlation between sugar food and weired dreams.
But sometimes the digestive system can influence the dreams.Eating sugar before you go to sleep makes you have crazy dreams. True or False?
Not true. At least, not for me. Food has no effect on whether or not I dream weird stuff.
It can yes, and so will chocolate and caffeine.
it just wont make you sleep
lol Yes it will.
thats just somethin they tell you to make u scared
Write a simple sentence and then write the negation. Imagine situations where each statement is True or False?
.
How does the truth value (True or False) of the negation statement compare with the truth value of the original statement?Write a simple sentence and then write the negation. Imagine situations where each statement is True or False?
statement = ';All cats have four legs';
negation = ';There is at least one cat who does not have four legs';Write a simple sentence and then write the negation. Imagine situations where each statement is True or False?
Simple sentence: Today is Wednesday.
Truth value = T
Negation: Today is not Wednesday.
Truth value = F
Here's another example:
Simple sentence: My name is Michelle.
Truth value = F
Negation: My name is not Michelle.
Truth value = T
The truth value of a negation is always the opposite of the original statement.
How does the truth value (True or False) of the negation statement compare with the truth value of the original statement?Write a simple sentence and then write the negation. Imagine situations where each statement is True or False?
statement = ';All cats have four legs';
negation = ';There is at least one cat who does not have four legs';Write a simple sentence and then write the negation. Imagine situations where each statement is True or False?
Simple sentence: Today is Wednesday.
Truth value = T
Negation: Today is not Wednesday.
Truth value = F
Here's another example:
Simple sentence: My name is Michelle.
Truth value = F
Negation: My name is not Michelle.
Truth value = T
The truth value of a negation is always the opposite of the original statement.
Oracle: You cannot modify the data type of a column if there is data in the column, True or false?
There are hundred records in the student table.
You need to modify the Phone column to hold only numeric value which is currently hlding varchar2. Can we modify it?Oracle: You cannot modify the data type of a column if there is data in the column, True or false?
True.
SQL%26gt; alter table t1 modify phone number(38);
alter table t1 modify phone number(38)
*
ERROR at line 1:
ORA-01439: column to be modified must be empty to change datatype
The easiest way around this is to export your data, truncate the table and import it back to the redefined table. That assumes the existing data is already only numbers i.e. 6005551212 not (600)555-1212. If that is not the case then you need to do some data cleanup first or the import of the data will fail.Oracle: You cannot modify the data type of a column if there is data in the column, True or false?
False, you can 'open' the database in MS access, change any or all values, columns, etc., then export back to oracle/ excell/ whatever.
You need to modify the Phone column to hold only numeric value which is currently hlding varchar2. Can we modify it?Oracle: You cannot modify the data type of a column if there is data in the column, True or false?
True.
SQL%26gt; alter table t1 modify phone number(38);
alter table t1 modify phone number(38)
*
ERROR at line 1:
ORA-01439: column to be modified must be empty to change datatype
The easiest way around this is to export your data, truncate the table and import it back to the redefined table. That assumes the existing data is already only numbers i.e. 6005551212 not (600)555-1212. If that is not the case then you need to do some data cleanup first or the import of the data will fail.Oracle: You cannot modify the data type of a column if there is data in the column, True or false?
False, you can 'open' the database in MS access, change any or all values, columns, etc., then export back to oracle/ excell/ whatever.
Can you help me answer these true or false History questions?
True of False:
1. Scientist agree that Neanderthals were the first truly modern humans
2. Cities differed from villages only in size
3. Technology advances, social ranking, and trade developed once people were not worried about basic survival
Your help is greatly appreciated!
]Can you help me answer these true or false History questions?
False, one current theory is that Neanderthals evolved separately to Cro-Magnon and subsequently died out
False, Trade structure, social welfare and elaborate complex society are pretty big factors in these differences, however there is a rough argument that on a ratio a village would eventually grow into a city given the correct factors.
True, I uphold this theory anyway, there's strong evidence that static communities develop better and faster than nomadic ones. Once an abundance of food and stable security was established resources could be diverted to technological advancements.
Given all the answers you've had differ I suggest there's a good case for some research and formation of your own arguments.
Good luck.Can you help me answer these true or false History questions?
1. True. Some are still around today. They play football, enter politics and teach PE. I saw one on television last night. His name was George W. something or other, I forgot.
2. False, cities had pudding and villages had beer.
3. True. Once societies had agricultural surpluses and did not have to worry about where the next meal was coming from, ';I believe I'll have a beer. And some pudding.'; people could pursue things other than hunting and gathering. ';That's good beer. But hold off on the pudding until we invent refrigerators.'; And occupational specialisation developed. And not just for spearhead makers and moose dressers. People had to be able to keep track of their wealth, so accountants and lawyers (the real oldest profession) and others developed. Writing was invented and math was discovered. And the math for keeping track of everything was needed (Algebra was invented by an accountant wanting to divide up his client' estate among the heirs.) But I digress. Where's that beer? And society and civilization (or sillyvization as my daughter calls it) grew up. She likes chocolate pudding.
True
False
True
1. False
2. False
3. False
1. Scientist agree that Neanderthals were the first truly modern humans
2. Cities differed from villages only in size
3. Technology advances, social ranking, and trade developed once people were not worried about basic survival
Your help is greatly appreciated!
]Can you help me answer these true or false History questions?
False, one current theory is that Neanderthals evolved separately to Cro-Magnon and subsequently died out
False, Trade structure, social welfare and elaborate complex society are pretty big factors in these differences, however there is a rough argument that on a ratio a village would eventually grow into a city given the correct factors.
True, I uphold this theory anyway, there's strong evidence that static communities develop better and faster than nomadic ones. Once an abundance of food and stable security was established resources could be diverted to technological advancements.
Given all the answers you've had differ I suggest there's a good case for some research and formation of your own arguments.
Good luck.Can you help me answer these true or false History questions?
1. True. Some are still around today. They play football, enter politics and teach PE. I saw one on television last night. His name was George W. something or other, I forgot.
2. False, cities had pudding and villages had beer.
3. True. Once societies had agricultural surpluses and did not have to worry about where the next meal was coming from, ';I believe I'll have a beer. And some pudding.'; people could pursue things other than hunting and gathering. ';That's good beer. But hold off on the pudding until we invent refrigerators.'; And occupational specialisation developed. And not just for spearhead makers and moose dressers. People had to be able to keep track of their wealth, so accountants and lawyers (the real oldest profession) and others developed. Writing was invented and math was discovered. And the math for keeping track of everything was needed (Algebra was invented by an accountant wanting to divide up his client' estate among the heirs.) But I digress. Where's that beer? And society and civilization (or sillyvization as my daughter calls it) grew up. She likes chocolate pudding.
True
False
True
1. False
2. False
3. False
Can urban legends be either true or false or even distorted in between?
Can you tell me some true Urban Legends?
Can you tell me some false Urban Legends?
Can you tell me some ditorted Urban Legends that are twisted to be partially true and false?Can urban legends be either true or false or even distorted in between?
The poodle in the microwave appears to be totally and completely false
The man who solved the unsolvable math problem is one partially based on fact, but was added to so it is now what we have
The person who fell through the grate at the church is true and has come down to us without distortionhow to cut hair
Can you tell me some false Urban Legends?
Can you tell me some ditorted Urban Legends that are twisted to be partially true and false?Can urban legends be either true or false or even distorted in between?
The poodle in the microwave appears to be totally and completely false
The man who solved the unsolvable math problem is one partially based on fact, but was added to so it is now what we have
The person who fell through the grate at the church is true and has come down to us without distortion
I heard that sattelites in space have the capability of seeing inside ones home? True or false?
A teacher told me this once and i didnt belive him. Now im starting too after i talked to a hacker i met at best buy. He told me the U.S Sattelites have the capability of being able to see inside ones home even with a rooftop ....Is this true? If not wat capability does the sattelite have that is sorta like it? Besides infared?I heard that sattelites in space have the capability of seeing inside ones home? True or false?
No, they can't.
They can only use Radio and visible light to see; none of these can penetrate wood and brick, or at least Radio won't give you anything.
Only wavelengths around visible light can be used to see people, radio just won't give an image.
Just look, I'm right, I deserve these points:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optical_win鈥?/a>
Infrared can't get through the atmosphere.I heard that sattelites in space have the capability of seeing inside ones home? True or false?
If you happen to have a glass roof, yes!
As far as I know there is no known device that could be mounted on an average-sized satellite in order to allow it to see through your roof and into your house. Any device capable of doing that would have to be very large and prohibitively expensive to put into space. Consider that when you go to the dentist, it takes an x-ray machine about as large as your computer keyboard just to see past the wall of your mouth and look at your teeth from a distance of less than a meter. Now imagine how much more power you'd have to have in order to see all the way through a house roof from a distance of over 400 kilometers! I don't think you have to worry about this yet.
That said, your privacy ends once you step outside the front door. Without any thick, opaque roof between you and the satellites, it becomes much easier to take pictures. Modern spy satellites have sufficient resolution to pick out individual people on the ground, distinguish between a sedan and a pickup, tell whether a person is carrying a suitcase or not, and so on. Larger, more accurate cameras will probably be able to improve this even further, and it may soon be possible to recognize faces and read car license plates from orbit, if it isn't already.
There are all sorts of beliefs about satellites that will never be confirmed because they will always remain classified. I personally don't believe this; what technology is capable of seeing through roofs and ceilings ONLY, but NOT through floors and things? I just wouldn't work.
Here's something that IS true about satellites. The PRC is building, or at least testing, a device that prevents spy satellites from obtaining photographs of the terra, by sending a laser beam from the surface of the Earth to the satellite, thus blinding it.
If they are equipped with infrared, like the HST or the Spitzer telecsope, they could register the heat signature from your home. That would be a bout it, unless you were using your 15,000 watt microwave. Plus, most satellites in low earth orbit circle the earth so fast, they could only get a snapshot of earth, they would pass by your house too quickly. A geosynchronous orbit is WAAAY out there, and so even though those satellites are orbiting with the earth's rotation, they are so far away, the resolving power is so negligible, your house would appear as just a little 20x20 pixel ';blip'; on the image.
Absolutely false, someone has been watching too many movies. A satellite cannot see through solid objects and any satellite that can pick up infra red would only be able too see the outline of your house. The ';Hacker'; you met just wanted to sound cool.
When terrorist Eric Rudolph was on the run (1998-2003), police believed that he was hiding (literally) underground, either in a cave or a mine, precisely because they were unable to locate him with the satellite technology available at the time. It turns out that he wasn't, but that isn't really the point. So, make of that what you will.
False. If this were so, then presumably this see-through technology would be usable on the ground, too. Have you ever heard of that?
In general there's a lot of confusion between satellite photos and those taken from planes. When you're looking at your house on Google Earth, you're looking at a photo taken from an airplane. Cities, counties, etc., have periodic ';fly overs'; done for GIS and other purposes.
Before people go off about this teacher, bear in mind that we have to take with a grain of salt any conversation between a teacher and a child which is reported by the listener years afterwards.
False.
Totally false, today's satellites do not have the resolution to image an object as small as a single person or see through solid objects.
false. sattelites can only see outside the home.
It's true, and I hear that the guys down at the NSA make bets on how many times you'll masturbate each day.
it might be true, but i doubt it. plus, why would the government want to look inside your house?
No, they can't.
They can only use Radio and visible light to see; none of these can penetrate wood and brick, or at least Radio won't give you anything.
Only wavelengths around visible light can be used to see people, radio just won't give an image.
Just look, I'm right, I deserve these points:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optical_win鈥?/a>
Infrared can't get through the atmosphere.I heard that sattelites in space have the capability of seeing inside ones home? True or false?
If you happen to have a glass roof, yes!
As far as I know there is no known device that could be mounted on an average-sized satellite in order to allow it to see through your roof and into your house. Any device capable of doing that would have to be very large and prohibitively expensive to put into space. Consider that when you go to the dentist, it takes an x-ray machine about as large as your computer keyboard just to see past the wall of your mouth and look at your teeth from a distance of less than a meter. Now imagine how much more power you'd have to have in order to see all the way through a house roof from a distance of over 400 kilometers! I don't think you have to worry about this yet.
That said, your privacy ends once you step outside the front door. Without any thick, opaque roof between you and the satellites, it becomes much easier to take pictures. Modern spy satellites have sufficient resolution to pick out individual people on the ground, distinguish between a sedan and a pickup, tell whether a person is carrying a suitcase or not, and so on. Larger, more accurate cameras will probably be able to improve this even further, and it may soon be possible to recognize faces and read car license plates from orbit, if it isn't already.
There are all sorts of beliefs about satellites that will never be confirmed because they will always remain classified. I personally don't believe this; what technology is capable of seeing through roofs and ceilings ONLY, but NOT through floors and things? I just wouldn't work.
Here's something that IS true about satellites. The PRC is building, or at least testing, a device that prevents spy satellites from obtaining photographs of the terra, by sending a laser beam from the surface of the Earth to the satellite, thus blinding it.
If they are equipped with infrared, like the HST or the Spitzer telecsope, they could register the heat signature from your home. That would be a bout it, unless you were using your 15,000 watt microwave. Plus, most satellites in low earth orbit circle the earth so fast, they could only get a snapshot of earth, they would pass by your house too quickly. A geosynchronous orbit is WAAAY out there, and so even though those satellites are orbiting with the earth's rotation, they are so far away, the resolving power is so negligible, your house would appear as just a little 20x20 pixel ';blip'; on the image.
Absolutely false, someone has been watching too many movies. A satellite cannot see through solid objects and any satellite that can pick up infra red would only be able too see the outline of your house. The ';Hacker'; you met just wanted to sound cool.
When terrorist Eric Rudolph was on the run (1998-2003), police believed that he was hiding (literally) underground, either in a cave or a mine, precisely because they were unable to locate him with the satellite technology available at the time. It turns out that he wasn't, but that isn't really the point. So, make of that what you will.
False. If this were so, then presumably this see-through technology would be usable on the ground, too. Have you ever heard of that?
In general there's a lot of confusion between satellite photos and those taken from planes. When you're looking at your house on Google Earth, you're looking at a photo taken from an airplane. Cities, counties, etc., have periodic ';fly overs'; done for GIS and other purposes.
Before people go off about this teacher, bear in mind that we have to take with a grain of salt any conversation between a teacher and a child which is reported by the listener years afterwards.
False.
Totally false, today's satellites do not have the resolution to image an object as small as a single person or see through solid objects.
false. sattelites can only see outside the home.
It's true, and I hear that the guys down at the NSA make bets on how many times you'll masturbate each day.
it might be true, but i doubt it. plus, why would the government want to look inside your house?
I heard that sattelites in space have the capability of seeing inside ones home? True or false?
A teacher told me this once and i didnt belive him. Now im starting too after i talked to a hacker i met at best buy. He told me the U.S Sattelites have the capability of being able to see inside ones home even with a rooftop ....Is this true? If not wat capability does the sattelite have that is sorta like it? Besides infared?I heard that sattelites in space have the capability of seeing inside ones home? True or false?
No, they can't.
They can only use Radio and visible light to see; none of these can penetrate wood and brick, or at least Radio won't give you anything.
Only wavelengths around visible light can be used to see people, radio just won't give an image.
Just look, I'm right, I deserve these points:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optical_win鈥?/a>
Infrared can't get through the atmosphere.I heard that sattelites in space have the capability of seeing inside ones home? True or false?
If you happen to have a glass roof, yes!
As far as I know there is no known device that could be mounted on an average-sized satellite in order to allow it to see through your roof and into your house. Any device capable of doing that would have to be very large and prohibitively expensive to put into space. Consider that when you go to the dentist, it takes an x-ray machine about as large as your computer keyboard just to see past the wall of your mouth and look at your teeth from a distance of less than a meter. Now imagine how much more power you'd have to have in order to see all the way through a house roof from a distance of over 400 kilometers! I don't think you have to worry about this yet.
That said, your privacy ends once you step outside the front door. Without any thick, opaque roof between you and the satellites, it becomes much easier to take pictures. Modern spy satellites have sufficient resolution to pick out individual people on the ground, distinguish between a sedan and a pickup, tell whether a person is carrying a suitcase or not, and so on. Larger, more accurate cameras will probably be able to improve this even further, and it may soon be possible to recognize faces and read car license plates from orbit, if it isn't already.
There are all sorts of beliefs about satellites that will never be confirmed because they will always remain classified. I personally don't believe this; what technology is capable of seeing through roofs and ceilings ONLY, but NOT through floors and things? I just wouldn't work.
Here's something that IS true about satellites. The PRC is building, or at least testing, a device that prevents spy satellites from obtaining photographs of the terra, by sending a laser beam from the surface of the Earth to the satellite, thus blinding it.
If they are equipped with infrared, like the HST or the Spitzer telecsope, they could register the heat signature from your home. That would be a bout it, unless you were using your 15,000 watt microwave. Plus, most satellites in low earth orbit circle the earth so fast, they could only get a snapshot of earth, they would pass by your house too quickly. A geosynchronous orbit is WAAAY out there, and so even though those satellites are orbiting with the earth's rotation, they are so far away, the resolving power is so negligible, your house would appear as just a little 20x20 pixel ';blip'; on the image.
Absolutely false, someone has been watching too many movies. A satellite cannot see through solid objects and any satellite that can pick up infra red would only be able too see the outline of your house. The ';Hacker'; you met just wanted to sound cool.
When terrorist Eric Rudolph was on the run (1998-2003), police believed that he was hiding (literally) underground, either in a cave or a mine, precisely because they were unable to locate him with the satellite technology available at the time. It turns out that he wasn't, but that isn't really the point. So, make of that what you will.
False. If this were so, then presumably this see-through technology would be usable on the ground, too. Have you ever heard of that?
In general there's a lot of confusion between satellite photos and those taken from planes. When you're looking at your house on Google Earth, you're looking at a photo taken from an airplane. Cities, counties, etc., have periodic ';fly overs'; done for GIS and other purposes.
Before people go off about this teacher, bear in mind that we have to take with a grain of salt any conversation between a teacher and a child which is reported by the listener years afterwards.
False.
Totally false, today's satellites do not have the resolution to image an object as small as a single person or see through solid objects.
false. sattelites can only see outside the home.
It's true, and I hear that the guys down at the NSA make bets on how many times you'll masturbate each day.
it might be true, but i doubt it. plus, why would the government want to look inside your house?
No, they can't.
They can only use Radio and visible light to see; none of these can penetrate wood and brick, or at least Radio won't give you anything.
Only wavelengths around visible light can be used to see people, radio just won't give an image.
Just look, I'm right, I deserve these points:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optical_win鈥?/a>
Infrared can't get through the atmosphere.I heard that sattelites in space have the capability of seeing inside ones home? True or false?
If you happen to have a glass roof, yes!
As far as I know there is no known device that could be mounted on an average-sized satellite in order to allow it to see through your roof and into your house. Any device capable of doing that would have to be very large and prohibitively expensive to put into space. Consider that when you go to the dentist, it takes an x-ray machine about as large as your computer keyboard just to see past the wall of your mouth and look at your teeth from a distance of less than a meter. Now imagine how much more power you'd have to have in order to see all the way through a house roof from a distance of over 400 kilometers! I don't think you have to worry about this yet.
That said, your privacy ends once you step outside the front door. Without any thick, opaque roof between you and the satellites, it becomes much easier to take pictures. Modern spy satellites have sufficient resolution to pick out individual people on the ground, distinguish between a sedan and a pickup, tell whether a person is carrying a suitcase or not, and so on. Larger, more accurate cameras will probably be able to improve this even further, and it may soon be possible to recognize faces and read car license plates from orbit, if it isn't already.
There are all sorts of beliefs about satellites that will never be confirmed because they will always remain classified. I personally don't believe this; what technology is capable of seeing through roofs and ceilings ONLY, but NOT through floors and things? I just wouldn't work.
Here's something that IS true about satellites. The PRC is building, or at least testing, a device that prevents spy satellites from obtaining photographs of the terra, by sending a laser beam from the surface of the Earth to the satellite, thus blinding it.
If they are equipped with infrared, like the HST or the Spitzer telecsope, they could register the heat signature from your home. That would be a bout it, unless you were using your 15,000 watt microwave. Plus, most satellites in low earth orbit circle the earth so fast, they could only get a snapshot of earth, they would pass by your house too quickly. A geosynchronous orbit is WAAAY out there, and so even though those satellites are orbiting with the earth's rotation, they are so far away, the resolving power is so negligible, your house would appear as just a little 20x20 pixel ';blip'; on the image.
Absolutely false, someone has been watching too many movies. A satellite cannot see through solid objects and any satellite that can pick up infra red would only be able too see the outline of your house. The ';Hacker'; you met just wanted to sound cool.
When terrorist Eric Rudolph was on the run (1998-2003), police believed that he was hiding (literally) underground, either in a cave or a mine, precisely because they were unable to locate him with the satellite technology available at the time. It turns out that he wasn't, but that isn't really the point. So, make of that what you will.
False. If this were so, then presumably this see-through technology would be usable on the ground, too. Have you ever heard of that?
In general there's a lot of confusion between satellite photos and those taken from planes. When you're looking at your house on Google Earth, you're looking at a photo taken from an airplane. Cities, counties, etc., have periodic ';fly overs'; done for GIS and other purposes.
Before people go off about this teacher, bear in mind that we have to take with a grain of salt any conversation between a teacher and a child which is reported by the listener years afterwards.
False.
Totally false, today's satellites do not have the resolution to image an object as small as a single person or see through solid objects.
false. sattelites can only see outside the home.
It's true, and I hear that the guys down at the NSA make bets on how many times you'll masturbate each day.
it might be true, but i doubt it. plus, why would the government want to look inside your house?
The criminal justice system is ineffective true or false?
what would the criminal justice system have to do to improve its effectiveness? should they be focussing more on retribution or rehabilitation? crime rates do not fall regardless of the rise in prison inmate numbers, does this signify to you, that prison is a bodgey punishment?
I am not trying to get everyone to do my assignment for me, just interested in other opinions.The criminal justice system is ineffective true or false?
it is not the system that is corrupt, it's the people running itThe criminal justice system is ineffective true or false?
True and False it depends
currently i believe that is moderately effective, but far too small. All/most prisons are overflowing right now (it's a shame, but true), and there is simply no more room for people to put criminals. I think you could swing it either left or right.
one way would (besides expanding the system) is to raise the execution rate of people on death row. currently I think it is around 3% (which in some cities means you are more likely to die on the street then on death row). The motivation to commit crime with numbers like that is high, and so it will happen.
Another, perhaps better way, is to have mandatory education in jail for those who haven't received it. one of the highest constants of criminals is that they have a low level of education. if someone gets out of jail with a diploma they can get a reasonable job, and if they're in there for long enough they could come out with a college degree. However this then poses the problem of committing crime simply to get into jail and have the oppurtunity (if the education in jail became better than public schools like it might be in my area) to get a better education.
I am not trying to get everyone to do my assignment for me, just interested in other opinions.The criminal justice system is ineffective true or false?
it is not the system that is corrupt, it's the people running itThe criminal justice system is ineffective true or false?
True and False it depends
currently i believe that is moderately effective, but far too small. All/most prisons are overflowing right now (it's a shame, but true), and there is simply no more room for people to put criminals. I think you could swing it either left or right.
one way would (besides expanding the system) is to raise the execution rate of people on death row. currently I think it is around 3% (which in some cities means you are more likely to die on the street then on death row). The motivation to commit crime with numbers like that is high, and so it will happen.
Another, perhaps better way, is to have mandatory education in jail for those who haven't received it. one of the highest constants of criminals is that they have a low level of education. if someone gets out of jail with a diploma they can get a reasonable job, and if they're in there for long enough they could come out with a college degree. However this then poses the problem of committing crime simply to get into jail and have the oppurtunity (if the education in jail became better than public schools like it might be in my area) to get a better education.
Firewall Blocks Open Ports, So No Connection Can Be Made To The Open Port! True or False?
If true, then whats the point of open port, if firewall blocks it from receiving connections??!!!
If false, why?
Firewall does not block outgoing traffic through the open ports, right?Firewall Blocks Open Ports, So No Connection Can Be Made To The Open Port! True or False?
Firewall cannot block connection, it can only block incoming traffic and some can block outgoing traffic.Firewall Blocks Open Ports, So No Connection Can Be Made To The Open Port! True or False?
you can configure your firewall to unblock specified ports
Firewall Can block only incoming traffic
If false, why?
Firewall does not block outgoing traffic through the open ports, right?Firewall Blocks Open Ports, So No Connection Can Be Made To The Open Port! True or False?
Firewall cannot block connection, it can only block incoming traffic and some can block outgoing traffic.Firewall Blocks Open Ports, So No Connection Can Be Made To The Open Port! True or False?
you can configure your firewall to unblock specified ports
Firewall Can block only incoming traffic
I have a friend american that is required a BTA of 3400 before she can leave Nigeria. True or false?
She said her travel agent says for an american citizen to leave Lagos Nigeria on KLM of which she already paid for the ticket. He won't give her the ticket until she pays a BTA of 3400.00 and is holding her ticket hostage. Is this truely required of an american leaving Nigeria?I have a friend american that is required a BTA of 3400 before she can leave Nigeria. True or false?
BTA's are only required for Nigerains leaving the country for a visit abroad.
Other nationalities never have to pay anyone for it.
It's just another Nigerian scam. Don't loose your money!I have a friend american that is required a BTA of 3400 before she can leave Nigeria. True or false?
www.internet-love-scams.org can help you....
BTA's are only required for Nigerains leaving the country for a visit abroad.
Other nationalities never have to pay anyone for it.
It's just another Nigerian scam. Don't loose your money!I have a friend american that is required a BTA of 3400 before she can leave Nigeria. True or false?
www.internet-love-scams.org can help you....
True or False? Explain: If we look at annual observations of any four or five consecutive years, the?
True or False? Explain: If we look at annual observations of any four or five consecutive years, the
inflation rate will be negatively related to the unemployment rate.True or False? Explain: If we look at annual observations of any four or five consecutive years, the?
Actually it is generally true. The Phillips Curve shows the short run trade off between inflation and unemployment, the higher the one the lower the other.True or False? Explain: If we look at annual observations of any four or five consecutive years, the?
In theory, true.
In practice, you may not find a relationship based on five observations.
Also, the Phillips curve is not technically based on the relationship between inflation rate and unemployment, but rather on that between the rate of change in price of imported goods and the rate of change in unemployment.
So, what you're taught in intermediate econ is:
In = f(Un)
While Phillips argued in his classic paper:
In - In-1 = f(Un - Un-1)
Essentially.
So for your test, it's true. In reality you wont' necessarily see it.
false.
falsehow to cut hair
inflation rate will be negatively related to the unemployment rate.True or False? Explain: If we look at annual observations of any four or five consecutive years, the?
Actually it is generally true. The Phillips Curve shows the short run trade off between inflation and unemployment, the higher the one the lower the other.True or False? Explain: If we look at annual observations of any four or five consecutive years, the?
In theory, true.
In practice, you may not find a relationship based on five observations.
Also, the Phillips curve is not technically based on the relationship between inflation rate and unemployment, but rather on that between the rate of change in price of imported goods and the rate of change in unemployment.
So, what you're taught in intermediate econ is:
In = f(Un)
While Phillips argued in his classic paper:
In - In-1 = f(Un - Un-1)
Essentially.
So for your test, it's true. In reality you wont' necessarily see it.
false.
false
How can you prove that a statement is True or False?
Knowledge does exist. The proof has to be possible logically.How can you prove that a statement is True or False?
A statement is proved true or false based on assumptions.
All men have beards
Socrates has a beard
Socrates is a man.
If the first statement is true it lends credence to the second one. But nowhere does it say that ONLY men have beards, so the third statement doesn't follow.
If you can put assertions in the first two that cannot be changed you can prove something. But ANY assertion can be questioned (I am not saying all truths are false, but they can be speculated on AS false.)
So in a given model (not necessarily a real model) any assertion can be deemed false and any proof can be undermined. Sometimes unrealistic models change our view of the real life situation, because they point at some underlying idea which we hadn't considered.
So knowledge is assumptions based on current information. The world changes and ideas grow and develop.
Logic is a tool, not an anchor to reality.How can you prove that a statement is True or False?
for something to be true or false one has to have some initial thing or result to be able to base that on or there is no answer. I don't know that knowledge in this case is proof, or at least you didn't state how that knowledge was gained, it can't come from just opinion. Opinion is not proof. And just like in a courtroom thre can't be heresay. True or False questions are generally just conjecture. Of course in a classroom a teacher would first give out the information, a pat statement and then on a test ask if how the statement was worded matches what was said initially or not, so that's not a real true or false question. In a specialty like philosophy it would be different as you'd be searching for an answer and not just quoting a teacher so you'd need some method of testing to be able to come out first with a statement.
You can probably do that in certain settings. For instance in a logic course or academically in a certain field. But in the general flow of life there seems to be fewer and fewer accepted truths. It is as if truth (or falsehood) has been mixed and stirred together and smeared out into something of a bell curve. the extremes will be opposing views and in between all the combinations you can imagine. Sometimes I think this is getting worse with all the information now available to us on the internet but really it has always been like this. There is an old adage, ';Even truth creates opposites'; or something like that.
My approach is this. When I find something to be true or false I keep it to myself. If I try to convince others of my idea of something being true or false it will be attacked and then I will no longer know.
Wagner expressed this somewhat when he wrote:
';Whatever I thought seemed bad to others, whatever seemed wrong to me others approved of. I ran into feuds wherever I found myself, I met disfavor wherever I went. If I longed for happiness, I only stirred up misery. So I had to be called ';Woeful';, woe is all I possess.';
So the moral of the story is, ';To avoid woe, keep your mouth shut.';
This is kind of a LOL but not really.
Either by demonstrating that it is necessarily true by virtue of its logical relationship with other more general statements known or believed to be true; or by showing how it is an acceptably accurate depiction of a state of affairs which is indisputably the case.
Nothing is true or false as there is no proof that the world around you is not a hallucination. Only one thing is certainly true (to me). I exist in some mental form. Why and how is unknown.
A statement is proved true or false based on assumptions.
All men have beards
Socrates has a beard
Socrates is a man.
If the first statement is true it lends credence to the second one. But nowhere does it say that ONLY men have beards, so the third statement doesn't follow.
If you can put assertions in the first two that cannot be changed you can prove something. But ANY assertion can be questioned (I am not saying all truths are false, but they can be speculated on AS false.)
So in a given model (not necessarily a real model) any assertion can be deemed false and any proof can be undermined. Sometimes unrealistic models change our view of the real life situation, because they point at some underlying idea which we hadn't considered.
So knowledge is assumptions based on current information. The world changes and ideas grow and develop.
Logic is a tool, not an anchor to reality.How can you prove that a statement is True or False?
for something to be true or false one has to have some initial thing or result to be able to base that on or there is no answer. I don't know that knowledge in this case is proof, or at least you didn't state how that knowledge was gained, it can't come from just opinion. Opinion is not proof. And just like in a courtroom thre can't be heresay. True or False questions are generally just conjecture. Of course in a classroom a teacher would first give out the information, a pat statement and then on a test ask if how the statement was worded matches what was said initially or not, so that's not a real true or false question. In a specialty like philosophy it would be different as you'd be searching for an answer and not just quoting a teacher so you'd need some method of testing to be able to come out first with a statement.
You can probably do that in certain settings. For instance in a logic course or academically in a certain field. But in the general flow of life there seems to be fewer and fewer accepted truths. It is as if truth (or falsehood) has been mixed and stirred together and smeared out into something of a bell curve. the extremes will be opposing views and in between all the combinations you can imagine. Sometimes I think this is getting worse with all the information now available to us on the internet but really it has always been like this. There is an old adage, ';Even truth creates opposites'; or something like that.
My approach is this. When I find something to be true or false I keep it to myself. If I try to convince others of my idea of something being true or false it will be attacked and then I will no longer know.
Wagner expressed this somewhat when he wrote:
';Whatever I thought seemed bad to others, whatever seemed wrong to me others approved of. I ran into feuds wherever I found myself, I met disfavor wherever I went. If I longed for happiness, I only stirred up misery. So I had to be called ';Woeful';, woe is all I possess.';
So the moral of the story is, ';To avoid woe, keep your mouth shut.';
This is kind of a LOL but not really.
Either by demonstrating that it is necessarily true by virtue of its logical relationship with other more general statements known or believed to be true; or by showing how it is an acceptably accurate depiction of a state of affairs which is indisputably the case.
Nothing is true or false as there is no proof that the world around you is not a hallucination. Only one thing is certainly true (to me). I exist in some mental form. Why and how is unknown.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)