[Mulderator]

Originally Posted by iltos

now you're doing what you accuse everyone else of doing...drawing conclusions without a shred of evidence.

That's why I said "my bet."

BTW--I learned something from quoting your post--didn't know about the "indent" tags!

[iltos]

Originally Posted by Mulderator

That's why I said "my bet."

BTW--I learned something from quoting your post--didn't know about the "indent" tags!

glad you learned something (i learned those from mdjess, the philipino philosopher whose logic is about as cohesive as yours ....they are pretty cool, tho)

try this, mr. clinton

the definition of "is" is not in the words "i bet"

it's here

Originally Posted by mulder

You all went on about how great this kid is when in fact, he's nothing more than a political hack

link please?

[Mulderator]

Originally Posted by iltos

link please?

Read the article--its classic political hack.

[BanditFlyer]

Originally Posted by Fyzbo

There will always be bias, almost no way around it. What bothers me the most here is that it occurred in a text book. Text book companies should hire multiple authors and have checks and balances between authors and editors to try and minimize the bias, how did false statements make it to print?

Agreed on all parts. One thing I'd bet is that even for all the bias showing up in current textbooks, it can't possibly be as bad as textbooks around during my childhood that used to say glass was a liquid at room temperature(at ROOM TEMPERATURE!!!!!). Even for all the faults noted in the article, I'd bet it's still a huge improvement.

[LANMaster]

Originally Posted by Mulderator

Read the article--its classic political hack.

yup

[Farmgirl22]

Originally Posted by BanditFlyer

Agreed on all parts. One thing I'd bet is that even for all the bias showing up in current textbooks, it can't possibly be as bad as textbooks around during my childhood that used to say glass was a liquid at room temperature(at ROOM TEMPERATURE!!!!!). Even for all the faults noted in the article, I'd bet it's still a huge improvement.

Glass actually is sort of a "solidy-liquid"--even at room temperature. If you take a pane of glass that was in a window for we'll say about 15 years, you would notice that the bottom is thicker than the top (up to the point of where the the frame starts)...this is because the glass actually "flows" downward at a very slow rate. Colored glass seems to be more obvious--it appears to "flow" at a faster rate and is easier to see the process. The colored glass thing isn't scientific, it's merely based on my own experience with making stained glass projects which started out with flat sheets of glass that became distorted over a period of 5 years.

A wonderful example of this is checking out windows that have come out of churches during renovations--it's not coincidence that the glass is thicker on the bottom of EVERY INDIVIDUAL PIECE.

Try it some time--you would find it interesting, I'm sure of it.

[Fyzbo]

Originally Posted by Farmgirl22

Glass actually is sort of a "solidy-liquid"--even at room temperature. If you take a pane of glass that was in a window for we'll say about 15 years, you would notice that the bottom is thicker than the top (up to the point of where the the frame starts)...this is because the glass actually "flows" downward at a very slow rate. Colored glass seems to be more obvious--it appears to "flow" at a faster rate and is easier to see the process. The colored glass thing isn't scientific, it's merely based on my own experience with making stained glass projects which started out with flat sheets of glass that became distorted over a period of 5 years.

A wonderful example of this is checking out windows that have come out of churches during renovations--it's not coincidence that the glass is thicker on the bottom of EVERY INDIVIDUAL PIECE.

Try it some time--you would find it interesting, I'm sure of it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass#B..._antique_glass

[Farmgirl22]

Originally Posted by Fyzbo

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass#B..._antique_glass

It doesn't explain why NEW (less than a decade old) colored glass behaves the way I mentioned earlier--I saw that article and I'm not convinced it's correct, especially since just anyone can create an account and edit it.

[Fyzbo]

Originally Posted by Farmgirl22

It doesn't explain why NEW (less than a decade old) colored glass behaves the way I mentioned earlier--I saw that article and I'm not convinced it's correct, especially since just anyone can create an account and edit it.

Will the website of a professor help:

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physic...***/glass.html

If not, what type of source would you feel is credible for this topic?

Do you have an example of colored glass, perhaps it was made using a different technique or materials.

[iltos]

Originally Posted by Mulderator

Read the article--its classic political hack.

in your opinion

you have nothing to substantiate your claim but LAN's agreement.....one i find dubious, given the sources he ofttimes uses (no offense LAN...we've discussed this ad nauseum in your bias thread)

[Farmgirl22]

Originally Posted by Fyzbo

Will the website of a professor help:

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physic...***/glass.html

If not, what type of source would you feel is credible for this topic?

Do you have an example of colored glass, perhaps it was made using a different technique or materials.

The specific glass I'm referring to is called Spectrum--that's what I use the most.

Does it truly matter who a source is? Experts constantly discover new stuff and change old theories or expound on them. If they didn't, would there be any point in continuing research? I mean, "experts" have claimed many things over the years only to be proven wrong after someone else studied it in a different way or held out longer for the results.

So you really think it's coincidence that the bottom of individual pieces in stained glass windows are wider than the top? Or that because it was that way pieces fell out and glass needed repaired? They weren't put in there loose, and the metal didn't "just happen" to loosen on the channel that was on the narrow top half of a piece. But, don't quote me, ask any professional who repairs these windows on a daily basis. They don't have to even be OLD windows for this to happen and according to Spectrum's website, their way of doing creating glass sheets has been around since about 1976. I assure you that my glass that I purchased wasn't anywhere NEAR that old, and didn't take but a few years (about 5) to become thicker at the bottom than at the top--visibly so...perhaps they [spectrum] lied about the fact that their glass is a uniform thickness?

[Fyzbo]

Originally Posted by Farmgirl22

The specific glass I'm referring to is called Spectrum--that's what I use the most.

Does it truly matter who a source is? Experts constantly discover new stuff and change old theories or expound on them. If they didn't, would there be any point in continuing research? I mean, "experts" have claimed many things over the years only to be proven wrong after someone else studied it in a different way or held out longer for the results.

So you really think it's coincidence that the bottom of individual pieces in stained glass windows are wider than the top? Or that because it was that way pieces fell out and glass needed repaired? They weren't put in there loose, and the metal didn't "just happen" to loosen on the channel that was on the narrow top half of a piece. But, don't quote me, ask any professional who repairs these windows on a daily basis. They don't have to even be OLD windows for this to happen and according to Spectrum's website, their way of doing creating glass sheets has been around since about 1976. I assure you that my glass that I purchased wasn't anywhere NEAR that old, and didn't take but a few years (about 5) to become thicker at the bottom than at the top--visibly so...perhaps they [spectrum] lied about the fact that their glass is a uniform thickness?

I can't comment as I haven't seen what you have, but it would make an interesting experiment. If the glass has changed shape so much that it's visible to the naked eye after only 5 years, why not take exact measurements. We can compare the original widths to what they are now and calculate the rate of change, then figure out when your window will have holes as the top became too thin.

[Farmgirl22]

It'll be a while before I can do that seeing as all my glass is lumped in a trailer with over half of our stuff! Remind me when we get a house bought and get everything moved in, and I'll get those measurements to you. I too think it would be an interesting experiment--thus the reason I suggested it to Bandit. He's got all sorts of time on his hands.... (You know I love ya, Bandit!)

[Bastiat]

Originally Posted by iltos

in your opinion

you have nothing to substantiate your claim but LAN's agreement.....one i find dubious, given the sources he ofttimes uses (no offense LAN...we've discussed this ad nauseum in your bias thread)

Of course its opinion..........defining all political hacks is by opinion. Most, dare I say all, political hacks don't identify themselves as political hacks. Would tend to diminish their credibility wouldn't you say? That said, one does not suspend logic and common sense when reading the article, he is by any reasonable mind a political hack.

[Mulderator]

Originally Posted by iltos

in your opinion

you have nothing to substantiate your claim but LAN's agreement.....one i find dubious, given the sources he ofttimes uses (no offense LAN...we've discussed this ad nauseum in your bias thread)

No--I have the article that I referrred you too--there are a number of clues:

When I confronted him in the principal's office, he denied making the remarks. What he didn't realize was that I had recorded the classes. But even after I informed school officials what had happened, they ignored my concerns. So after more than a month, my parents and I took the news to the media.

Why did he record the classes? Ask yourself that. I do not know about this school, but in many schools you are not permitted to record the class or you must obtain the professor/teacher's permission--a fair minded person would have done so anyway--this little twit had the intention of causing trouble from the beginning so he recorded the professors classes--he's a sneaky little coward in my book. I would have taken the professor on myself--not recorded his/her classes without permission. Do none of you liberals see a problem with that? Aren't liberals concerned with invasion of privacy?
Next clue:

At first, I was harassed and intimidated by other students. School officials ignored the harassment and even a death threat I received.

No way in hell would this be ignored in my children's school--it was very likely a "cry wolf" situation--that is this kid probably pi$$ed so many people off that no one would give him the time of day anymore.

Next clue:

Only after the story became national news did the school district begin to take us seriously. After lengthy negotiations (and against continuing opposition from the school board), we finally persuaded the district to address the teacher's false and inappropriate remarks. The Anti-Defamation League was brought in to teach the faculty about the separation of church and state, and experts in the fields of church-state separation, evolution and cosmology came to our school to conduct assemblies.

So the little **** stirred up enough trouble that he had the entire school engaged in his self promoted liberal crusade.

So of course nailing one conservative wasn't enough for him, now he's going after a nationally prominent professor with what is likely a completely unfounded accusation:

After that, I thought I was done with controversy for a while. But now, in my senior year, I am back in the midst of it. In one of my classes, we use the 10th edition of "American Government" by James Q. Wilson, a well-known conservative academic, and John J. DiIulio, a political scientist and former head of President Bush's Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives. (2005). The text contains a statement, repeated three times, that students may not pray in public schools. In this edition of the text, the authors drive the point home with a photograph of students holding hands and praying outside a school. The caption reads: "The Supreme Court will not let this happen inside a public school."

I knew this was false. In fact, students are allowed to pray in schools; courts have ruled many times that a student's right to pray may not be abridged. What's generally impermissible is state-sponsored prayer, in which school officials lead prayer or students are called on or required to pray. It seemed clear to me that the purpose of the discussion in the textbook was to indoctrinate, not to educate.

That last paragraph is impossible for him to come up with on his own--there's no way a high school student would have enough knowledge of court decisions to have made that kind of statement--that came from a lawyer.

This little "liberal in training" is after one thing and one thing only--going after people for their political ideologies--i.e., a political hack. He's not different than Ann Coulter or any of the other people you liberals despise except that he's beating the liberal hack drum instead of the conservative.

Read the rest of the article--pure unadulterated liberal hack politics. If you can't see it, then your blind.