True free range meat is probably orders of magnitude less cruel than grain fed...both in how the animals are generally treated, and in the death of random animals that comes from growing the grain that's fed to the cattle / pigs / chickens / etc.
Unfortunately, it's been a long time since non-industrial farming methods have been able to sustain the amount of food that people need to eat. Not to mention that cattle (or other livestock) grazing hundreds of thousands of acres of land isn't especially good for those ecosystems...
Of course, we could eat less meat, but what's the fun in that? One of these days all we'll have to eat is reconstituted Soylent Green and algae paste. All the kids will gather around me to hear stories about things like bacon-wrapped steaks, and turduckicken and a whole variety of different foods that just aren't available anymore.
0
Options
DemonStaceyTTODewback's DaughterIn love with the TaySwayRegistered Userregular
I'm trying to find like, basic shit to cook, like recipes that have nutrition and you can go to the grocery store and get all the stuff for them and they're healthy
all these recipes are like A VEGAN TWIST ON AN OLD FAVORITE or THIS IS A CHEAP WAY TO GET THIS FAMILY CLASSIC
seriously I want to know why I'm a walking argument against democracy
I'm wholly in favor of policies that make factory farmed meat less of a thing, and hey one of those things might be lab meat (some day)
And so what if lab meat is still worse for the environment than a salad? So is the ipad I'm using to type on, I'm not about to strip naked and go live in a forest, I want to derive some enjoyment out of life
but then again the whole vegan movement seems to be opposed to "unnatural" things at a basic level
you may also be amused that Catholic opposition in Eastern Europe to Soviet domination was frequently also heavily tinged with white supremacy and anti-semitism
in any case, an economist's disposition here is to presume that talk is cheap: religion is at its core an economic institution, and the words are just dressing; the role that human reason and reflection plays in intermediating how religious rhetoric translates to institutional effect is limited. Until the day that the philosophers and linguists deliver to us a quantitative theory of semiotics, but we are a while away from that.
And I would say -- and have said -- that religion is an inherently political enterprise to provide for the legitimation of timeless/classic modes of hierarchal organization and governance. It has historically bent the knee to/been subordinated and coopted by "secular" power for "secular" ends but also becomes a common mode of opposition to that same "secular" power.
But the problem with calling Religion Politics-by-another-name is that there is then nothing that isn't Politics, by that definition... which becomes highly problematic when you're trying to isolate causal variables -- even if they all stem from the same ur-source (Politics).
yes, well, nobody promised you that macroecon would be easy. I've remarked before that we need newer mathematicals tools.
Which reminds me: I met with Tarek Masoud today during his office hours to get some general career advice. He suggested that for what I wanna do -- Middle East policy -- that I pretty much have to pursue a PhD. He said a dual-MA between the Div School and K School is inoptimal just because that kind of work basically requires PhD level knowledge of PoliSci and econ. He pretty much told me flat out that just a Div School MA was not going to get me to where I wanna go, and that transferring to the K School might actually just be a better idea -- and that there may be a "backdoor way" of doing that instead of an off-the-street application.
sounds like a good idea to me!
Buuuuut I probably still need to "beef up" my Quant score on the GRE.
Why can't the universe just continue to let me shirk being a Grown Ass Adult and not make myself Good At Math?!
Maybe now that I got this Vyvanse prescription -- for $30 using a coupon, which is actually $5 less than I was paying for Adderall XR with a copay -- I'll suddenly start being An Adult!
If you were given 2.6 furlongs as your starting measure and you're supposed to be taking significant figures into account (which you always should), then the answers can only have 2 significant figures.
104 isn't even right, it should be 100, (or to make it easier to tell, 1.0 * 102)
0
Options
Deebaseron my way to work in a suit and a tieAhhhh...come on fucking guyRegistered Userregular
Well, that's the thing. Maybe more of them don't even bother taking the test, whereas in a public school, you're kinda peer pressured into it.
I mean sure, there are probably nobel prize winning upper middle class single income families where the instructor parent takes their kids on the magic school bus of learning and academic excellence, but Im willing to bet they are greatly outnumbered by backwoods yokels that dont want the devil putting ideas in their precious Jimmy Dean's brain noodle.
Yeah, so it turns out you're exactly backwards about everything you wrote here!
People in public school are not peer pressured to take the SATs - it's just the opposite, outside the subset of high-achievers.
Nobel prize winners send their kids to private academies and don't take huge amounts of time to homeschool their kids, because they're busy winning nobel prizes for shit at their jobs.
Backwoods yokels similarly don't have time to homeschool much because lol economy + poverty
Most homeschoolers are middle-class families where one parent raises the kids and for one reason or another (mostly either religious or 'all my schools are hella terrible') decide to do it themselves.
Lots of times now they band together and do ad-hoc school, often taught by people who have expertise in their fields rather than by people who have expertise in getting a shitty degree in 'education'.
Hmmmph. I'll need to look more into this, but at a cursory googling this bit is troubling. About 1/4 homeschooling parents don't even have associates degrees? That's a pretty high number assuming they aren't going the private "not a school" staffed by people who have subject matter expertise that they impart on their children but are totally not teachers route.
0
Options
CindersWhose sails were black when it was windyRegistered Userregular
It should be easy enough to memorize and although the baking time is slightly longer than it would be with a chopped fruit crisp, in that longer time magical things happen, like the sugar melts against the almonds and bubbles into the peach juices to form an almost chewy peach almond caramel brittle on top. Chewy peach almond caramel brittle.
If you were given 2.6 furlongs as your starting measure and you're supposed to be taking significant figures into account (which you always should), then the answers can only have 2 significant figures.
104 isn't even right, it should be 100, (or to make it easier to tell, 1.0 * 102)
I did the whole gamut of education - public, private catholic, and home schooled.
While home schooling may work for some families, and there certainly are massive amounts of wasted time in any sort of traditional schooling, I can't see how home schooling is the right course of action for anyone in the real world. Like, some kids will be successful because they get individual attention or don't have disruptive classmates, but that's a failing of the school. Learning how to deal with assholes and not getting the attention / resources you always need is part of life.
I'm pretty confident that most of the kids that do well academically in home schooling would do just as well academically anywhere. Parents that are willing to home school a kid properly are probably going to make sure their kid succeeds wherever they are at.
Well, that's the thing. Maybe more of them don't even bother taking the test, whereas in a public school, you're kinda peer pressured into it.
I mean sure, there are probably nobel prize winning upper middle class single income families where the instructor parent takes their kids on the magic school bus of learning and academic excellence, but Im willing to bet they are greatly outnumbered by backwoods yokels that dont want the devil putting ideas in their precious Jimmy Dean's brain noodle.
Yeah, so it turns out you're exactly backwards about everything you wrote here!
People in public school are not peer pressured to take the SATs - it's just the opposite, outside the subset of high-achievers.
Nobel prize winners send their kids to private academies and don't take huge amounts of time to homeschool their kids, because they're busy winning nobel prizes for shit at their jobs.
Backwoods yokels similarly don't have time to homeschool much because lol economy + poverty
Most homeschoolers are middle-class families where one parent raises the kids and for one reason or another (mostly either religious or 'all my schools are hella terrible') decide to do it themselves.
Lots of times now they band together and do ad-hoc school, often taught by people who have expertise in their fields rather than by people who have expertise in getting a shitty degree in 'education'.
Ah yes, because it's not like being able to instruct people is its own skill set. I'm tired of the shitting on education as a skillset. And
1: it's a subset. Without a grasp of the subject, the best teacher will be ineffective.
2: a degree in English doesn't really guarantee that you either know about literature or can teach it. A degree in education doesn't really guarantee that you know about education or can teach others, but it pretty well does guarantee that you don't know very much about literature. Or math or physics or chemistry.
Theres some arguments going around (real ones, like in Nature) that sustainable farming of both meat and veg might actually be able to produce enough to feed the world
some people at my university are involved in a lot of this discussion, and it'll be interesting how it shakes out in a few years
(I think it will fall into "we can produce enough sustainably if we drastically reduce meat consumption in developed nations", which surprises no one but we will see. science is about testing predictions!)
People are oddly protective of their eating habits.
I think its because its one of the few things that, within reason, you have almost complete control over. Sure doing things outside of easy or standard can take some work. But people make a lot of things happen to eat the way they want.
Im in favor of taxing meat to increase its price and drive down consumption, as I believe I've gotten into an argument with spool in the past over (something about me wanting the poor to starve)
+1
Options
CindersWhose sails were black when it was windyRegistered Userregular
yeah Ronda Rousey is not impressing me on TUF at all
I love her as a fighter and I thought Misha is a dick (she launched off her opponent with her hand when the round ended in the match I saw)
but
my respect for Ronda is just bleeding, mostly because of how she dealt with Shayna
What happened?
It's not really 1 specific thing. She was just sorta... super unstable acting a lot.
Like having a breakdown when her fighter lost and yelling at Miesha for cheering (because her fighter won) saying that she was celebrating her fighters loss and stuff.
Like it was just weird uncomfortable sort of stuff like that.
I'm not really sure what the idea with "America's obsession with meat products" comes from. Like, it's not like America just sprung out of the ground overnight and was like "MEEeeeeaaat."
Pretty sure most Western countries have habits like we do in regards to dinner. Hell, Americans probably are more diverse than say England or France. The only difference being French people eat snails.
Americans eat more beef and chicken, on average, than other countries, and we are second in the world for pork consumption
I am in extreme doubt of your statements at this point in time.
I literally just gave a lecture on this to my students
So your solution to factory farming is "eat less meat"?
I don't see how that stops factory farming, it would just be somewhat less factory farming
I don't really get the opposition to cultured meat, eventually it could be a far more eco friendly (and healthier) alternative that doesnt kill any actual animals
Lab-meat might be better than factory-meat, but it will still never be better than plants. Ergo we return to the original and best solution of reducing meat consumption.
I don't see why it couldn't?
Anyway, regular farming kills millions of rabbits and voles and shit and is slowly becoming less viable because of large scale dependance on fossil fuels to create fertilizer
The raw materials for lab-meat are still going to be plant derived. Or I guess some advances could be made with fungi.
The agriculture problem is a real one and I'm a huge advocate for permaculture practices, local/urban farming, rooftop gardens, etc. I'll not go so far as to let the perfect be the enemy of the good, however, because a "conventionally-farmed" salad is still orders of magnitude better than a comparable hamburger in terms of both fossil fuel use and animal cruelty.
*nods*
*continues eating cheeseburger*
You're a walking argument against democracy.
why are you singling me out when almost everybody in this thread eats meat
You happen to be waggling your unwillingness to change your lifestyle in the thread, in the midst of a conversation about the problems with that lifestyle.
If you were given 2.6 furlongs as your starting measure and you're supposed to be taking significant figures into account (which you always should), then the answers can only have 2 significant figures.
104 isn't even right, it should be 100, (or to make it easier to tell, 1.0 * 102)
yeah!
what the heck!
The "tolerance" is the range of numbers that WebAssign will mark as correct. The tolerance can be set by the problem coder to just about anything. But by default, the tolerance is 2% of the "key". The "key" is the exactly correct value. For example, if the key were "9.81 m/s^2", with a tolerance of 2%, then any entry between "9.6138 m/s^2" and "10.0062 m/s^2" would be counted as correct. This is if there is no sig figs checking.
If sig figs are being checked, then in the question coding there is a variable called $SIGFIGS that is set to a number greater than 0. That number determines how many significant figures there must be in order for the question to be marked correct. By default, any entry that does not have exactly that number of sig figs will be marked totally wrong (0 points awarded), regardless of the value of the number.
If sig figs checking is used, the default tolerance is not a certain percent of the key but is instead usually 1 of the least significant digits. For example, if, in the previous problem, $SIGFIGS was set to 3, then the tolerance would be set to allow answers between 9.80 m/s^2 and 9.83 m/s^2.
However, both the value of $SIGFIGS and the tolerance can be altered by the question coding; this means it can change within a single problem depending on how the question was written. In many lab-related questions, $SIGFIGS is allowed to be set to a range of values, say between 1 and 4. The point is to make the question accept up to a certain maximum number of figures. As the $SIGFIGS value changes depending on what is entered, the tolerance also changes.
People are oddly protective of their eating habits.
well when "Hardcore hedonists who dont care about the suffering of others" and "Walking argument against democracy" come into the picture
You really think more than like one percent of the population has put any thought into their beliefs about eating animals other than that it tastes good and maybe "fuck anybody who tries to get me to eat less delicious stuff."
I don't want to crap all over public school teachers but
In most cases public school teachers generally teach wildly disparate subject materials to their students, often things they have no formal training in, and often poorly
So while it is tempting to say that "Oh no a lot of homeschooling parents are teaching things they have no training to teach"
keep in mind my anatomy class in high school was taught by a person with a degree in geology because they taught "science"
Well, that's the thing. Maybe more of them don't even bother taking the test, whereas in a public school, you're kinda peer pressured into it.
I mean sure, there are probably nobel prize winning upper middle class single income families where the instructor parent takes their kids on the magic school bus of learning and academic excellence, but Im willing to bet they are greatly outnumbered by backwoods yokels that dont want the devil putting ideas in their precious Jimmy Dean's brain noodle.
Yeah, so it turns out you're exactly backwards about everything you wrote here!
People in public school are not peer pressured to take the SATs - it's just the opposite, outside the subset of high-achievers.
Nobel prize winners send their kids to private academies and don't take huge amounts of time to homeschool their kids, because they're busy winning nobel prizes for shit at their jobs.
Backwoods yokels similarly don't have time to homeschool much because lol economy + poverty
Most homeschoolers are middle-class families where one parent raises the kids and for one reason or another (mostly either religious or 'all my schools are hella terrible') decide to do it themselves.
Lots of times now they band together and do ad-hoc school, often taught by people who have expertise in their fields rather than by people who have expertise in getting a shitty degree in 'education'.
Hmmmph. I'll need to look more into this, but at a cursory googling this bit is troubling. About 1/4 homeschooling parents don't even have associates degrees? That's a pretty high number assuming they aren't going the private "not a school" staffed by people who have subject matter expertise that they impart on their children but are totally not teachers route.
I believe those stats are way, way higher than the general public
Do you know... I've never heard a good argument for why I need to care about the suffering of animals in mass meat production environments, outside of the secondary impact on human consumers (ie. antibiotic overuse, sanitary conditions, etc).
0
Options
Deebaseron my way to work in a suit and a tieAhhhh...come on fucking guyRegistered Userregular
Walter White was a High School teacher and had a chemistry degree.
Look how that turned out!
He wound up teaching his student to make meth amphetemine!
If you were given 2.6 furlongs as your starting measure and you're supposed to be taking significant figures into account (which you always should), then the answers can only have 2 significant figures.
104 isn't even right, it should be 100, (or to make it easier to tell, 1.0 * 102)
yeah!
what the heck!
The "tolerance" is the range of numbers that WebAssign will mark as correct. The tolerance can be set by the problem coder to just about anything. But by default, the tolerance is 2% of the "key". The "key" is the exactly correct value. For example, if the key were "9.81 m/s^2", with a tolerance of 2%, then any entry between "9.6138 m/s^2" and "10.0062 m/s^2" would be counted as correct. This is if there is no sig figs checking.
If sig figs are being checked, then in the question coding there is a variable called $SIGFIGS that is set to a number greater than 0. That number determines how many significant figures there must be in order for the question to be marked correct. By default, any entry that does not have exactly that number of sig figs will be marked totally wrong (0 points awarded), regardless of the value of the number.
If sig figs checking is used, the default tolerance is not a certain percent of the key but is instead usually 1 of the least significant digits. For example, if, in the previous problem, $SIGFIGS was set to 3, then the tolerance would be set to allow answers between 9.80 m/s^2 and 9.83 m/s^2.
However, both the value of $SIGFIGS and the tolerance can be altered by the question coding; this means it can change within a single problem depending on how the question was written. In many lab-related questions, $SIGFIGS is allowed to be set to a range of values, say between 1 and 4. The point is to make the question accept up to a certain maximum number of figures. As the $SIGFIGS value changes depending on what is entered, the tolerance also changes.
hmmm
Email your prof. Get screens shots of it not working and such and email him
Posts
Unfortunately, it's been a long time since non-industrial farming methods have been able to sustain the amount of food that people need to eat. Not to mention that cattle (or other livestock) grazing hundreds of thousands of acres of land isn't especially good for those ecosystems...
Of course, we could eat less meat, but what's the fun in that? One of these days all we'll have to eat is reconstituted Soylent Green and algae paste. All the kids will gather around me to hear stories about things like bacon-wrapped steaks, and turduckicken and a whole variety of different foods that just aren't available anymore.
HER NAME IS HONDA.
@Dread Pirate Arbuthnot
Check out http://smittenkitchen.com
It can get a bit fancy but a lot of it it's designed to be filling weeknight meals with minimal prep
What happened?
I'm wholly in favor of policies that make factory farmed meat less of a thing, and hey one of those things might be lab meat (some day)
And so what if lab meat is still worse for the environment than a salad? So is the ipad I'm using to type on, I'm not about to strip naked and go live in a forest, I want to derive some enjoyment out of life
but then again the whole vegan movement seems to be opposed to "unnatural" things at a basic level
Buuuuut I probably still need to "beef up" my Quant score on the GRE.
Why can't the universe just continue to let me shirk being a Grown Ass Adult and not make myself Good At Math?!
Maybe now that I got this Vyvanse prescription -- for $30 using a coupon, which is actually $5 less than I was paying for Adderall XR with a copay -- I'll suddenly start being An Adult!
@Ludious
well when "Hardcore hedonists who dont care about the suffering of others" and "Walking argument against democracy" come into the picture
I must make these
Both of those are wrong.
If you were given 2.6 furlongs as your starting measure and you're supposed to be taking significant figures into account (which you always should), then the answers can only have 2 significant figures.
104 isn't even right, it should be 100, (or to make it easier to tell, 1.0 * 102)
Hmmmph. I'll need to look more into this, but at a cursory googling this bit is troubling. About 1/4 homeschooling parents don't even have associates degrees? That's a pretty high number assuming they aren't going the private "not a school" staffed by people who have subject matter expertise that they impart on their children but are totally not teachers route.
/drool
that's the ipad for poor people, right?
this was my understanding
While home schooling may work for some families, and there certainly are massive amounts of wasted time in any sort of traditional schooling, I can't see how home schooling is the right course of action for anyone in the real world. Like, some kids will be successful because they get individual attention or don't have disruptive classmates, but that's a failing of the school. Learning how to deal with assholes and not getting the attention / resources you always need is part of life.
I'm pretty confident that most of the kids that do well academically in home schooling would do just as well academically anywhere. Parents that are willing to home school a kid properly are probably going to make sure their kid succeeds wherever they are at.
1: it's a subset. Without a grasp of the subject, the best teacher will be ineffective.
2: a degree in English doesn't really guarantee that you either know about literature or can teach it. A degree in education doesn't really guarantee that you know about education or can teach others, but it pretty well does guarantee that you don't know very much about literature. Or math or physics or chemistry.
some people at my university are involved in a lot of this discussion, and it'll be interesting how it shakes out in a few years
(I think it will fall into "we can produce enough sustainably if we drastically reduce meat consumption in developed nations", which surprises no one but we will see. science is about testing predictions!)
I think its because its one of the few things that, within reason, you have almost complete control over. Sure doing things outside of easy or standard can take some work. But people make a lot of things happen to eat the way they want.
This blog is going to make me fat.
It's not really 1 specific thing. She was just sorta... super unstable acting a lot.
Like having a breakdown when her fighter lost and yelling at Miesha for cheering (because her fighter won) saying that she was celebrating her fighters loss and stuff.
Like it was just weird uncomfortable sort of stuff like that.
You happen to be waggling your unwillingness to change your lifestyle in the thread, in the midst of a conversation about the problems with that lifestyle.
yeah!
what the heck!
hmmm
In most cases public school teachers generally teach wildly disparate subject materials to their students, often things they have no formal training in, and often poorly
So while it is tempting to say that "Oh no a lot of homeschooling parents are teaching things they have no training to teach"
keep in mind my anatomy class in high school was taught by a person with a degree in geology because they taught "science"
Funny, I have a problem with homeschooling for the same reason I have a problem with private schooling.
I believe those stats are way, way higher than the general public
Look how that turned out!
He wound up teaching his student to make meth amphetemine!
Fuckin' teachers
we are like yin and yang
oil and water
normal person and vegan jackass
Email your prof. Get screens shots of it not working and such and email him
It was a mercy killing. Trust me.