Jorsay
-
Posts
161 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Classifieds
Store
Posts posted by Jorsay
-
-
I try to spend my wife's "Mom-free-time" as wisely as possible. Usually, I will keep handy a list of errands she can run for me in case she gets some free time.:lol:
-
What's up with the basket weaving blasting? In coastal SC there are a lot of people who make a decent living weaving baskets, and they are things of beauty. I own several grass baskets that have lasted for years and that look beautiful. The women who wove them created something beautiful and useful, which is more than I can say for a lot of other jobs in the world.
Did they weave them UNDERWATER? The class is UNDERWATER basketweaving.
-
I found this on a website about Brown Recluse
Note: Some time ago, the extraction of the necrotic tissue was made in the first days of the victim evolution, but recently it was demonstrated that this act can delay the time of treatment.
http://www.brownreclusespider.org/brown-recluse-spider-bite-treatment.htm
-
No. Not at all. Sorry. I actually don't know what Digiorno's pizza looks or tastes like.
This pizza has a unique taste. Let him try the sauce first. Make it really sweet and he will love the sauce. You can gradually make it less sweet later if you like. Then try the sauce on a different crust if you have to.
Sorry I couldn't be more help.
-
I have autistic children. They love this recipe:
Gluten-free Cassein-free pizza: (at least no cowmilk cassein)
Crust:
1/4 cup potato starch
1/4 cup potato flour
3/4 corn starch
1 table spoon xanthan gum
1/4 teaspoon baking soda
1 teaspoon baking powder
1/2 teaspoon salt
1/4 cup shortening
(I leave out the yeast. Don't need it.)
Mix in an electric mixer while adding goat milk until texture is right for spreading (about 1 1/4 cups)
Grease pan with vegtable oil. Spreads easily without flour or grease on hands. (Of course, it takes practice to get it right.)
Once spread, cook the crust until it is just slightly brown. Then remove from oven and add sauce and topping.
Sauce:
Tomato paste
honey, garlic powder, onion bits, basil, oregano, thyme, mustard, rosemary (keep tasting until it is how you like it)
add pineapple-Orange juice (until the thickness is how you like it)
(You can simmer the sauce, but the flavor will weaken.)
Toppings:
Shredded goat chesse (preferrably different flavors)
broiled mushrooms
sausage
diced peppers
Bake at 400 degrees until cheese is melted.
-
Take the Garbage class for instance. It's a class in the science of decay. In addition, archeology is all about garbage.
How about Judge Judy? What could be more useful for a logic class than learning how to dissect logical and illogical arguments.
The walking class? Why isn't it useful to discuss Kant?
The science of superheroes? Why isn't it useful to study theoretical science?
I think they all are useful except for the porn and the basket weaving.
-
I gotta disagree.
Other than the porn and the basket weaving, they look interesting and useful.
-
My experience is that (at your child's age) one year of home schooling is worth at least 3 years of public school.
In public school, my son repeated Kindergarten and did one year of 1st grade. He learned nothing. He couldn't really read, write, or do any math to speak of.
In two years of homeschooling, he is doing at least junior high or high school work in reading, algebra, science, history, Ancient Greek, logic, philosophy. In writing, he is somewhere above his age level, but not as advanced as in the others.
You can mess up for several years and still do fine. I believe that is why unschooling is possible. Unschooling almost CAN'T be worse than public schooling because public schooling is almost like not schooling at all.
Make a plan and work your plan. You'll do fine.
-
Gluten-free Cassein-free pizza: (at least no cowmilk cassein)
Crust:
1/4 cup potato starch
1/4 cup potato flour
3/4 corn starch
1 table spoon xanthan gum
1/4 teaspoon baking soda
1 teaspoon baking powder
1/2 teaspoon salt
1/4 cup shortening
(I leave out the yeast. Don't need it.)
Mix in an electric mixer while adding goat milk until texture is right for spreading (about 1 1/4 cups)
Grease pan with vegtable oil. Spreads easily without flour or grease on hands. (Of course, it takes practice to get it right.)
Once spread, cook the crust until it is just slightly brown. Then remove from oven and add sauce and topping.
Sauce:
Tomato paste
honey, garlic powder, onion bits, basil, oregano, thyme, mustard, rosemary (keep tasting until it is how you like it)
add pineapple-Orange juice (until the thickness is how you like it)
(You can simmer the sauce, but the flavor will weaken.)
Toppings:
Shredded goat chesse (preferrably different flavors)
broiled mushrooms
sausage
diced peppers
Bake at 400 degrees until cheese is melted.
-
Some basics:
Choose any topic that you know something about. Preferrably something simple like brushing your teeth or tying your shoe. Without any written prep, practice teaching this in front of a mirror. Move your body around the room, but don't pace back and forth. Use your hands. Change the cadence, tone, and loudness of your voice (i.e. whisper, speak loudly, and so on.) Make eye contact with each person, but with no one person for too long. Ask questions, hesitate like you want an answer, but don't wait for someone to answer. If someone gives the correct answer, repeat it. (No one will listen to the student's answer even if you say it was correct. You have to repeat it.) If someone is falling asleep, ask them a question, but don't wait for the answer. You don't want to slow the entire class down and you don't want to embarrass anyone. Don't worry about looking smart. Admit when you don't know something, but remain confident at all times. Remember, everyone makes mistakes. Make it clear to the students that you know what you are doing.
-
There's a lot of squirrels that come to our back patio--we have been putting cracked corn out for a few days now, and love to watch the birds, chipmunks and squirrels.
Today, one of the squirrels seems quite interested in our sliding glass door--he has "peeked" into the window several times, attempted to climb the screen door (the window/door is not open and the screen is on the outside), and is walking everywhere and not jumping/leaping as much as the squirrels usually do.
There isn't any corn left--could he be "angry?" Could he be sick? Am I in any "danger?" I feel silly asking, but I'm a little unnerved!:001_unsure:
I would get the kids inside and lock all the doors. Use metal locks because a determined squirrel will chew right through wooden ones! Do you own a shotgun? Is there any way to electrify the screen door? Most importantly, do the other squirrels seem to be following his lead? Squirrels, though small, are highly susceptible to mob mentality. If the lead squirrel mounts an attack, the others may rally to his cause and then there's no stopping them.
Don't be angry. Just teasing. Couldn't help myself. I apologize in advance. My wife says I'm her tenth child, and I guess this proves it.
-
Here is a page discussing learning Homeric versus Attic Greek.
-
[bolding mine]
Actually, Homeric is the toughest of the 3 common ancient Greek dialects to learn. You are right that Koine is the easiest of the three. Most people (at least in homeschooling/self-educating circles) learn Koine first because there simply aren't many materials geared toward kids in Attic or Homeric.
I studied Attic Greek in College and Homeric Greek is not a problem at all. I would say it is more difficult to read Plato than Homer.
-
My understanding is, if you can read attic Greek, you can read Homer and Koine is a cinch.
Attic Greek is very tough. Much tougher than Koine. In my opinion, much tougher than Chinese or Latin, and, of course, German, Spanish or French.
If you want to read the bible, I think it would be easier (and probably cheaper after all the time, textbooks, dictionaries, and tutors) to purchase some software that gives the ancient languages and various translations and even various bible transcriptions.
-
- Theories are higher than laws: Several people in this thread have exalted the "scientific" belief that theories are higher than laws in scientific thinking. It should be clear to all observers that this approach to science is merely a means of putting non-scientific religious beliefs which do not agree with the observed nature of the universe above the immutable laws which have been observed throughout history.
I agree with almost nothing that you have said in your post, nevertheless, I would like to point out something interesting about this particular point; something that may support your argument.
Although contrary to what I have learned about science, I noticed that several others were arguing in favor of the definitions that you have stated above. I decided to investigate. Interestingly, in my dozens of textbooks, the definitions of 'theory, fact, law, and principle' are rarely even addressed until around the turn of this century (2000 AD). It's like they are common words and everyone knows what they mean. Then, these definitions begin to receive emphasis in the late 90s. Not only that, their meanings seem to change. Upon further investigation, I found that Craig Dilworth (philosopher of science) wrote a paper in 1990, published in 1994 (i think), which attempted to redefined these words. The reviews that I read on his paper were not flattering. However, the new definitions, though for the most part similar to the old, provided, what I will call a semantic-type emphasis to the word 'theory'. This emphasis seems suspiciously useful for falsely bolstering the argument that evolution is somehow 'more reliable' because it is a theory. From what I can tell, these new definitions have lately been creeping into the science textbooks. The funny thing is, they don't really change the science; they just change the language. For instance, according to this new idea, a 'fact' is no longer necessarily true. A 'fact' is, by the new definition, what we used to call, an 'observation'.
Hewitt: Conceptual Physics 2001 (BTW: A scientist whom I respect):
"But in Science, a fact is generally a close agreement by competent observers of a series of observations of the same phenomenon. For example, where it was once a fact that the universe is unchanging and permanent, today it is a fact that the universe is expanding and evolving. A scientific hypothesis, on the other hand, is an educated guess that is only persumed to be factual until tested by experiments. When a hypothesis has been tested over and over again and has not been contradicted, it may become known as a law or principle."
Why would science make this change? Because now, it sounds like a theory is the ultimate in truth; more true than even a fact. "It's a fact!" no longer means that it is true. Now we can say that science aspires to theories, not facts. Thus, the Theory of Evolution becomes almost sacred.
This entire reasoning is fallacious, of course, and the idea that somehow theories are more reliable than Laws of science or more true than facts is exactly the kind misunderstanding that I believe the new language is designed to achieve. Nothing has changed but the language. (Keep in mind, this language is in dispute and has not been agreed upon by the entire scientific community.) Theories are built on (what some are calling) facts. Facts, by this new definition are subject to change with new observations. When the facts change, the theory must change as well. The theory is still "Just a Theory" and subject to change like any other theory.
BTW: you won't find any reputable science source that denies that a all theories and laws are subject to change.
So, while I believe firmly that the theory of evolution is a pretty accurate description of how man arose, I am, at the same time, concerned that scientists are, perhaps, allowing the debate to shape their language and, perhaps, this is being done in a somewhat disingenuous fashion.
-
My bil, who is very sensitive, can't have white vinegar or oats. He also has a dedicated toaster for gluten-free toast.
I'd play it ultra-conservative. For the first few meals, I'd do plain meat, potatoes, salad with oil and cider vinegar, and a steamed/boiled vegetables. Read labels, because a dairy protein, cassein (sp) can pop up in the strangest places, like some brands of canned tuna. If they will be visiting for a while, you might take one of the adults grocery shopping to get a better feel for their restrictions.
Does your husband react to Heinz White Vinegar? Heinz claims it is gluten free. My kids seem to do fine with it.
-
And lastly, the Bible states that all of creation testifies about God and that NO one is without excuse on the day of judgement. There is no excuse.
I do not know the day, week, hour, month, year, etc that Christ will come but I know he is coming. And you know what is so exciting? He isn't coming back as a lowly babe this time without the fanfare. He is coming back as LORD and warrior! I love it!!! The earth will know in that day. Sad thing though, by then it will be too late for those he is so patiently waiting to turn to him. What a glorious and sad day that will be for Him.
So what if you know the story but just don't believe it? You may even want to have faith, but you just don't believe it. Perhaps you have read the entire bible word for word and you are simply not convinced. Perhaps you have listened to and read many arguments about why Jesus is the savior, but you find them unconvincing. Perhaps you just can't make yourself have faith. Do you publicly lie, accept Jesus as your lord and savior when you don't really believe it, and then you are saved? Do you lie to God? Won't God know that you don't believe? What then? How do you force yourself to believe something that you just don't?
If you are going to hell because you used the only tools that God gave you to decide whether or not Jesus is your savior, you come to an honest conclusion that he is not, and then God sends you to eternal condemnation, that seems a unfair. Also, watching other good people condemned to hell, doesn't seem exciting and exhilerating to me, even if I am saved.
-
Heinz White Vinegar is gluten free
-
I have a 10 year old son. I have a different point of view.
I am not criticizing you, just offering my point of view. I am not claiming that I know better than you, what is good for your child. I don't.
In my opinion, your son was exposed to the rest of the world. Not the typical adult world, but the typical world of his peers. If the same thing were to happen to my child, my response would be concern that he was not well prepared to deal with his peers in the rest of the world. I would coach him on how best to deal with the situation and then send him back to the same enviornment and let him try again.
You have described bullying, teasing, swearing, and name calling. This is what most kids (and even adults) do. Unless someone was in physical danger, I wouldn't complain to the camp director. How can the camp director stop kids from doing what kids do naturally, especially when he only has the kids for a couple of weeks. You won't be able to change the entire world for your son. Instead, if it were my son, I would teach him to live in the world rather than to criticize it and avoid it. I would teach him to live in it in the way that I think is best. Perhaps rather than hiding from the peer group, you can teach him to rise above the peer group and to lead it.
By the way, something similiar happened to my child when he entered public school. He was bullied, swore at, and ridiculed. I taught him to wrestle (so he could not be physically intimidated and bullied), to stand up for himself and others, to make friends, to make himself the leader, and to lead. It has taken a lot of hard work and a long time (years in fact), but he has moved a long way toward accomplishing this.
Again, this is nothing more than my opinion. It may be completely wrong for your child and for your values.
-
I am not a lawyer, either, but I just don't see how everything could come down to intent. It would be too easy to say, "I didn't intend to commit the crime".
To use the shoplifting example from an earlier post, if you 'accidentally' shoplift something, it is my understanding that you are still liable for the act and can still face punishment for it. It would be too easy for anyone caught to say, "Gee, officer, I had no idea that that television was under my coat!"
I believe that it is not a crime if a jury finds that you accidently took something. And yes, I believe that "Gee, officer, I had no idea that that television was under my coat!", if true, is legitimate.
I found the following at http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Intent:
"In Criminal Law the concept of criminal intent has been called mens rea, which refers to a criminal or wrongful purpose. If a person innocently causes harm, then she or he lacks mens rea and, under this concept, should not be criminally prosecuted.
Although the concept of mens rea is generally accepted, problems arise in applying it to particular cases. Some crimes require a very high degree of intent, whereas others require substantially less. Larceny, for example, requires that the defendant intentionally take property to which the person knows he or she is not entitled, intending to deprive the rightful owner of possession permanently. On the other hand, negligent homicide requires only that the defendant negligently cause another's death."
This was also there, but I don't think it applies to the act of shoplifting mentioned above:
"Criminal law dispenses with the intent requirement in many property-related crimes. Under Common Law the prosecution had to establish that the defendant intended to steal or destroy property. By 1900 many statutes eliminated the "intent-to-defraud" requirement for property crimes. Passing a bad check, obtaining property under False Pretenses, selling mortgaged property, and embezzling while holding public office no longer required criminal intent."
On a side note, what I learned in law school destroyed my faith in the legal system. Nearly nothing is cut and dry, and most of it seems to depend upon how well your lawyer argues and which judge and jury you happen to get.
-
On a completely off-topic sideshoot, I'd be interested to see what a lawyer would say about that.
I would like to hear this as well. There is a good chance that I am not exactly right about the legalities.
-
I'm assuming that were I to strike an adult with the intent to teach him a lesson, that would be considered intent to commit a crime, since we can't just go around hitting adults to make our points. For example, if my brother-in-law keeps taking the keys to my car to run errands while I'm napping and I decide he needs a good spanking so that next time he'll remember that pain before he takes my keys again, I'd imagine he could bring me up on assault charges, no? Of course you can hit other adults to defend yourselves, but that's not what I'm talking about here. By all means, if your teenager is coming at you, you should feel free to defend yourself. Yet, if my daughter keeps taking my makeup from the bathroom after being told not to and I decide to spank her so she'll remember that pain before she lays hands on my mascara again, I'm within my rights. After all, that's blatant disobedience, which most of you would spank for, I'm gathering.
This is not what is meant by criminal intent. For a crime to be comitted, there must be criminal intent. I believe that this applies even to criminal neglegence. This means that you must be intending to commit a crime. Yes, what your school teacher used to say "ignorance of the law is no excuse" is not exactly correct.
You can also think about an insane person. If an insane person kills, is he automatically convicted of murder? No, because he must be proven to have had intent. In other words, he knew what he was doing AND he knew it was wrong. The second part is required.
And it is also possible to be held legally liable for other adults' actions. We still can't strike them at will to make a point.
No. It is not legally possible to be held responsible for the actions of another adult. You must have criminal intent. Perhaps there is a lawyer on the forum who can explain this much better than I.
I don't think you would agree with your own argument under the following conditions:
Let's say that I want to take my family on vacation. My 8 year old doesn't want to go. I take her anyway. Should I be charged with kidnapping?
I ground my daughter to the house. Shall I be charged with false imprisonment?
I take my daughter's cell phone. Shall I be charged with stealing?
The answer to these questions is probably no, and is at least not unequivocal. Why should the answer to "I spank my daughter for running into the street. Shall I be charged with assualt?" be unequivocal?
-
If I strike an adult with the intent to cause pain and teach him a lesson, it's still assault. If I strike a child with the intent to cause pain and teach him a lesson, it's considered my right. Makes no sense to me.
I am harkening back to my single sememster in law school some 20 years ago so I may not be completely accurate, but intent refers to your criminal intent. Did you intend to commit a crime?
For instance, A person goes into a store, picks up an item, walks out without paying. This may or may not be a crime. It depends upon the persons intent. Did the person think the item was already paid for, or perhaps the person thought he/she owned the item.
For instance, you run over a person in your car intending to kill him. This may or may not be a crime. Perhaps you were protecting the life of yourself or someone else.
In nearly all cases, intent is necessary for a crime to be comitted.
It is legal for me to strike an adult in certain strange cases as well. This has to do with my intent.
This makes legal sense. It is possible for you to be held legally liable for your child's actions. As a result, you are likely to be given more leeway in controlling that behavior than you would be in controlling the behavior of a perfect stranger. Hence, you can do things to your own child that you could not do to an adult.
-
My children are 12, 4.5 and 3.
I can't get over the fact that if I hit an adult it's called "assault", but if I hit a kid I can call it "spanking" and not be charged with assault.
??? :confused:
It is a common and important legal point known as "intent"
your favorite gluten-free substitution/product?
in General Education Discussion Board
Posted
Teff is great. My son likes butter in his teff.