gehringer_2

During a period break in the last game Yzerman made it sound like it would be a couple of games but that it would be up to Kane to tell them when he thought he was ready.

Georgia should have started playing no-huddle after the 1st drive.

There is no such thing as 'Science' in that sense - there are only individual Scientists and like any other group you will find a variety of views. In my experience of the scientific community you may not find many fans of organized dogmas, but a lot of agnosticism about transcendental questions.

What kind of PCR would one expect? To see tiny Angels dancing on the Western Blot?

Guilty as charged. My wife will pursue satisfaction to the ends of the earth - I'm much too prone to just taking the write off and moving on,

You'd like the be able to say a counter example proves the negative, but the logic doesn't actually work. There are a ton of bad investments out there being hawked as good ones, doesn't prove that good ones don't exist.

The Jesuits have been a big driver in the Catholic education movement and whatever else you may say about them, they are relatively dedicated to the value of knowledge and intellectual rigor, ergo Catholic education has generally not been adversarial to science in the way some Protestant fundamentalists have become.

LOL - That could be a grey area - maybe l'm happier if the guy just checks out quickly as opposed to giving me a run-around and only at the end of a couple of hours of wasted time fails to solve the problem! 🤔

the problem with that formulation is that neither is particularly close to the mark. The OT is a national historical chronicle of the Hebrews. It's a series of records of how the those people understood their own history and beliefs. We need not take it literally but neither did the writers write it to be fairly tale. Much the same is true of the NT but the gospels are much closer to being personal eyewitness accounts than anything in the OT probably is. The letters in the NT are real letters that real people wrote to other real people - some of whose identities we are pretty sure of, other not so much. Again, how you view the writers' credibility is up to the reader. Contrary to popular perception, with a single exception I would argue that none of the writers of the NT make any claims as to their own infallibility, in contrast for instance to the claim in Islam that the Quran was dictated to Mohammed directly in Arabic by Angel Gabriel and therefore most properly its absolute truth is best not to be compromised even by translation to other languages.

One would hope that in 5000 yrs we would have learned enough about the natural world we inhabit to tell better stories than bronze agers. But every creation story, as well as every scientific extrapolation to origins, still collides the at the same paradox - which is that any origin of the Universe must be outside the Universe in either space or time, yet nothing that is can be outside the Universe. This is a fundamental paradox of existence that the human mind is just stuck with. The brain cannot process any further than that.

I find the degree to which the American Biblicist wing of Christianity gets hung up on both creation and eschatology myths is curious from a theological standpoint. Obviously from a more earthly standpoint, to posit divine inerrancy for a very complex collection of documents and then claim the exclusive right to the interpretation of said documents is a clear winner for the promulgation and preservation of temporal power and wealth. OTOH, what is about equally silly is to hold that the scientific illiteracy of Genesis in and of itself stands as some kind of refutation of possibility of God, one simply asks: For the sake of argument assume God does exist, then try to come up with a recommendation for just exactly what he should have tried to tell a band of semi-literate bronze age nomads about how to create a world of quarks, relativity and quantum mechanics? Seen from that perspective, Genesis 1-4 works as well as anything else would have.

Spinoza decided that even God has to work within some kind of fundamental constraints and thus things were no better because this is "The Best of Of All Possible Worlds." Voltaire had a pretty good time with that one.

Single face bar helmet is definitely 50-60s though.

Is 'doubtful' and upgrade for Anzalone? I thought I heard this morning he was 'out' out.

very weird

Sounds like the blind leading the blind. Monty has coached successful teams, you'd like to believe that was more than just lucking into so much talent he couldn't screw it up, but in basketball you can never ignore that possibility.

Capitalism was probably never self-aware of itself enough to have any intents as it evolved. The idea of putting money to work for a return goes back to before the Roman Empire - it's pretty much the same idea everybody thinks of as soon people start using money in commerce. The ideas about how to run a business to most efficiently exploit everyone and everything else are more modern, but I would almost be tempted to separate the general framework for the generation of production by private investment i.e. capitalism as framework for economic activity, from the creation of economic regulatory structures that allow for so much exploitation in the name of profit. The first is a matter of economic theory, the second is simply a matter of political failure in a society. You can have, and we have seen, terrible human and resource exploitation in both capitalist and non-capitalistic systems. That is always more a matter of governance, politics and how power is distributed in a society than of economic models. In the recent history of the US, when the law was friendly to unions, workers had more power, worker exploitation was lower. Today the legal environment has been made more hostile to unions and workers, workers have less power, worker exploitation and economic disparity is greater. It wasn't that capitalism somehow changed, the governance under which the US instance of capitalism operates has changed.

Will be interesting to see if they start using Lyon more.

Not to dis Alberta's father, but you see in retrospect that his congregation was not built on community, or service, or even belief, though those things were probably there in the beginning. But as it exploded into a big church, in the end it was growing up instead based on the the self-validation of the membership. The worst trap of all for any clergman.

this could go any number of places, but I just saw that Henry the K has shuffled off this mortal coil at 100. I wonder if they will declare tomorrow (well today already in that part of the world) a holiday in Vietnam?

No shame in losing to the Rangers, but it sucks to have been within 5 minutes of a point and losing it.

Sunk cost fallacy. If he holds it the value is just going to keep going lower. 😱

I don't think I've seen a team so dependent on one player when that player is himself only a mid top talent. Wings just flail when Larkin is out or even playing through injury. And it might be nice to have some goaltending that steals a game here and there instead of the other....I think if they fall short this season we'll look back and blame in on the goaltending.

I just don't see the talent here. You have one player with one standout skill level, and that is Thompson's defense. That's it. No-one else on the team does anything at average NBA or higher level. Cade scores a lot because Cade has the ball all the time (e,g., see Anthony, Carmelo) - you can't hang a hat on that. Weaver has drafted poorly and traded even more poorly. it's going to be 5 years with under 25 wins in a league where you only need to find two or three above average players to be a 500 team. Every day he keeps his job is just additional proof that ownership is just a hopeless.

They need to broom the whole organization starting with Gores hanging a "For Sale" sign out on Woodward Ave.