Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Rat

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6
I believe up in Washington, SATs matter more.than ACTs. The best thing to do is to look at what colleges you would prefer to go to, and see what requirements they have for getting in. It might say on their website, or I believe you can write to request information. Some colleges are a lot more lax on what is necessary to enter, and others are a lot more difficult to enter. Also then you can check into their financial aid stuff and see what they have to offer as far as scholarships go. Also, as far as financial aid goes, you should probably fill out a FAFSA. I think you can do that online as well.

General Discussion / Re: Worst and best subject in school!!!!!
« on: August 08, 2006, 01:45:32 pm »
I developed a formal understanding of grammar—a very difficult ordeal!—and was able to combine my intuitive knowledge from all that reading with my new structural expertise to form probably the best grammatical intellect you’re likely to come across—at least in English.

 :shock:  Congratulations. You are now one of the most arrogant people I know.

What would you people say is the best subjuct take in the morning.........I never really paid attention to the k- 12 and things.

Hrm, depends on each person I guess, and how they react to things in the morning... if you're not a morning person and not likely to be able to keep track of things that are difficult for you early in the morning, then it's best not to take something you find hard. And if you want to pay attention during a class you enjoy simply because you love the subject, you don't want to take it first thing in that case either. So something easy that doesn't matter too much to you.

If you are a morning person though and are awake and bright and alert first thing, you may as well get your worst subjects out of the way first.

Does that make sense?

The only thing I remember from kindergarten was a few PE classes, a dorky boy that wanted me to be his girlfriend and I said yes because he gave me free stuff (I didn't know what a girlfriend was),  and having a rival that I always challenged to races to see who was faster. I remember very little about the actual schooling. Which is probably pretty true of my entire K-12 education - the education aspect of it doesn't figure very prominently in my memory for the most part.

It's kindergarten through twelfth grade. 13 grades total, unless you go to "T-1", which is where they put kids who aren't ready for first grade. Or so they claim! In truth, T-1 is an abysmal failure which only exists because kids aren't learning to read quickly enough. It is a gigantic waste of time in which all you do is play with toys and engage in inane diversions. I avoided it through literacy, and made these observations on random visits during elementary school. As a result, I was a year younger than almost everyone else (they came from T-1).

Hmm, I've never heard of T-1.  It must be a regional thing.
Are kids really expected to be able to read in kindergarten? It seems from my report cards for kindergarten they had me learn the alphabet and numbers and other fairly basic stuff that can be learned at home - and from what I can remember, I learned to actually read and write in the first grade. Did they do it differently for you?


Sounds ominously like a place to grow children as food.  :D

General Discussion / Re: A Letter To God
« on: August 07, 2006, 11:29:36 pm »
Uh, what's this from?

I take it you hate some movie.


General Discussion / Re: Coke & Pepsi: The Ultimate Battle
« on: August 07, 2006, 04:49:19 pm »
Humans are humans, we taste generally the same as each other.

I about burst into laughter at one single thought: Cannibalism!

I know that's not what you meant, but still.

It's true that people have some of the general same tastes when it comes to food and drink, but then there are many differences - and these differences arise from something different than just a person's mental stance (the difference in culture and what is acceptable to eat for a person's society). I mean, how do you explain how some people hate certain foods (peas, green beans, asparagus, watermelons, cherries) that other people love?  But then, I guess a counter for that would be that taste buds are different for each person, so it might actually be more biological than mental/preferential.

.....And stuff.

General Discussion / Re: Coke & Pepsi: The Ultimate Battle
« on: August 04, 2006, 11:39:24 am »

The Coke counterpart to Dr. Pepper is Mr. Pibb.

As for the poll, I never liked cola.

Hmm, reading up on it, apparently Dr. Pepper is owned by both Coke and Pepsi (or a random third party), but who owns it depends on the region. In the regions where Coke doesn't own Dr. Pepper, they use Mr. Pibb as an alternative.

Learn something new everyday, just so you can forget it in a week. :D

General Discussion / Re: Worst and best subject in school!!!!!
« on: August 04, 2006, 02:17:56 am »
Best is English.

Worst, definately math.

Anyone ever take the ACTs?

General Discussion / Re: Coke & Pepsi: The Ultimate Battle
« on: August 02, 2006, 06:18:46 pm »

Watch it bub. Any more posts like this and you're next.

On to the topic, I've always been a Dr. Pepper drinker, so I assume that means I have to side with Pepsi.

Eh, not really. Dr Pepper seems to play both sides - its served where either Pepsi or Coke products are served.

General Discussion / Re: A question for all you Anime fans
« on: August 02, 2006, 03:08:40 pm »
Evangelion did seem good, but I didn't care enough for it to absolutely love it like most people did (and I did watch the entire series, and both movies). Then again, I'm the same about most of the "great mindfucks" that most people think are so awesome, and other than Evangelion I've seen Lain and Boogiepop Phantom all the way through as well. Just to me personally, even though they are pretty good, they weren't as great as I have always heard or was expecting.

Although of similar anime, I did absolutely love Paranoia Agent and Perfect Blue.

General Discussion / Re: Coke & Pepsi: The Ultimate Battle
« on: August 02, 2006, 02:51:01 pm »

Remember . . . it's POP not SODA

Can't we just compromise on "soda pop"?

...And if we can't, I'm joining the soda faction.

Hmm... for sissy drinks, I pretty much like anything with cherry in it.
Berries and cream Dr. Pepper is pretty good. :D


Those cost a lot of money, money that they aren't willing to shell out for their health.

I assumed she was saying that in response to the gym thing, and to my knowledge, some gyms charge membership fees. If going is such a problem then, and if you're already willing to shell out money for the benefit of health, why not buy some kind of machine to use at home?

Or at least, that's kind of the impression I got on her response. *shrugs*

General Discussion / Re: Coke & Pepsi: The Ultimate Battle
« on: August 02, 2006, 10:53:12 am »
Hmm, I know they don't taste alike, but I don't really prefer one more than the other.

Coke is definately better as a fountain drink though - I've never really liked adding ice to Pepsi.

I'm more of a Dr. Pepper person anyways. =P

Many a woman has kicked my ass, you sexist :P

Ah, well, I try, you wuss. =P

*note: not one to talk on the wuss part... a fly could kick my ass, sadly enough*

Also, insults towards fat people are usually used in a non-serious way. I guess you want a world without offensive jokes Josh...might as well take out porno with it.

No, not porn!
....Most jokes tend to be rooted in offending someone in some way anyways, so you'd have to get rid of a lot of the world's humor.

And even if women were as tall as men, they'd still be women. No mysoginist thinks proudly to himself, "Boy, it's a good thing women are shorter than men, or my intrinsic superiority as a male would be lost!" The height gap is not the root of the problem, and eliminating it will not eliminate sexism.

I'm not entirely too sure, but it seems his idea is more along the lines of, if women were more the size of men, they could stand up for themselves better on par with a man, and in the end have more respect from men.
I agree though, that most misogynists that are really truly hateful and look down on women aren't going to change their minds that women are inferior simply because a woman might be more capable of keeping up with them physically or say, kicking their ass. They're still going to believe that women are baby machines whose role is in the home.


That diabetes study found an 80% increase for acquiring diabetes when one ingests soft drinks regularly.

Can wisdom be infinite?

I read such and yet I'll probably never actually stop drinking soda. =P Oh well.


You have a point. I try to make my arguments hard to rebut. And, usually, I don’t make an argument unless I am confident in its strength. So, usually, it is hard to disagree with me—because, when I bother to contest a point, I’m usually right. That is probably what you are seeing.

Look at this topic for instance. You suggest that I label people’s negative comments about fatness as prejudiced, with prejudice of my own. Not so. The evidence is in abundance all around us, in this thread and in the wide world. There is so little reason to discriminate against fat people, and yet not only do we discriminate against them anyway, but we do it with spectacular zeal.

You are welcome to name any anti-fat remark you like, which you believe is not based in prejudice or bigotry, and I will probably be able to show you that in fact it is.

I didn't say that you labeled negative comments as prejudice with prejudice of your own. I was thinking more along the lines of this point instead: most people seem to be ignoring the main basis of your post (the prejudice aspect) and have instead been making a case for the benefits of being healthy, or at least not excessively fat, which :

For the umpteenth time, I am not trying to argue that being fat is healthy. I am not even saying it is not unhealthy.

... you are apparently not discussing at all, focusing on the prejudice aspect of it.

So, they make a case for health, they get a response that they are prejudice against fat people.  Or at least, that is how I am seeing some posts I seem to be reading, and possibly I have gotten the wrong meaning from it.

I think the main prejudice might be more against ugly people. Not to say that there is no prejudice against fat, but a person can be overweight, even excessively overweight, to where they truly have no figure that people find attractive (for example, a girl can be round instead of still maintaining the semblance of a figure 8 ) and still be found attractive, or at least relatively good looking to others, because their features are still pretty, and are probably less likely to get bashed for their fatness in this case, or at least, not as much as say, a person who is not only fat, but also ugly, is likely to get picked on. But that's just a thought.

A correlation does not establish cause. Neither of us can be certain that body fat itself is the direct cause of diabetes. There is a great deal of physiology that goes into fat accumulation and maintenance, and who knows the mechanisms by which diabetes is formed? If science knew that, we’d be much further along the road to a preventative medicine.

I honestly think that diabetes is more caused by how active a person is, what they choose to eat, and how much of it they choose to eat, which can cause the correlation I mentioned. If you're gaining weight because you can eat more than one pizza by yourself and never exercise, I'd venture to say you're on the road to diabetes.

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6