Guest MikeSC Posted February 28, 2005 Report Posted February 28, 2005 In other news, water is wet. Not the sludgy shit down by the rendering plant. -=Mike
Guest Agent of Oblivion Posted February 28, 2005 Report Posted February 28, 2005 'cept dry ice. aint water
Guest Agent of Oblivion Posted February 28, 2005 Report Posted February 28, 2005 Sludgy shit would also by definition be wet. Mike is incorrect.
Art Sandusky Posted February 28, 2005 Report Posted February 28, 2005 'cept dry ice. aint water Dude, ice is so water.
Guest MikeSC Posted February 28, 2005 Report Posted February 28, 2005 Sludgy shit would also by definition be wet. Mike is incorrect. You can walk on that sludgy shit. It's as wet as a rancid hobo. -=Mike
Ripper Posted February 28, 2005 Report Posted February 28, 2005 Okay, Mike, I'm gonna need you to stop walking on sludgy shit down by the rendering plant and rancid hobos, kay?
Guest MikeSC Posted February 28, 2005 Report Posted February 28, 2005 Okay, Mike, I'm gonna need you to stop walking on sludgy shit down by the rendering plant and rancid hobos, kay? The rancid hobos would miss me. -=Mike ...WHAT ABOUT THE HOBOS?!?!?...
Guest Agent of Oblivion Posted February 28, 2005 Report Posted February 28, 2005 'cept dry ice. aint water Dude, ice is so water. Dry ice ain't water. Look it up, I know I'm right. You owe me fifty bucks.
Guest Salacious Crumb Posted February 28, 2005 Report Posted February 28, 2005 Let's see........ long winded........ check postivie outlook on Hitler......... check Damn Jason must've written that article.
Art Sandusky Posted February 28, 2005 Report Posted February 28, 2005 That is so retarded to call something ice that isn't. Call it Cold Carbon or something.
SuperJerk Posted March 1, 2005 Report Posted March 1, 2005 (edited) You bitch about societal ignorance and then say that social reprecussions of historical paradigm shifts aren't essential. Make up your mind and pick up a book. The Industrial Revolution is one of the four (some say five) truly world-changing things to go down. Recognize. Pure events are mostly irrelevant and societal trends yield a much greater understanding into things. Oh, bite me. I never said the Industrial Revolution wasn't important. I was complaining about the number of curriculum standards devoted to that one subtopic while other things get ignored. I had to spend four weeks teaching the Industrial Revolution last year because there were about 10 curriculum standards devoted to it (i.e. how did it individually effect every single group of people who ever lived while it was still going on), while the Reformation got about two, and the school year ended before we even finished WW2. We have tons of things we're supposed to cover, but as long as we're spending weeks and weeks on details of a few things, we're not covering a broad enough range of events so students get a fuller view of history. The World Wars' causes and impact, the Great Depression, the Renaissance, the Reformation, the rise of Nationalism in the 18th century, the Age of Exploration, colonialism and imperialism...the list goes on and on...ALL OF IT IS IMPORTANT. But we're still expected to exhaust every topic in minute detail? edit: And don't even pretend we know who the hell the exceptionally hot chick in your sig is, either. Edited March 1, 2005 by RobotJerk
Guest Agent of Oblivion Posted March 1, 2005 Report Posted March 1, 2005 I'm curious as to what Patrick thought dry ice was made of..
Art Sandusky Posted March 1, 2005 Report Posted March 1, 2005 I dunno, I figured it was just some weird version of normal ice.
Kahran Ramsus Posted March 1, 2005 Report Posted March 1, 2005 You bitch about societal ignorance and then say that social reprecussions of historical paradigm shifts aren't essential. Make up your mind and pick up a book. The Industrial Revolution is one of the four (some say five) truly world-changing things to go down. Recognize. Pure events are mostly irrelevant and societal trends yield a much greater understanding into things. Oh, bite me. I never said the Industrial Revolution wasn't important. I was complaining about the number of curriculum standards devoted to that one subtopic while other things get ignored. I had to spend four weeks teaching the Industrial Revolution last year because there were about 10 curriculum standards devoted to it (i.e. how did it individually effect every single group of people who ever lived while it was still going on), while the Reformation got about two, and the school year ended before we even finished WW2. We have tons of things we're supposed to cover, but as long as we're spending weeks and weeks on details of a few things, we're not covering a broad enough range of events so students get a fuller view of history. The World Wars' causes and impact, the Great Depression, the Renaissance, the Reformation, the rise of Nationalism in the 18th century, the Age of Exploration, colonialism and imperialism...the list goes on and on...ALL OF IT IS IMPORTANT. But we're still expected to exhaust every topic in minute detail? edit: And don't even pretend we know who the hell the exceptionally hot chick in your sig is, either. That is too broad. You can't possibly cover that in a year. When I was in school we started history with the Fall of Rome in Grade 5 and then worked our way up to the end of World War II by Grade 10. That year consisted entirely of the two World Wars, the 20s and the Depression. Those were the compulsory courses. In Grade 11 we did the Ancient World, but I only took that one voluntarily.
Jingus Posted March 1, 2005 Report Posted March 1, 2005 Welcome to the American public educational system, Kahran. In my school experience, we mostly got taught the same stuff over & over again, just in slightly more detailed form as we got older. So in high school we spent one year each on geography, world history, American history, and current events/politics/economics.
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now