Somehow I went from the solution of complex DEs to reading about secular humanism. Then while adjusting the religious views on FB, I bit the bullet and changed the interested-in too. Currently only the latter is any sort of public. It's published to timeline, but it's also about 5AM... I don't think anyone will notice. Not that it makes any sort of difference at all anyways.

In my defence, I finished making the crib sheet for DEs. I hope the final is easier than the midterm. The Romans final was as easy as its predecessors, but statics was absolutely brutal. I was lucky to finish. Errors everywhere. 

(First world problems: can't complain about how difficult exam was - "Oh, I'm sure you did fine!" Well I know I'll probably be on the right side of the curve but that doesn't mean it wasn't difficult.)

To update my other life bits...

I broke up with the guy Friday night, saying that I probably wouldn't see him again due to exams. He took it like a champ and shed some manly tears. I didn't cry. I hope he isn't too angry. I hope he never realizes the real reason that I did it.

I'm not angry at him. Just the circumstances of stuff. It's the equivalent of a kid whining, "But mommmyyyyyy, it's just not fair." But not fair to whom? It's a moot point.

My frustration lies with my inability to create adequate solutions to what seems like such a simple problem.

--

February 2nd, conversation between [1], [2], and [Me]

[1] can u guys please date or something

[2] i'm pretty sure we're both holding out for someone better.

[1] lol idk if taht was a complement or a diss

[2] just an observation.

[1] still cant figure it out

[2] bit's not so much an insult
as we both look down on each other.

[Me] well summarized.

What's funny is that some evolutionists claim that prohibiting such teaching makes students better thinkers. how is showing one point of view and not letting students think about it in contrast with other viewpoints 'better thinking'? if evolution is true, it will stand true despite the other side's best efforts to disprove it. sheltering behind monologue is at best, avoiding an opportunity to prove the worth of evolutionists' convictions, and at worst, intellectual cowardice.

Posted by an old friend in support of the bill that allows for debate of evolution by teachers and the teaching of creationism in schools.

TLDR: If Tennessee’s “Monkey Bill” passes, teachers will be permitted to challenge scientific concepts such as evolution and climate change, and teach the Bible’s creation story.

Which teachers will teach evolution and which teachers will also teach creationism? Inevitably some teachers will favour one explanation over the other. In areas where creationism is the default explanation, teachers are likely to lean towards teaching creationism and, more importantly, casting doubt on the explanation offered by evolution, which will strengthen the convictions of the prevailing beliefs. In areas where evolution is the default explanation, teachers are unlikely to mention creationism much at all, as is the case in Canada, where about 58% accept evolution and 22% accept that God created humans. 

I strongly believe that creationism, which was published in approximately one text several thousand years ago, has no place in a science classroom except as a passing mention, perhaps to draw parallels as to how light, and darkness, and the stars, planets, water, vegetation, seasons and clearer atmosphere, reptiles, fish, birds, mammals, and finally humans came into being in roughly that order. It's also impossible to debate the results of the experiment when you ARE the experiment.

--

I made 150 freezer bags of correlation study samples today and my shoulders are rather sore. I also have to watch a movie about metaphysics that was loaned to me by the janitor who is also probably a Mason. I really don't want to watch it. michiichan, I wish you were here to watch it with me to fling metaphorical tables at every chunk of pseudoscience they're gonna throw at me, but I'd rather ask you to sit through Titanic 3D with me, which is also a really embarrassing and slightly inconvenient request.

A thought:

Is it common practice to remove a former significant other from a list of facebook friend list? Bleeping program was by nature rather incestuous in its entanglements... but a failed LDR, for example. 

The reason I ask is because I jokingly paid an offhand complimen a former lab partner's muscular ass today, though under the impression that he was in a relationship with a lovely fellow Redditor who, as far as I can tell, is an SNSD fan, speaks Portuguese is bisexual, is a Leo born 1990, last updated LJ in May 2009, and calls herself "part Nazi", and shares no mutual friends with me but that's not important right now. What matters is that it was extremely difficult to find her when I forgot who she was because Muscular Ass defriended her after their breakup between August and now. And before anyone asks, I have no interest in Senor Muscular Ass, except in a future productive lab partnership, because his well-defined gluteal muscles are very well-defined and I feel threatened by that level of bodybuilding distinction, and his ex-girlfriend. Well, I don't, but meh, not unless he ends up fitting into my type later on. But there's still the problem of too much internet across both parties.

Which brings me to the first point.

Is it normal to defriend upon breakup?

I also remember seeing Derp and Yee defriend after Derp's northern indiscretions. Eh, I really haven't been looking.

Back to stats.