Intuitive explaination that .9999...=1
Dale Henderson
I'm not sure this is entirely appropriate for this group. But the
atmosphere here is fairly relaxed so I thought I'd give it a shot.
I'm looking for an intuitive explanation as to why the repeating
decimal .9999.....=1. I know the algebraic trick and the convergence
of geometric series explanations. But like I said I'm looking for
something more intuitive. Something using manipulatives would be
great.
How do the various math curriculums handles this?
Does anyone have any interesting techniques?
Thanks
"Mark T"
> I'm not sure this is entirely appropriate for this group.
Way over their heads! They are only amateur DIY experimenters on kids.
"Look, Ma! No brains!"
> the atmosphere here is fairly relaxed ...
... like a flatulent homeskoola after eating 20 cans of baked beans.
> How do the various math curriculums handles this?
1) A Beka Books from the unaccredited Pensacola Christian College think it's
a miracle and needs no explanation. "Just believe!"
2) The Robinson Self-Teaching Home School Curriculum doesn't have iot in
their
1911 Encyclopedia Britannica, 1913 Webster's Dictionary or Original King
James Version of the Bible - therefore it doesn't exist!
Homeskool - Get a better education elsewhere!
Scott Bryce
>
> I'm not sure this is entirely appropriate for this group. But the
> atmosphere here is fairly relaxed so I thought I'd give it a shot.
>
> I'm looking for an intuitive explanation as to why the repeating
> decimal .9999.....=1.
The following works if we understand that we are talking about decimals
that repeat infinitely, but we can't write them that way using only ASCII.
if .99999 = 1
then .99999 x 10 = 10
then 9.99999 = 10
then 9.99999 - .99999 = 10 - 1
then 9 = 9
Dale Henderson
MT> "Dale Henderson" <nil...@hotpop.com> wrote:
>> I'm not sure this is entirely appropriate for this group.
MT> Way over their heads! They are only amateur DIY experimenters
MT> on kids.
And your professional advice is?
Paul Danaher
Call this number k
k = 0.99999999999.......
Multiply it by ten
10 x k = 9.99999999999.......
Subtract k from 10k
9 x k = 9.0000000000.....
Divide both sides by 9
k = 1
http://extranet.edfac.unimelb.edu.au/DSME/decimals/SLIMversion/backinfo/advprops.shtml
Michael S. Morris
Tuesday, the 18th of April, 2006
Dale:
I'm looking for an intuitive explanation as to why the repeating
decimal .9999.....=1. [...]
Scott:
The following works if we understand that we are
talking about decimals that repeat infinitely, but
we can't write them that way using only ASCII.
if .99999 = 1
then .99999 x 10 = 10
then 9.99999 = 10
then 9.99999 - .99999 = 10 - 1
then 9 = 9
I think of this as "the algebraic trick" that Dale said he knew,
but wanted something different.
Basically, 0.999999...=9*sum(n=1 to inf) [(1/10)^n] = 9*S.
So, 10*S=1.11111....=1+S=>10*S=1+S=>9*S=1=>S=1/9.
0.9999999.....=9*S=9*(1/9)=1.
In general, if S=sum(n=1 to inf) (r^n) and S converges
(r<1), then (1/r)*S=1+S => [(1/r)-1]*S=1 => S=1/[(1/r)-1].
But, manipulatives? I can see how to use them to "show"
9*(1/9)=1, but connecting this to the infinite decimal
expansion, I don't see. It seems to me you'd have to
anchor this with some given equality between
the fraction and the decimal expansion, like (1/9)=0.11111.... .
You could start with the finite sum, I guess.
So, S= sum (n=1 to m) (r^n). Then, you're on
safe ground to multiply by (1/r), and write
(1/r)*S=1+S-(r^n). Solve for S: [(1/r)-1]*S=1-(r^m),
or S=[1-(r^m)]/[(1/r)-1]. So, imagine a sequence
of "manipulative experiments" trying to verify this
formula for m=1,2,3, and so on (for r=1/10 we get (9/10)/(9)=(1/10),
(99/100)/9=(11/100),(999/1000)/9=(111/1000),...). But for
even m=3, I guess what this would mean is you've got a
whole area divided up into a thousand equal parts, and you'd
be showing that (1/10)+(1/100)+(1/1000)=111*(1/1000) => one
"tenth" plus one "hundredth" plus one "thousandth"
equals one hundred eleven "thousandths", where you have a
supply of tenths, hundredths, and thousandths. That is, it strikes
me that already for m=3 we are pretty darn abstract and
dealing with impractically large numbers of physical
objects.
I know I tend to think algebraically and then, if geometry is
required, to think back towards it, translating the algebra into
the geometry. So, to me, the algebraic formulas, summing
either the finite series or the infinite one, are the
intuitive things, and I'm not sure that any "manipulatives"
could make them more intuitive than they already are---especially
given that there seems to be an unavoidable infinite limit
involved in whatever demonstration/proof one tries. But
I'm willing to listen to suggestions.
Mike Morris
(msmo...@netdirect.net)
Jayne Kulikauskas
<msmo...@netdirect.net> wrote:
[...]
>I know I tend to think algebraically and then, if geometry is
>required, to think back towards it, translating the algebra into
>the geometry. So, to me, the algebraic formulas, summing
>either the finite series or the infinite one, are the
>intuitive things, and I'm not sure that any "manipulatives"
>could make them more intuitive than they already are---especially
>given that there seems to be an unavoidable infinite limit
>involved in whatever demonstration/proof one tries. But
>I'm willing to listen to suggestions.
That was kind of my reaction too. I think it already is intuitive.
However I'm wondering if using a graph with an asymptotic line
approaching a limit might help someone to grasp the idea.
Jayne
Paul Danaher
Isn't this missing the inherent difference in the *infinite* series? An
asymptotic approach treats the series as a constructed number, whereas the
arithmetical treatment emphasises the identity.
Jayne Kulikauskas
Theoretically, yes, but in practice the thickness of the pencil line
as it approached the limit would make it look like an identity.
Jayne
Paul Danaher
I put that badly, perhaps - the infinite series 0.999... isn't a very long
finite series which approaches 1 at the limit, it is something intrinsically
different.
Scott Bryce
> However I'm wondering if using a graph with an asymptotic line
> approaching a limit might help someone to grasp the idea.
No. One concept of asymptotes is that the graphed curve never actually
reaches the limit.
That would demonstrate that .9999... approaches 1 as the number of
decimal places increases, but that it never actually equals 1.
Michael S. Morris
Tuesday, the 18th of April, 2006
Jayne:
However I'm wondering if using a graph with an asymptotic line
approaching a limit might help someone to grasp the idea.
Scott:
No. One concept of asymptotes is that the graphed curve never actually
reaches the limit.
That would demonstrate that .9999... approaches 1 as the number of
decimal places increases, but that it never actually equals 1.
So, I'm not exactly understanding why you say "No." here. It seems
to me Jayne's suggestion would amount to we graph a function, f(m),
where f(m)=9*[sum (n=1 to m) (1/10)^n]. m would be the abscissa,
and f(m) the ordinate. f(m) would have f=1 as an asymptote for m->inf.
f(1)=9/10, f(2)=99/100, f(3)=999/1000, and so on. For any finite value
of m, f(m)<1, but we visually "see" the limit, which I guess is what a
"manipulative" is all about.
Mike Morris
(msmo...@netdirect.net)
Paul Danaher
Which is the difference between a limit and an infinite series. The wretched
expression "tends to infinity" ought to have been left in the 19th century
when they came up with the "delta-epsilon" answer to the philosophical
problems of the "infinitesimal" calculus. It just confuses people, because
it tempts them to think that an infinite number is the same kind of animal
as a very, very big number. "Infinite" entities in mathematics have strange
and wonderful properties which a constructivist approach obscures. The ghost
of Kronecker lives on ...
"Mark T"
> MT> Way over their heads! They are only amateur DIY experimenters
> MT> on kids.
>
> And your professional advice is?
If you are going to homeschool then do it properly with some professional
oversight.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
J.Pascal" wrote:
>> What contact with the outside world do ALL homeschooled children have?
>> I am not asking about YOUR particular circumstances but what is UNIVERSAL
>> to ALL homeschoolers.
>
> Do you realize how *political* your insistance on a common
> experience for all people is?
I'm not being "political" - I'm being honest. That is why I was asked by
the Australian Baptist Union to be the first person in Australia to speak on
"the pros and CONS of Christian schooling" at their annual national
celebration at Hahndorf, SA, in the early 90s. No-one at the time wanted to
discuss the cons of Christian schooling.
If homeschooling is universally good it must be good for EVERYONE ...
without exception.
If homeschooling is not universally good then what are the problems
associated with it?
NO-ONE on misc.education.home-school.christian wants to discuss the obvious
problems of homeschooling. How is that helpful for anyone deciding upon
homeschooling? Do you just tell them the good stuff and ignore the bad?
Because I dare to raise the problems I am called a troll.
If everyone thinks the same then you aren't thinking at all.
> It's political, Mark. It's not educational.
Education is also political. Homeschooling is political. Ever read
"Teaching as a Subversive Activity?" or the work of Paulo Friere?????
It is also political on misc.education.home-school.christian in that it is
(for most people on this ng) a fearful irrational reaction to state control.
Such fear paints anyone who deviates from the official line as a troll. The
fear related groupings on this ng would be a good area for a sociology PhD
thesis.
> The choice between a common authority vs. personal autonomy is a political
> choice
> made for reasons of political philosophy.
As a trained philosopher, I must disagree with you. It is based on one's
world view not on one's political philosophy. Furthermore the choice is not
an essentail choice - common authority and personal autonomy can co-exist
together. There are also many blends of the two ideas.
> Everyone having everything all the same is a political value held by many
> people.
I haven't heard that philosophy espoused anywhere in philosophy in the last
50 years ... except in communism. Who are the "many people" who espouse
this philosophy recently?
>> This is a problem with homeschooling. There is NO universal quality
>> control in homeschooling. Would you like to discuss this problem ... or
>> do
>> you just want to continue with your immature gossip about me?
>
> What you call a problem, I call a strength because I see severe
> weakness inherent in the philosophy that demands anything be
> "universal."
Quality control is about ensuring quality education. This is an essentail
part of state schools, Christian schools, Catholic private schools and
distance education. It is NOT an essentail part (apparently) in
homeschooling.
That then begs the question: "How do you you really know if your kids are
getting a quality edcation?" (because that in essence is what quality
control is about)
By this I mean:
How is quality education in homeschooling measured?
Does it use BOTH assessment and evaluation?
What is the criteria against which assessments are made?
Who decides the criteria?
What are their qualifications for setting such criteria?
It is of no use to assert that homeschooling is quality education without
giving any substantial verifiable proof.
By quality education I mean a minimum of a consistent liberal education with
minimum standards and criteria (e.g. literacy, basic maths, knowledge of
one's country and political systems and it's place ion the world, general
art appreciation) that is available to all children regardless of
socio-economic status or the educational level of the parents.
By quality education I do not mean isolated examples of the very best
students of a systenm performing well. Every system has those!
Stated in plainer English, how do you really know that homeschooling is good
for ALL children? What is the verifiable evidence for your opinion?
> Doesn't matter if it's nutrition, health care or education.
So you wouldn't mind if:
- nutritional products had no quality control and were basically useless and
without nutrition ... causing people to die from malnutrition
- health care had no quality control and anyone could be a doctor, prescribe
medication and do surgery ... and hospitals could be located in the local
sewers ... causing people to die by visiting a doctor or hospital
Is that the type of state that homeschoolers envisage?
Quality control in nutrition and health care ensures the quality of
nutrition and health care that everyone receives.
If there is NO quality control in homeschooling, how can you ensure that you
have quality education in homeschooling? Please explain.
> So while I can discuss the issue of "isolation" or I can discuss the
> philosophical differences defining an individualist or this sort of
> "universal" preference, I can't frame those discussions as a discussion
> of a "problem."
Then you are not thinking enough.
If everyone thinks the same then you aren't thinking at all.
> Isn't that what's called "begging the question" when the question
> itself is stated such that the answer isn't open to debate or
> discussion?
>
> Nothing about homeschooling is "universal"
Therefore it is without definition? I am therefore a homeschooler because
you cannot define homeschooling.
The definition of "homeschooler", in reality, is based on universal
attributes of homeschoolers.
What are those attributes?
....
Is isolation of a child from the rest of society a part of quality
education?
Is isolation of a child from the rest of society a possibility in
homeschooling?
If it is possible, do homeschoolers value isolationism? Why?
If it is NOT possible, please explain how it is not possible with reference
to the Branch Davidians at Waco and the People's Temple at Jonestown ...both
of whom homeschooled.
Did the the Branch Davidians at Waco and the People's Temple at Jonestown
provide quality education for their children?
Why are homeschoolers on misc.education.home-school.christian unable to
answer such basic questions?
Dale Henderson
PD> Which is the difference between a limit and an infinite
PD> series. The wretched expression "tends to infinity" ought to have
PD> been left in the 19th century when they came up with the
PD> "delta-epsilon" answer to the philosophical problems of the
PD> "infinitesimal" calculus. It just confuses people, because it
PD> tempts them to think that an infinite number is the same kind of
PD> animal as a very, very big number. "Infinite" entities in
PD> mathematics have strange and wonderful properties which a
PD> constructivist approach obscures. The ghost of Kronecker lives on
PD> ...
This is the idea I'm trying to get across. That .9999... actually IS
1. And not just a very good approximation. When asked if .9999...=1
students often say that .9999.... is really close but not actually 1.
The algebraic approach you posted in your other post works. But
students often think there's something fishy about it and don't fully
accept it. (Oh and I found the link you posted with it to be very
useful. Thanks)
So what I'm looking for is a way to make this seem clear, without
being overly technical.
Oh in the interest of honesty, I'm not doing this for the purpose of
homeshcooling. (At least not yet. My kids are too young.) I'm looking
for this information for a freshman level university class I'm
teaching. But I thought a group of homeschoolers would have more
diverse views on this topic. And so far I've recieved some very
insightful responses.
Dale Henderson
MT> "Dale Henderson" <nil...@hotpop.com> wrote:
MT> Way over their heads! They are only amateur DIY experimenters on
MT> kids.
>> And your professional advice is?
MT> If you are going to homeschool then do it properly with some
MT> professional oversight.
Very helpful. And in this case irrelevant. Since I'm actually
interested in this question for a university level class I'm
teaching.
I would think that a professional educator would have plenty of
suggestions for this particular question. Its a concept many students
problems with. And since what works with one student will not work
with another, the professional educator would need a arsenal of
explainations to help the students that aren't getting it.
So Mark, do you have anything constructive to add? I'd be glad to
hear it.
Paul Danaher
>>>>>> "PD" == Paul Danaher <paul.d...@watwinc.com> writes:
>
>> Which is the difference between a limit and an infinite
>
>
> This is the idea I'm trying to get across. That .9999... actually IS
> 1. And not just a very good approximation. When asked if .9999...=1
> students often say that .9999.... is really close but not actually 1.
>
> The algebraic approach you posted in your other post works. But
> students often think there's something fishy about it and don't fully
> accept it. (Oh and I found the link you posted with it to be very
> useful. Thanks)
It isn't algebraic - it uses the basic operations of arithmetic on an
*infinite* series.
> So what I'm looking for is a way to make this seem clear, without
> being overly technical.
>
> Oh in the interest of honesty, I'm not doing this for the purpose of
> homeshcooling. (At least not yet. My kids are too young.) I'm looking
> for this information for a freshman level university class I'm
> teaching. But I thought a group of homeschoolers would have more
> diverse views on this topic. And so far I've recieved some very
> insightful responses.
Keep focusing on the difference between "incrementally infinite" and
*infinite* ...
"Mark T"
>>> And your professional advice is?
> MT> If you are going to homeschool then do it properly with some
> MT> professional oversight.
>
> Very helpful. And in this case irrelevant.
Education is always irrelevant to amateur homeskoolas.
Dale Henderson
MT> "Dale Henderson" <nil...@hotpop.com> wrote:
>>>> And your professional advice is?
MT> If you are going to homeschool then do it properly with some
MT> professional oversight.
>> Very helpful. And in this case irrelevant.
MT> Education is always irrelevant to amateur homeskoolas.
I'll take your continued ridicule to mean that you have nothing
constructive to add. Further I'll assume that you do not even
understand the question at hand.
If you actually care about the education that homeschool students
receive, it would be prudent to post helpful, constructive advice when
questions like "How do I teach...?" arise in the hopes that someone
might take your well-informed advice. In doing so, you could wind up
helping home-educated students. You might even offer some educational
theory for the questions at hand. In the current case, you might
discuss the problems students have grasping concepts involving
infinity.
But you don't do any of this. Instead you ridicule and it has become
blindinlgly obvious that your goal isn't to help home-educated
children but to ridicule home-schoolers, christians and americans.
"Mark T"
> I'll take your continued ridicule to mean that you have nothing
> constructive to add.
Your comprehension is faulty.
You are just not worth the time answering with anything substantial.
Stop your gossip about me and get a life!
#############################################################
"Dale Henderson" <nil...@hotpop.com> wrote:
>> There is NO assurance of quality education for every child in the USA's
>> homeschools.
>
> Yeah. Yeah. I think everyone agrees with that.
Finally!
################################################################
Dalene Barnes
>
> ........it has become
> blindinlgly obvious that your goal isn't to help home-educated
> children but to ridicule home-schoolers, christians and americans.
Do we have a nominee yet for "understatement of the year?" LOL
--
--
Dalene Barnes AOL IM: TX Dalene
"You shall teach them (God's commands) diligently to your children,
and shall talk of them when you sit in your house, when you walk by
the way, when you lie down, and when you rise up." - Deuteronomy 6:7
"Mark T"
"Wooly (sic) Baa Lamb" <ch...@txbarnes.com> wrote:
> Do we have a nominee yet for ...
... "Idiot Homeskool Family of The Year"?
YES!
The BARNES family !!!!!!
The Barnes family like to teach shooting to their kids. Kids playing with
guns! Woohoo!!!!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
OXYMORON OF THE MONTH: 'SPORTING SHOOTERS'
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What sort of morons are 'oxymorons'? They're figures of speech in which
words with an opposite meaning are used together - wise fool, making haste
slowly, etc. The Port Arthur tragedy got headlines around the world; as did
our PM's swift response in reining in the gun lobby.
Now these 'sporting shooters' (I'm not referring to farmers and others who
shoot to survive) are beginning to mobilize. They range in opinion from the
dangerous redneck far-right to those who keep a gun for 'protection', and
others who shoot for sport. It's the latter group I'm concerned with here.
I guess there are some good reasons why men (they're mostly males) should
inflict pain/death on animals for fun, but I haven't heard them yet. And,
speaking as a Christian, I find any sport where people set out to maim or
kill a violation of the 'Creation mandate.' The Creator, says Genesis 1-3,
has given humans responsibility to be good stewards of creation. All
creation praises God (Psalm 148:9-10). God watches over the doe as it gives
birth to the fawn, and God-as-sustainer provides food for the young ravens
(Job 39:1, 38:41). Jesus said his Father cares for sparrows...
Sure, Christians have had different views here. Generally, Catholic
countries are less humane than Protestant nations. In a conference to
discuss ending the practice of transporting animals for 22 hours without a
break for water or food (October 1994) Spain, Portugal and Italy resisted
moves to treat animals more humanely. Britain and Germany voted on the
opposite side. In Spain the Catholic hierarchy supports bull-fighting, in
Canada fur trapping and seal hunting, in Norway whaling, and in Ireland
many clergy enjoy hare coursing. Rome and Canterbury are more divided on
issues of animal welfare than artificial contraception.
The saints disagree too. St Francis is well known for befriending animals.
But St. Thomas Aquinas wrote 'It is not wrong for man to make use of
[animals], either by killing or in any way whatever.' Unfortunately Aquinas
has carried more weight in Catholic officialdom. Catholic theology bears a
heavy responsibility for much of the cruelty to animals in the Western
world.
Was it Voltaire who wrote, 'Those who believe in absurdities will commit
atrocities'? Calvin said we owe animals justice. Quaker George Fox
encouraged his followers to 'do good' to them. John Wesley believed in
animals' immortality.
It's ironic (moronic?) that our gung-ho culture should pay over $300 million
(U.S.) to watch 'Jurassic Park': a movie about large, fast, and better-armed
animals hunting humans. Shades of 'Hollywood versus America'! On the other
hand there's 'Babe' - a pig that can act but refuses to be a ham... :-)
Talk about a schizophrenic culture: we care about our pet dog or cat or
horse, then eat turkey for Christmas. The killing of turkeys is often
brutal: these heavy birds are fully conscious when hung upside down by
their legs on the conveyer belt before their throats are cut.
Now some argue that as animals are not spiritual/moral - or thoughtful -
beings 'made in the image of God' then they are simply commodities to be
exploited. But the relevant question is not 'can animals think?' but 'can
animals suffer?' If they can, inflicting pain on them creates enormous moral
problems.
The recent book by Jeffrey Masson & Susan McCarthy, 'When Elephants Weep',
will make you weep, if you have any compassion. Animals, these authors
point out, have emotional lives at least as complex as our own. Of course
you don't have to be 'Christian' to be an animal liberationist. The world's
expert there is a humanist - Professor Peter Singer, who edited 'The Great
Ape Project'. He argues that apes have the intelligence of a two-year-old
child and have three basic rights - life, liberty and prohibition of
torture. So let the silent majority on this issue become more vocal.
Shooters are not sportsmen, they're vandals.
--
Shalom! Rowland Croucher
"If only it were so simple! If only there were evil people somewhere
insidiously committing evil deeds and it were necessary to separate them
from the rest of us and destroy them. But the line dividing good and evil
cuts through the heart of every human being. And who is willing to destroy
a piece of his own heart?" Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
http://jmm.aaa.net.au/ - 17,000 articles; 4000 jokes/funnies
Wooly Baa Lamb
> Dale Henderson wrote:
>>
>> ........it has become
>> blindinlgly obvious that your goal isn't to help home-educated
>> children but to ridicule home-schoolers, christians and americans.
>
> Do we have a nominee yet for "understatement of the year?" LOL
To me, it was more the remberance of a song.
I saw the light
I saw the light
No more darkness
No more night
...
:-)
--
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Chris Barnes AOL IM: CNBarnes
ch...@txbarnes.com Yahoo IM: chrisnbarnes
You always have freedom of choice, but you never have freedom of
consequence.
"Mark T"
> remberance
Homeskool spellun!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> * Side note - when moving, we found Chris' scholastic apptitude tests
> from high school. He scored .... 33 in spelling. :-)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Michael S. Morris
Thursday, the 20th of April, 2006
Paul Danaher wrote:
I put that badly, perhaps - the infinite series
0.999... isn't a very long finite series which
approaches 1 at the limit, it is something intrinsically
different.
I know we aren't talking, but I don't get this idea at all.
The *limit* implies infinite. And the infinite series
is the limit of a sequence of finite series. Moreover,
this emphasis on the difference-in-kind---well, something
in me really rebels at that. I mean, .999=999/10,000
can perfectly well be understood as an infinite series
in its own right. One way to do this would be
0.999=9/10 + 9/100 + 9/1000 + 0/10000 + 0/100000 + ....
Another would be 0.999= 0.998999999999... .
I mean, one can write any finite number as an infinite
series in this way. And, the point of 0.999...=1 is
the very opposite of "they are different animals". Rather,
it is that they are exactly the same animal.
Mike Morris
(msmo...@netdirect.net)
Paul Danaher
But an infinite set *isn't* a limit of finite sets. You can truncate an
infinite set or an infinite series to get a finite set or a finite series,
but the two aren't the same. You can take any integer you like and add one,
but the resulting number isn't infinite. This is why I say the animals are
different in nature (cardinality, if you prefer).
Dale Henderson
MM> Thursday, the 20th of April, 2006
MM> Paul Danaher wrote:
MM> I put that badly, perhaps - the infinite series
MM> 0.999... isn't a very long finite series which approaches 1 at
MM> the limit, it is something intrinsically different.
MM> I know we aren't talking, but I don't get this idea at all.
MM> The *limit* implies infinite.
Not exactly the limit means that the sequence of partial sums
S_n=sum(i=1 to n) 9/10^n comes arbitrarily close to 1 for n
sufficiently large. Notice that n never *becomes* infinity but just
gets bigger, in short the limit represents a trend. In
calculus one never really uses infinity; in fact, modern calculus is
designed to avoid it.
To help illustrate the difference consider the following example:
Let A_n={1,...,n} and let P_n be the collection of all subsets of
A_n. (Note that P_n has 2^n elements). Let U=union (i=1 to infty)
P_n. What this means is that for x to be in U, x must be in P_i for at
least one i. Now let N={1,2,3,....} (the set of positive integers) and
let P be the collection of all subsets of N. Does P=U?
From experience with calculus one might see the trend and assume that
the answer is "yes". N is a subset of itself, so N is in P, but all
elements of U are finite sets so N is not in U. So P does not equal U.
MM> And the infinite series is the limit of a sequence of finite
MM> series.
This is by definition.
MM> Moreover, this emphasis on the difference-in-kind---well,
MM> something in me really rebels at that. I mean, .999=999/10,000 can
MM> perfectly well be understood as an infinite series in its own
MM> right. One way to do this would be 0.999=9/10 + 9/100 + 9/1000 +
MM> 0/10000 + 0/100000 + .... Another would be 0.999=
MM> 0.998999999999... .
MM> I mean, one can write any finite number as an infinite series
MM> in this way. And, the point of 0.999...=1 is the very opposite
MM> of "they are different animals". Rather, it is that they are
MM> exactly the same animal.
This is all true. But I believe the point that Paul is trying to make
is there is a "leap" from any of the partial sums (.9, .99, .999,...)
to the infinite string 0.9999.... In that none of the partial sums
actually equal 1=.999..., but get very close. (Whatever your
definition of very close may be.)
MM> Mike Morris (msmo...@netdirect.net)
"Mark T"
... whatever ....
"Scott Bryce" <sbr...@scottbryce.com> wrote:
> According to the charter, this newsgroup is for discussing homeschooling.
Though it's usually about gossip and DIY experimentation on kiddes.
BTW "explanation" not "explaination" ... unless you use homeskool spellun.
Paul Danaher
> This is all true. But I believe the point that Paul is trying to make
> is there is a "leap" from any of the partial sums (.9, .99, .999,...)
> to the infinite string 0.9999.... In that none of the partial sums
> actually equal 1=.999..., but get very close. (Whatever your
> definition of very close may be.)
There's a certain irony in two atheists arguing about the nature of the
infinite on a Christian newsgroup ...
MaG Douglas
news:vr32g.5066$ZW3.3242@dukeread04...
I've been struck by the irony that lately the most active posters in this ng
are either not Christian or not home-schooling. Perhaps we who are both are
too busy or ??? to post frequently.
MaG
Nori Benz
"MaG Douglas" <mag_d...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:_p62g.16$AJ6...@fe06.lga...
from California. Plus, Jessi and I are busy working on what's left of tenth
grade. :) Since I couldn't afford to get Spanish curriculum until now,
we're going to be doing "summer school" too. And, I may be moving sometime
this year. I will know that within the next few weeks or so. If all goes
well, I will be extremely rare on the NG for about the next six months or
so.
Nori
Dalene Barnes
>
> I've been struck by the irony that lately the most active posters in
> this ng are either not Christian or not home-schooling. Perhaps we
> who are both are too busy or ??? to post frequently.
>
I'd say that's accurate - school year winding down for some, gardens popping
up, there there are those of us who have difficulty with the word NO and
find ourselves planning the home school formal, home school graduation, in
charge of the yearbook, and planning a pre-season basketball tournament
already. Etc. etc. with usual chores, church stuff, housework, school stuff!
The newsgroup gets about 10 minutes of attention in the early a.m., then
again when I get home from my new part-time "job." BUT I still check in
faithfully to see what's going on!
"Mark T"
... whatever ....
After being asked by Nori Benz to participate in the Theology Online
homeschool forum http://www.theologyonline.com/ I now find that I am banned.
There has been no reason given to me whatsoever. Such Trew Kristyun luv!
Does one have to be a brain dead fundamentalist to be part of the Theology
Online forum? Is a professional educator with 30 years experience (K-12 &
Adult, public and Christian schools) not welcome? Is a person who has been
a Christian for over 30 years not welcome merely because they state their
mind as an Exile Believer in the current Fundamentalist Dark Age? YES!!!!!
I've tried to unsubscribe but I'm not allowed to do that either! I'm still
plagued by their silly little ads.
Please pass this to the trigger happy braindead dickhead Knight who banned
me and to whoever runs your "forum' where people cannot debate the real
issues facing homeschooling and the current Fundamentalist Dark Age.
As you may be aware:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A satisfied customer may tell 3 - 5 people about their experience.
A dissatisfied customer may tell 8 - 10 people about their experience.
The average business never hears from 96% of its unhappy customers.
For every complaint received the average company in fact has 26 customers
with similar complaints, 6 of which are serious problems. Of the customers
who register a complaint as many as 70% will do business again with your
organisation if the complaint is effectively resolved. That figure goes up
to a staggering 95% if the customer feels that their complaint was resolved
quickly.
It costs 6 times as much to attract a new customer as it does to keep an
existing customer.
1 complaining customer & 26 other dissatisfied customers = 27 unhappy
customers
27 complaining customers will each tell up to 20 others = 540 people may
have heard complaints about your company.
(Source: AussieHost)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This type of banning is why I and many others have left church for good.
You give Christianity a bad name.
Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from
religious conviction." - Blaise Pascal (1623-1662)
Nori Benz
""Mark T"" <thinkaboutwh@youaredoing32876587498544> wrote in message
news:4449...@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
> "Nori Benz" <spiri...@nalu.net> wroteth:
>
> ... whatever ....
> After being asked by Nori Benz to participate in the Theology Online
> homeschool forum http://www.theologyonline.com/ I now find that I am
> banned. There has been no reason given to me whatsoever. Such Trew
> Kristyun luv!
Mark,
I didn't ban you and I don't know why Knight banned you (And I'm just
guessing that it was Knight that banned you. There are several moderators
on the site.). Obviously, you ticked him off somehow. :) If you'd like, I
can ask why you were banned and e-mail you the answer.
I was enjoying our conversation because, in my opinion, you were being
civil. You didn't call names or get too rude.
I just got too busy with everything going on here to thank you for the
civility you chose to show there.
Nori
Nori Benz
""Mark T"" <thinkaboutwh@youaredoing32876587498544> wrote in message
news:4449...@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
>
> ... whatever ....
> After being asked by Nori Benz to participate in the Theology Online
> homeschool forum http://www.theologyonline.com/ I now find that I am
> banned. There has been no reason given to me whatsoever. Such Trew
> Kristyun luv!
Okay, Mark. I asked Knight why you were banned. He directed me to the
thread that got you banned. If you want to know exactly what got you
banned, e-mail me and I'll send you a link.
Nori
"Mark T"
> I didn't ban you and I don't know why Knight banned you (And I'm just
> guessing that it was Knight that banned you. There are several moderators
> on the site.). Obviously, you ticked him off somehow. :) If you'd like,
> I can ask why you were banned and e-mail you the answer.
That would be a polite thing to do.
"Mark T"
> Okay, Mark. I asked Knight why you were banned. He directed me to the
> thread that got you banned. If you want to know exactly what got you
> banned, e-mail me and I'll send you a link.
I have nothing to hide. Email it.
Nori Benz
""Mark T"" <thinkaboutwh@youaredoing32876587498544> wrote in message
http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1003103#post1003103 ,
is what got you banned, according to Knight. But, if you read through this
thread, http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=24815 , you
will see that even though we're "Trew Krystian Fundamentalists," not one of
us was rude to you in the homeschooling discussion. I may have gotten a few
things wrong about you. But, other than that, I wasn't rude to you. Yet,
you still talked to us like you do the homeschoolers here on meh-sc. Are
you sure that the problem isn't you?
I will admit that I got angry with you several times during our discussion.
But, you cannot tell from reading the thread. And, it doesn't matter that
I'm a moderator there or not. I didn't know why you were banned until
yesterday. Knight, the owner of the site, can and does ban whomever he
thinks is either disrupting the site or is disrespecting the old-timers on
the site.
You know the saying, "You can catch more flies with honey than vinegar?"
Maybe, you ought to try that sometime.
Nori
"Mark T"
>>> Okay, Mark. I asked Knight why you were banned. He directed me to the
>>> thread that got you banned. If you want to know exactly what got you
>>> banned, e-mail me and I'll send you a link.
....
> Well, Mark, post # 22 in this thread,
> http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1003103#post1003103
> ,
> is what got you banned, according to Knight.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Too difficult to use one's God-given brain to address ANY of my statements?
Typical brain-dead fundamentalist in the current Fundamentalist Dark Age!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
You MUST be joking!!!! The statement is FACT.
>But, if you read through this
> thread, http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=24815 , you
> will see that even though we're "Trew Krystian Fundamentalists," not one
> of
> us was rude to you in the homeschooling discussion.
I consider the following posts in the same thread to be more offensive than
any of my statements:
docrob57 - Both I and my wife are far more qualified as teachers than, I
would say, ummmm . . .maybe 100% of the public school teahers out there. And
I believe this to be true of most homeschooling parents. *[though NO
homeschooler is assessed as competent to teach and EVERY public school
teacherr is assessed as comptetent to teach] The fact that in this day and
age you identify with the left suggests, however, that you should be right
at home in a public school environment. *[typical right wing fundamentalist
facist found at Theology On-Line] ......If you are at all interested in
homeschooling, I would suggest just taking a look at what A Beka has to
offer. There is a DVD "teacher" that does a lot of the work. *[from the
unaccredited creationist Pensacola Christian College - I consider this to be
child abuse]
Melody - That so-called professional educator is attempting to teach 25 - 40
students at a time. And teaching politically correct garbage at that.
Ninevah - It doesn't take a degree in method to teach your own children I
use the ABeka accredited DVD curriculum. *[from the unaccredited creationist
Pensacola Christian College - I consider this to be child abuse] Maybe 5th
grade work is "brainsurgery" for you, but so far it appears I can handle all
the "tough" problems she has.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Are you sure that the problem isn't you?
Quoting yourself ebenz47031 from post #86
"The only time we censor here, at TOL, is when someone uses profanity."
BWHAHAHAHAHA!!!! ROTFLMAO!!!!! Bullshit!!!!
I'll be quoting that back at you for sometime to come.
Where is the profanity in ....
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Too difficult to use one's God-given brain to address ANY of my statements?
Typical brain-dead fundamentalist in the current Fundamentalist Dark Age!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
?????
>Knight, the owner of the site, can and does ban whomever he
> thinks is either disrupting the site or is disrespecting the old-timers on
> the site.
I challenge Knight to a debate on "Censorship in the current Fundamentalist
Dark Age" on Theology On-Line. I bet he won't let me debate him on Theology
On-Line. He's a gutless wanker who has not replied to any of my letters of
complaint. Typical brain-dead fundamentalist in the current Fundamentalist
Dark Age!
REMEMBER ................
Jani
""Mark T"" <thinkaboutwh@youaredoing32876587498544> wrote in message
> "Nori Benz" <spiri...@nalu.net> wrote:
>
>>>> Okay, Mark. I asked Knight why you were banned. He directed me to the
>>>> thread that got you banned. If you want to know exactly what got you
>>>> banned, e-mail me and I'll send you a link.
> ....
>> Well, Mark, post # 22 in this thread,
>> http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1003103#post1003103
Very interesting thread ...
Jani
"Mark T"
>>>>> Okay, Mark. I asked Knight why you were banned. He directed me to
>>>>> the
>>>>> thread that got you banned. If you want to know exactly what got you
>>>>> banned, e-mail me and I'll send you a link.
>> ....
>>> Well, Mark, post # 22 in this thread,
>>> http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1003103#post1003103
>
> Very interesting thread ...
But cut short. No more discussion allowed by Knight ... a medieval
fundamentalist wanker who owns Theology On-Line. Have you noticed how many
right wing zealots are on the site???? God save us from the buggers!!!
Nori Benz
""Mark T"" <thinkaboutwh@youaredoing32876587498544> wrote in message
> "Nori Benz" <spiri...@nalu.net> wrote:
>
>>>> Okay, Mark. I asked Knight why you were banned. He directed me to the
>>>> thread that got you banned. If you want to know exactly what got you
>>>> banned, e-mail me and I'll send you a link.
> ....
>> Well, Mark, post # 22 in this thread,
>> http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1003103#post1003103
>> ,
>> is what got you banned, according to Knight.
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Too difficult to use one's God-given brain to address ANY of my
> statements?
> Typical brain-dead fundamentalist in the current Fundamentalist Dark Age!
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> You MUST be joking!!!! The statement is FACT.
>
>
>
banned.
>>But, if you read through this
>> thread, http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=24815 , you
>> will see that even though we're "Trew Krystian Fundamentalists," not one
>> of
>> us was rude to you in the homeschooling discussion.
>
> I consider the following posts in the same thread to be more offensive
> than any of my statements:
>
> docrob57 - Both I and my wife are far more qualified as teachers than, I
> would say, ummmm . . .maybe 100% of the public school teahers out there.
> And I believe this to be true of most homeschooling parents. *[though NO
> homeschooler is assessed as competent to teach and EVERY public school
> teacherr is assessed as comptetent to teach] The fact that in this day and
> age you identify with the left suggests, however, that you should be right
> at home in a public school environment. *[typical right wing
> fundamentalist facist found at Theology On-Line] ......If you are at all
> interested in homeschooling, I would suggest just taking a look at what A
> Beka has to offer. There is a DVD "teacher" that does a lot of the work.
> *[from the unaccredited creationist Pensacola Christian College - I
> consider this to be child abuse]
LOL! You get offended by a parent saying they are more qualified to teach
their child/ren than a total stranger? Whatever do parents do the first
four years before kindergarten when those strangers want to take over? Who
in the world teaches the kids to walk, talk, eat, use the toilet, and in a
lot of cases to read? It ain't a public school teacher, honey.
BTW, I know docrob and his wife. They are both very intelligent people who
like to help people who have a hard time homeschooling. What do you find
more offensive? The fact that parents are more qualified to teach their own
children or that he recommended A Beka curriculum?
>
> Melody - That so-called professional educator is attempting to teach 25 -
> 40 students at a time. And teaching politically correct garbage at that.
>
Is it better to teach on a one-on-one basis or a group teaching situation?
One-on-one would be my preferred learning method. I learn more on a
one-on-one basis. And, why should we have to teach politically correct
lessons? If you live in a diverse area (not everyone does), I can
understand it. But, like I said, not everyone lives in a diverse cultural
area.
> Ninevah - It doesn't take a degree in method to teach your own children I
> use the ABeka accredited DVD curriculum. *[from the unaccredited
> creationist Pensacola Christian College - I consider this to be child
> abuse] Maybe 5th grade work is "brainsurgery" for you, but so far it
> appears I can handle all the "tough" problems she has.
>
Remember, Mark, you came onto TOL with your comments about DIY brainsurgery,
much like you did on MEH-SC. You expect everyone to just let you give your
comments denigrating homeschoolers and not say anything back? Nineveh's
daughter is in fifth grade, for heaven's sake! Besides the fact that you
think she is "abusing her child," what is so tough about teaching one fifth
grader? And, before you answer that, I probably should let you know that I
have taught in a Christian school. I taught third grade, fourth grade, and
high school Spanish.
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
>> Are you sure that the problem isn't you?
>
> Quoting yourself ebenz47031 from post #86
>
> "The only time we censor here, at TOL, is when someone uses profanity."
>
> BWHAHAHAHAHA!!!! ROTFLMAO!!!!! Bullshit!!!!
>
That is the only time I censor at TOL. And, you were not censored. You
were banned. Everything you posted is still up there as you wrote it.
> I'll be quoting that back at you for sometime to come.
>
Go ahead. Like I said, you were not censored. You were banned. There's a
difference, you know. If you were censored, you would see a message in
place of your post saying, "Post deleted by moderator."
> Where is the profanity in ....
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Too difficult to use one's God-given brain to address ANY of my
> statements?
> Typical brain-dead fundamentalist in the current Fundamentalist Dark Age!
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> ?????
>
Where is the respect to your fellow human being? You demand respect for the
fact that you are a "professional educator." Yet, you refuse to show any
respect. I tried with you, Mark. You're now at the same stage my daughter
is. If you want respect from me, show me respect. I will not reward bad
behaviour with good.
>
>>Knight, the owner of the site, can and does ban whomever he
>> thinks is either disrupting the site or is disrespecting the old-timers
>> on
>> the site.
>
>
> I challenge Knight to a debate on "Censorship in the current
> Fundamentalist Dark Age" on Theology On-Line. I bet he won't let me debate
> him on Theology On-Line. He's a gutless wanker who has not replied to any
> of my letters of complaint. Typical brain-dead fundamentalist in the
> current Fundamentalist Dark Age!
>
I'll pass on the message to him, although I doubt that he will want to waste
his time on you. He, like I, doesn't see what happened to you as
censorship. He banned a disrespectful jerk.
>
> This type of banning is why I and many others have left church for good.
> You give Christianity a bad name.
>
> Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from
> religious conviction." - Blaise Pascal (1623-1662)
>
People have left church because they choose to let the actions of other
people affect them. Mark, it seems that, despite my wishes to try to
communicate with you properly, you don't want to communicate. I tried, both
here and at TOL (twice there), to engage you respectfully. You decided that
you don't want that. You want someone to shut up and listen to you; not
saying anything unless it is to agree with your mistaken concept of
education. Educating children is not a "one size fits all" job. You have
to look at the individuals being educated.
Nori
"Mark T"
>> I consider the following posts in the same thread to be more offensive
>> than any of my statements:
>>
>> docrob57 - Both I and my wife are far more qualified as teachers than, I
>> would say, ummmm . . .maybe 100% of the public school teahers out there.
>> And I believe this to be true of most homeschooling parents. *[though NO
>> homeschooler is assessed as competent to teach and EVERY public school
>> teacherr is assessed as comptetent to teach] The fact that in this day
>> and age you identify with the left suggests, however, that you should be
>> right at home in a public school environment. *[typical right wing
>> fundamentalist facist found at Theology On-Line] ......If you are at all
>> interested in homeschooling, I would suggest just taking a look at what A
>> Beka has to offer. There is a DVD "teacher" that does a lot of the work.
>> *[from the unaccredited creationist Pensacola Christian College - I
>> consider this to be child abuse]
> LOL! You get offended by a parent saying they are more qualified to teach
> their child/ren than a total stranger?
No, I am offended by an UNQUALIFIED parent claiming that they can teach
better than a QUALIFIED professional teacher. The claim is totally absurd!
> What do you find more offensive? The fact that parents are more
> qualified to teach their own children or that he recommended A Beka
> curriculum?
Neither. They are both offensive and forms of child abuse.
>> Melody - That so-called professional educator is attempting to teach 25 -
>> 40 students at a time. And teaching politically correct garbage at that.
>>
> Is it better to teach on a one-on-one basis or a group teaching situation?
I am not a "so-called" professional educator. I AM a professional educator
whereas homeschoolers are amatuer DIY experimenters on kids. I don't
"attempt to teach" I DO teach.
>> Ninevah - It doesn't take a degree in method to teach your own children I
>> use the ABeka accredited DVD curriculum. *[from the unaccredited
>> creationist Pensacola Christian College - I consider this to be child
>> abuse] Maybe 5th grade work is "brainsurgery" for you, but so far it
>> appears I can handle all the "tough" problems she has.
>>
> Remember, Mark, you came onto TOL with your comments about DIY
> brainsurgery
A valid comparison which I have also been discussing today with one of my
professional educator friends ... who agrees with the parable.
You expect me, a a professional educator, just let you give your comments
denigrating education and praising the child abuse of DIY amateur
experimentation on kids and not say anything back?
> I have taught in a Christian school.
My sympathy. I recently visited a professional educator friend whom I
helped get out of an abusive Christian school and find a job as a uni
lecturer.
>> Quoting yourself ebenz47031 from post #86
>> "The only time we censor here, at TOL, is when someone uses profanity."
>> BWHAHAHAHAHA!!!! ROTFLMAO!!!!! Bullshit!!!!
> That is the only time I censor at TOL. And, you were not censored. You
> were banned. Everything you posted is still up there as you wrote it.
Banning is a form of censorship. Get a real education - not a homeskool
one!
>> I'll be quoting that back at you for sometime to come.
>>
> Go ahead. Like I said, you were not censored. You were banned.
In our times, various ideologically dedicated groups *[such as fearful
little DIY amateur experimenters on kids - aka homeschoolers] increasingly
use censorship, coercion, or propaganda to limit access to ideas,
literature, and the arts that they consider threatening. p.74
Censorship, the twin brother of propaganda, is the tool of despots, of
ideologues, of ayatollahs, of fanatics. p.96
Franky Schaeffer "Sham Pearls For Real Swine" ( Wolgemuth & Hyatt;
Brentwood:1990) [Francis Schaeffer's son & Susan Schaeffer Macaulay's
brother]
>> Where is the profanity in ....
>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>> Too difficult to use one's God-given brain to address ANY of my
>> statements?
>> Typical brain-dead fundamentalist in the current Fundamentalist Dark Age!
>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>> ?????
>>
> Where is the respect to your fellow human being?
Fundamentalists deserve no respect from me.
>> I challenge Knight to a debate on "Censorship in the current
>> Fundamentalist Dark Age" on Theology On-Line. I bet he won't let me
>> debate him on Theology On-Line. He's a gutless wanker who has not
>> replied to any of my letters of complaint. Typical brain-dead
>> fundamentalist in the current Fundamentalist Dark Age!
>>
> I'll pass on the message to him, although I doubt that he will want to
> waste his time on you.
Knight can't debate. He bans those whom he disagrees with so that he doesn't
have to think about the consequences of his silly actions. I speak as a
professional philosopher.
>> This type of banning is why I and many others have left church for good.
>> You give Christianity a bad name.
>>
>> Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from
>> religious conviction." - Blaise Pascal (1623-1662)
>>
> People have left church because they choose to let the actions of other
> people affect them.
... such as inquisitions, stonings, crucifixions, burnings at the stake, tar
and feathering, banning, censoring, etc etc etc.
> Mark, it seems that, despite my wishes to try to communicate with you
> properly, you don't >want to communicate.
R e a d s l o w l y.
T h e a b o v e i s E n g l i s h c o m m u n i c a t i o n.
misc.education.home-school.christian FAQ (Revised 2006)
If you are a Newbie on misc.education.home-school.christian and have any
intelligence or a different opinion to the people there ...or WORSE STILL
... you are an actual PROFESSIONAL TEACHER!!(HORROR!!!) ...then the
following will be your treatment:
1 - Repeated ad hominem attacks ...called "troll" etc
2 - Character assassination .....you are always wrong ...they are always
correct ...no discussion on this matter as it is the 11th Commandment of
Home Skooling
3 - Irrational inquisition / witch hunt followed by crucifixion / stoning /
burning at the stake .........they like that "Old Time Religion"!!!
4 - Thinking and critical reflection are capital offences ...some are not
capable of doing one or the other ....some are not capable of doing
either!!!
5 - Don't ask questions ... if you ask questions then you looking for
information to discredit home skooling ...and trying to FORCE them ... to
THINK!!! ...it's being worldly!!! ...you can't be a "Trew Kristyun"!!!! ...
this is a conspiracy ... not that they are paranoid ...much ...and anyway
the medication keeps them sane ... most of the time ... perhaps ... maybe
... oh
well ... just talk about the fun playing with kids .. and acting like kids
....and how wonderful home skoooling is ... go away ... trouble maker ....oh
.... by the way ... welcome to misc.education.home-school.christian ...we
are
a friendly bunch ... believe it ...OR ELSE!!!!
FAQ answered by the NG members:
* Will I find anything of worth regarding education on this NG that I don't
already know because I attended school once ...a long time ago?
No ... not really ...what's education???? ...we only home skool ..."we don't
need no education, we don't need no thought control ...teacher, leave us
kids alone"... go away ... I'm playing with my kids!!!
* Will I have an intelligent logical rational conversation with any person
on this NG?
Maybe ... but only a very few seem capable of doing so ... you can count
them on one hand ... which is good for home skool maths! ... now bugger off
.... I'm playing with my kids!
* Is this NG plagued by Trew Kristyuns?
No ... "Trew Kristyuns" are not a plague ... just a very horrible disease
... let us show you how much we luv you ...really ... we just have to
collect the wood for the fire ... and the petrol for the fuel ... and the
rope to .... oh well ... you don't need to know about that right now
...bugger off ....I'm playing with my kids!
* Is his group friendly?
Yes, to our own kind ...unfortunately you are the Other .... an outsider ...
because of this you will be treated to our friendly "Trew Kristyun luv"
(complete with pithy proof text from the bible) ... this is because you are
inferior and the lowest of the low ... only home skoolers are able to access
the wisdom of God .... only home skoolers know everything in the universe
about education ... and only home skoolers can get their heads that far up
their arses ...so there!! ...now bugger off! ...go away! ...still got to do
more playing with my kids ...I mean more 'Trew Home Skooling Ejakashun"
..... you STILL here? ...... bugger off! ... I'm off to perform more
witchdoctory and diy brain surgery
Surgery isn't something for professionals only. Anyone can do it. It's
just carving up meat.
Us DIY surgeons don't want any government interference with our surgery.
Its our kids we are operating on and we know what's best for the little
buggers. I own my kids so I can experiment on them as I wish. I especially
like experiements using electricity, bare wires and a power socket.
I went to hospital once so I know everything about DIY brain surgery. I've
also watched a lot of soap operas about hospitals. I've read several DIY
brain surgery books and even attended several DIY brain surgery seminars.
Its very easy to do brain surgery as it comes naturally to everyone.
Everyone is born with the ability to do brain surgery because everyone can
use a knife. I use a knife every day to cut up my own food and my kid's
food. That proves that I'm qualified to do DIY brain surgery.
Scalpel? I don't need a scalpel. I've got a steak knife and its sharp
enough. If it doesn't cut through I can always use the chain saw.
Anaesthetic? That's just fancy professional doctor stuff. You don't need
it. You just hit the kid over the head with your steel reinforced KJV
bible. That knocks 'em out.
If you really know your child well you can just ask where it hurts, open up
their head, operate and stitch it back up with some cotton and a few safety
pins. It works just as good as that fancy medical professional stuff.
I don't need to assess or diagnose whether DIY brainsurgery is needed or
not. I like doing it and the kids turn out a whole lot better after I'm
finished. I just ask Junior "You got a headache, Junior?" or "Are you
thinking again?" and if Junior's head wobbles or Junior's head is a bit pale
I operate.
What's really neat is that you can use the leftovers for a family casserole
meal. The kids love it! Great big juicy brain blobs deep fried! Yummy!
Here we go!
Oops!
Made a mistake!
Better take them to a DIY brain surgery hospital.
Oops!
The DIY brain surgery hospital made a mistake!
Better send the kids to a real hospital with professional doctors who know
what they are doing.
Oops!
Too late!
The kids are dead.
Oh well ...
Time to make some more kids so I can continue my career as a DIY surgeon.
Get you Skool Suplice from Miss Poppy at "Downwind From The Homeskool"
Includes:
- Sister De Sade's Ten Commandments Ruler
- Bible Pencil Sharpener
- Jesus Walking On The Water Floaty Pen
http://www.jesus21.com/htdocs/hatemail.php
Marty Carts
> ""Mark T"" ...
>>"Nori Benz" <spiri...@nalu.net> wrote:
Fascinating thread, Nori. I guess I find it so
fascinating because I'm intrigued to know what
makes what could be a normal person behave
as Tindall does. An interesting analogy is
the electronics practice of characterizing
an unknown (linear) network by prodding it with
an impulse response. Ok, except that it really
isn't a very good analogy. It's Tindall who
prodded himself. And he's not, if I can take
the analogy theme a bit further, particularly,
uh, linear. And in truth, it's not all that
illuminating; we pretty much know how he behaves
here, which is how he behave[d|s] there, and it
doesn't give us any really new information.
(But it is fascinating anyway, no?!)
Two comments from the thread so far.
First, it's important to give the 'other side'
108% of their due. In this case, regarding the
docrob57 first sentence--I can understand how
someone would take issue with the statement.
I think it's going over the line somewhat to
suggest that one is better than *100* percent
of public school teachers "out there". (Btw
I'm in *no* way either supporting anything that
Tindall claims nor suggesting that the actions
taken by any of Tindall's victims is inappropriate.)
There was a second point, which I forgot, but
here's a substitute: Be careful if/when you invest
your happiness in the success of rational dialog
with Tindall.
Here's a(n only slightly mischevious) suggestion.
Tindall seems to have spasms of energy to harrass
us. I'd wait until the end of one of these to
post/email him. If he's going to victimize us,
we needn't accommodate his preferred schedule.
__________________________________________Marty
>>>>>Okay, Mark. I asked Knight why you were banned. He directed me to the
>>>>>thread that got you banned. If you want to know exactly what got you
>>>>>banned, e-mail me and I'll send you a link.
>>....
>>>Well, Mark, post # 22 in this thread,
>>>http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1003103#post1003103
>>>, is what got you banned, according to Knight.
>>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>Too difficult to use one's God-given brain to address ANY of my
>>statements?
>>Typical brain-dead fundamentalist in the current Fundamentalist Dark Age!
>>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>You MUST be joking!!!! The statement is FACT.
P.S. Ok, now I remember what the second point
was. But never mind.
> I didn't say I agree with him. I just pointed out the post that got you
> banned.
>>>But, if you read through this
>>>thread, http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=24815 , you
>>>will see that even though we're "Trew Krystian Fundamentalists," not one
>>>of
>>>us was rude to you in the homeschooling discussion.
[...]
"Mark T"
amateur DIY experimenter on kids wroteth:
> Fascinating thread, Nori.
I'm intrigued to know what makes what could be a normal person behave as
Farty Carts does.
> dialog (sic)
Homeskool spellun!
Last time I was on misc.education.home-school.christian Marty Carts
complained to my ISP ... which took no notice of his ranting!!!!!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Paola Addamiano- & Marty Carts
Sep 16 2003, 5:08 pm
Newsgroups: misc.education.home-school.christian
From: Paola Addamiano- & Marty Carts <alaca...@csi.com>
Subject: Marty Carts' repeated abuse continues!!!!
A...@tpg.com.au, regarding the
complaint, subject "Is this abuse of xxx's terms?"
regarding Mark T .....,
the situation has evolved. He apparently has
counter-complained to my ISP, Compuserve.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Such Trew Kristyun luv from Marty Carts!!!!
Jani
""Mark T"" <thinkaboutwh@youaredoing32876587498544> wrote in message
news:444a...@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
There were a few reasonable people there, but the overbearing attitude of
some of the others completely overshadowed them.
Jani
"Mark T"
>>>>>>> Okay, Mark. I asked Knight why you were banned. He directed me to
>>>>>>> thethread that got you banned. If you want to know exactly what got
>>>>>>> you
>>>>>>> banned, e-mail me and I'll send you a link.
>>>> ....
>>>>> Well, Mark, post # 22 in this thread,
>>>>> http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1003103#post1003103
>>> Very interesting thread ...
>>
>> But cut short. No more discussion allowed by Knight ... a medieval
>> fundamentalist wanker who owns Theology On-Line. Have you noticed how
>> many right wing zealots are on the site???? God save us from the
>> buggers!!!
>
> There were a few reasonable people there, but the overbearing attitude of
> some of the others completely overshadowed them.
Yep!
"overbearing attitude" puts it mildly!
Joan
"Jani" <ja...@dsl.pipex.com> wrote in message
news:rd2dnQpvqoV4sdLZ...@pipex.net...
Oh? ... and Mark isn't overbearing?
Joan
>
>
Snapper (yec)
> "Mark T"wrote in message
>> "Jani" <ja...@dsl.pipex.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Very interesting thread ...
>>
>> But cut short. No more discussion allowed by Knight ... a medieval
>
> There were a few reasonable people there, but the overbearing attitude of
> some of the others completely overshadowed them.
::chuckle::
Yeah, can't imagine why INAT lost the right to spew his gunk in that place.
It's not like his arguments are poor, his language skills next to
no-existent, his attitude anti-Christian or that he uses swearing to get
peoples attention.
"Mark T"
<davidv...@optusnet.com.au> wroteth:
> no-existent (sic), peoples (sic) attention.
...
> Something's (sic) look stupid to me, tho (sic) I don't normally pass that
> opinion on to them.
....
> all other's (sic) to die at the stake.
...
> Tho (sic) , if it works ......
An example of a homeskoola who is a better teacher than a professional
educator ... NOT!!!!
This illiterate creationist moron "teechuz homeskool spellun"!
INAD is one of our resident amateur DIY homeskool experimenters on kiddies.
Such people think professional educators are trolls.
Btw, INAD means "I'm Not A Dickhead", something David Varidel tends to claim
in direct opposition to the facts!
> Ozzie (sic)
Aussie for ignorant weird homeskoola Snapper who thinks Aussie is spelt
"Ozzie".
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From http://www.aussieslang.com/
Australia Slang, Aussie Slang, or Strine as it is sometimes called, is a
reflection of the harsh Australian land, and the no-nonsense "lets get on
with it" attitude of the Australian people.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From http://www.koalanet.com.au/australian-slang.html
Aussie (pron. Ozzie) : Australian
Aussie salute : brushing away flies with the hand
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From http://www.australianexplorer.com/slang/people.htm
Aussie : Australian
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
SILLY LITTLE INAD!!!!!!
###############################################################
> would be happy to touch base with any Melbourne Australia referee's he
> provides.
What an insufferable little prick!!!!!
Why should anyone need a referee on a public newsgroup???????????
You people are REALLY WEIRD!!!!!!!!
#################################################################
"Mark T"
> Oh?
***********************************************************
'As rare as a Fundamentalist who loves her enemy.
#################################################
... quoting from James Barr's book "Fundamentalism" on the three
distinguishing features of the Fundamentalist '... an assurance that those
who do not share their religious viewpoint are not really true Christians at
all.' - Peter Cameron "Heretic" (Doubleday; Sydney: 1994) p. 178
#################################################
lynx
>
>I am not a "so-called" professional educator. I AM a professional educator
>whereas homeschoolers are amatuer DIY experimenters on kids. I don't
>"attempt to teach" I DO teach.
>
>
If the measure of your postings is the measure of your teaching, then
god help your students.
--
rgds,
Pete
~~~~~
'Don't hassle me. Others do it much better'
http://saveaustralia.vze.com
"Mark T"
...whatever ...
If the measure of your postings is the measure of your IQ then God help you.
lynx
>"lynx" <no...@nothere.com> wrote:
>
>....whatever ...
>
>If the measure of your postings is the measure of your IQ then God help you.
>
>
I'm happy for anyone to judge my posts by their own standards and
values. I'm sure some find some merit in them. I'm sure some ppl even
find some value in yours.
--
rgds,
Pete
~~~~~
'IBM-PC: Something you spend more time trying to fix than actually using'
http://saveaustralia.vze.com
* irenic *
"lynx" <no...@nothere.com> wrote in message
news:9oT3g.16716$vy1....@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> "Mark T" wrote:
>>"lynx" <no...@nothere.com> wrote:
>>
>>....whatever ...
>>
>>If the measure of your postings is the measure of your IQ then God help
>>you.
> I'm happy for anyone to judge my posts by their own standards and values.
> I'm sure some find some merit in them.
Yep!
> I'm sure some ppl even find some value in yours.
Yep!
I can't speak for Ninure but what I hear her say is that although she is
with Mark on the more liberal end of the spectrum about some matters (eg.
social justice issues), she finds a discrepancy between Mark's distaste of
fundamentalists' unloving attitudes, and his own apparent lack of love... So
there's 'cognitive dissonance' operating here...
'Lynx's problems are (were?) with Mark's put-downs when he tried to ask
serious questions, or defend 'fundamentalist stupidities'... which evoked
tit-for-tat responses.
Mark - I like him, his humour, his openness to new understandings of
this'nthat, but, with lynx and Ninure I don't like his attitude - and
self-syling as a modern satirist is no excuse for that,,,
As for Athanasius... well I like him too, but I'd like him to tell us the
cut-off point time-wise when 'Christian truth' ceased to be taught by
Christian scholars... 'The Lord has yet more light and truth to break forth
from his holy Word...' or is that not true any more?
I'm back... Hi everyone...
--
Shalom! Rowland Croucher
"If only it were so simple! If only there were evil people somewhere
insidiously committing evil deeds and it were necessary to separate them
from the rest of us and destroy them. But the line dividing good and evil
cuts through the heart of every human being. And who is willing to destroy
a piece of his own heart?" Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
http://jmm.aaa.net.au/ - 17,000 articles; 4000 jokes/funnies
Athanasius
wrote:
>As for Athanasius... well I like him too, but I'd like him to tell us the
>cut-off point time-wise when 'Christian truth' ceased to be taught by
>Christian scholars...
Christian scholars still to today teach "Christian truth". Here is a
link to one of them:
http://www.coptnet.com/Pope.htm
especially note this one:
http://www.coptnet.com/Pope-Books/ordofwom/index.htm
and this one:
http://www.coptnet.com/Pope-Books/priesthood/index.htm
> 'The Lord has yet more light and truth to break forth
>from his holy Word...' or is that not true any more?
What verse of the Bible is that? :)
Actually, spiritual knowledge and depth has reduced in the West
remarkedly. I guestimate that most western students of theology are
running at about 10-30 per cent and that from outside the Church's
walls.
Ancient Christians seemed to know far more even of the philosophies
than most scholars so caled today.
Also there are no true theologians who are also not men of prayer.
There is some offerings for you to ponder upon Rowland.
let me know a short written response to the second links book if you
get a chance or feel led. :)
Peace and grace.
Athanasius, dcn_ath...@REMOVEyahoo.com.au
http://www.ourchurch.com/member/a/Aus_Orthodox/
If the world is against Athanasius then Athanasius is against the world.St Athanasius
"Mark T"
> Mark - I like him, his humour, his openness to new understandings of
> this'nthat
I wuv you too. ;-)
--
"Fundamentalism is demonic, and can only be met with the sword, or at least
with a very vitriolic pen." - Peter Cameron, "Fundamentalism and Freedom"
(Doubleday; Sydney: 1995.) p.3
* irenic *
"Athanasius" <dcn_ath...@REMOVEyahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:65h052d74olska1pf...@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 27 Apr 2006 13:33:07 +1000, "* irenic *" <see...@website.com>
> wrote:
>
>>As for Athanasius... well I like him too, but I'd like him to tell us the
>>cut-off point time-wise when 'Christian truth' ceased to be taught by
>>Christian scholars...
>
> Christian scholars still to today teach "Christian truth". Here is a
> link to one of them:
>
> http://www.coptnet.com/Pope.htm
>
> especially note this one:
>
> http://www.coptnet.com/Pope-Books/ordofwom/index.htm
>
> and this one:
>
> http://www.coptnet.com/Pope-Books/priesthood/index.htm
>> 'The Lord has yet more light and truth to break forth
>>from his holy Word...' or is that not true any more?
>
> What verse of the Bible is that? :)
Same as 'God helps those who help themselves' (I think it's 75% of Americans
who believe that's in the Bible)...
I'll look at these sites when my grandchildren give me a little more
space...
--
Shalom! Rowland Croucher
"If only it were so simple! If only there were evil people somewhere
insidiously committing evil deeds and it were necessary to separate them
from the rest of us and destroy them. But the line dividing good and evil
cuts through the heart of every human being. And who is willing to destroy
a piece of his own heart?" Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
http://jmm.aaa.net.au/ - 17,000 articles; 4000 jokes/funnies
> Actually, spiritual knowledge and depth has reduced in the West
lynx
>"lynx" <no...@nothere.com> wrote in message
>news:9oT3g.16716$vy1....@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>
>
>>"Mark T" wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"lynx" <no...@nothere.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>....whatever ...
>>>
>>>If the measure of your postings is the measure of your IQ then God help
>>>you.
>>>
>>>
>>I'm happy for anyone to judge my posts by their own standards and values.
>>I'm sure some find some merit in them.
>>
>>
>
>Yep!
>
>
>
>>I'm sure some ppl even find some value in yours.
>>
>>
>
>Yep!
>
>I can't speak for Ninure but what I hear her say is that although she is
>with Mark on the more liberal end of the spectrum about some matters (eg.
>social justice issues), she finds a discrepancy between Mark's distaste of
>fundamentalists' unloving attitudes, and his own apparent lack of love... So
>there's 'cognitive dissonance' operating here...
>
>
'Cognitive dissonance'?? Call a spade a spade! It's just plain old
fashioned hypocrisy. And interesting that you're willing to categorize
fundamentalists as 'unloving' (I haven't found that to be the case), but
Marks venom is just an 'apparent lack of love'.
>'Lynx's problems are (were?) with Mark's put-downs when he tried to ask
>serious questions, or defend 'fundamentalist stupidities'... which evoked
>tit-for-tat responses.
>
>Mark - I like him,
>
I don't. He's an arrogant know-it-all. (and a few other things as well)
> his humour, his openness to new understandings of
>this'nthat, but, with lynx and Ninure I don't like his attitude - and
>self-syling as a modern satirist is no excuse for that,,,
>
>As for Athanasius... well I like him too, but I'd like him to tell us the
>cut-off point time-wise when 'Christian truth' ceased to be taught by
>Christian scholars... 'The Lord has yet more light and truth to break forth
>from his holy Word...' or is that not true any more?
>
>I'm back...
>
Is that a good thing.. ? :)
> Hi everyone...
>
>
--
rgds,
Pete
~~~~~
'I am NOT suffering from insanity! It's really quite painless'
http://saveaustralia.vze.com
"Mark T"
> Call a spade a spade!
OK. You're a dickhead!
Dale Henderson
For the curious.
I ended up using a few strategies to present this. First I introduced
the trick that any repeating set of digits is that set of digits over
an equal number of nines. For example .333333....=3/9,
.27272727....=27/99, .142857142857142857....=142857/999999, etc. I
then applied this to .999... which gives 9/9=1. Which got a few
grumbles. I then talked about geometric series and argued that way.
I kept getting arguments along the lines that .9999... is "getting
closer to 1" but is not 1. But since .999... is constant it doesn't
"move" and can't "get closer" to anyghing.
But what got the most complaints was when I looked at this decimal
.124.... where each digit is twice the previous digit. This is the
geometric series 1/10+2/100+4/1000+...=1/10 sum(n=0) to
(infinity)2^n/10^n which works out to 1/8. If you keep doubling the
digits and "carrying" appropriately you get .12499999... of course
1/8=.125. A couple of people argued that the calculator giving .125
for 1/8 was round of error.
Yesterday my classes where given a survey relating to this subject. Of
the ones I looked at, only one student answered the questions
correctly.
The last question asked if there was a number between .999... and
1. (Since if they are distinct real numbers there must be). The most
common answer was "No. Because .999... is as close as you can get to
1". It makes me curious to know what they'd think of (1+x)/2 where
x=.999...
Anyway, I know this is increasingly off topic (at least it involves
education) but I thought some of you would appreciate knowing what
happened with this.
"Mark T"
> I kept getting arguments .... it doesn't
> "move" and can't "get closer" to anyghing. (sic)
.......
> You went though all that work to make an inflamatory (sic) post and forgot
> to mention "Socialization". Tsk. Tsk. Tsk.
>
> By the way, you ended a sentance (sic) with a preposition and forgot a
> question mark.
You went though all that work to make a reply and used "homeskool spellun"!
inflamatory (sic) = inflammatory
sentance (sic) = sentence
anyghing (sic) = anything
An example of why parents are much more qualified to teach their kids than
any professional educator .................................................
NOT!
What if the homeschooling parent has other deficiencies apart from
spelling?????
God save me from these moronic homeskoolas!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
APPLICATION TO JOIN misc.education.home-school.christian
Amended 2006
*Mandatory for all Newbies
Personal Information
[_] Mr.
[_] Mrs.
[_] Ms.
[_] Miss
[_] Troll Namer
[_] Crusader
[_] Infidel Slayer
[_] Winnie The Pooh Fan
[_] Paranoid Sociopath (with gun fetish)
[_] Creationist
First Name: ___________________________
Last Name: __________________________
Estimated age: ____
How many dozen kids do you homeskool?: ____
Do you own a kitchen table to homeskool at? ___
Can you read and rite (sort of)? ______________
1. Who can vouch that you really are a Trew Homeskoola?
[_] Trailer park manager
[_] Parole Officer
[_] Local drug dealer
[_] Gun store owner
[_] Trew Kristyun Pasta
[_] Fellow Trew Homeskoola
[_] Napoleon
[_] My Mom
[_] Answers In Genesis
[_] A Beka books from unaccredited Pensacola Christian College
2. How did you find out about misc.education.home-school.christian?
[_] I'm perfick and I know everything coz I'm a Trew Homeskoola
[_] The Homeskool Fairy told me about it
[_] None of your business, troll!
[_] Answers In Genesis
[_] A Beka books from unaccredited Pensacola Christian College
3. Are you able to shout "Troll!" with every post you send?
[_] Yes
[_] No
[_] Carnt spel trol as i em homeskooled
4. If you are a Trew Homeskool how was your homeskool acquired?:
[_] Cracker Jack / Cereal Box
[_] Extortion
[_] Made it myself from human waste
[_] Found it on the kitchen table
[_] Fell off the back of a truck
[_] A Beka books from unaccredited Pensacola Christian College
[_] Answers in Genesis
5. What made you decide on joining misc.education.home-school.christian?
(Check all that apply):
[_] Ratbaggery
[_] Chance to flame professional educators
[_] Didn't take my medication
[_] I was drunk at the time
[_] I am a member of the Fundamentalist Dark Age
[_] Dunno
[_] Meaningless whim
[_] Winnie The Pooh Fetish
[_] I like to gossip
[_] I like to repeat "Troll!" ad nauseum
[_] I heard a command to join even though I was wearing my Tin Foil Beanie
[_] I like playing with me kids ... and dead things ... and poking 'em with
a stick
6. Please check the subjects you are willing/capable to homeskool in
[_] Illegal drug industry
[_] Hanging by the neck
[_] Gang member/leader
[_] Burning crosses / churches and homes
[_] Phone scamming
[_] Stoning with real stones
[_] E-Mail scamming
[_] Crucifixion
[_] Home invasion ring member/leader
[_] Auto theft
[_] Welfare scamming
[_] Terrorism
[_] Convenience store clerk
[_] Tar and feathering
[_] Homeskool
[_] Playing with guns (Kindergaten to beginning of High School only)
[_] Creationism as science
[_] Phrenology, blood letting, astrology, tarot card reading, etc etc etc as
science
7. How would you describe yourself and your beliefs? (Check all that apply):
[_] Religious fanatic
[_] Funnymentalist
[_] Universal Hatemonger
[_] Anti-educator
[_] Trew Homeskoola
[_] UFOlogist
[_] Paranoid Psychotic with gun fetish
[_] Creationist ratbag
8. What activities do you enjoy participating in on a regular basis?:
[_] Recreational drug use
[_] Religious persecutions
[_] Rape/murder/mayhem
[_] Crucifixion and stoning
[_] Occassional tar and feathering
[_] Intimidation
[_] Singing Ren & Stimpy's "Happy Happy Joy Joy" song
Thank you for taking the time to fill out your Application to join
misc.education.home-school.christian.
Send your completed application to Seckrateary Farty Carts c/o
misc.education.home-school.christian or <p.addami...@att.net>
Please enjoy the little that your new newsgroup has to offer and don't
hesitate to call people Trolls if they have a different opinion to yourself.
Remember, you don't have to change - you're a Trew Homeskooler!
Jon Houts
> You went though all that work to make a reply and used "homeskool spellun"!
>
> inflamatory (sic) = inflammatory
> sentance (sic) = sentence
> anyghing (sic) = anything
Are you under the impression that professional educators are good
spellers?
but,but...
Jon