Gold Winger

"Science (from the Latin scientia, meaning "knowledge" or "knowing") is the effort to discover, and increase human understanding of how the physical world works. Through controlled methods, scientists use observable physical evidence of natural phenomena to collect data, and analyze this information to explain what and how things work. " Sounds like drawing conclusions based on observations of phenomena.

Mark, it is these kinds of antics that got you suspended from the forums once before. It isn't funny. FScouter (This message has been edited by a staff member.)

, it was the orthodoxy of then which is far different from the orthodoxy of now. At one time, the idea that there four elements of earth, air, fire and water was considered science and to claim that substances were made up of of unseeable particles was heresy. You're the one who seems to miss the idea that science changes continually. (I'm sure that will be moderated) (This message has been edited by a staff member.)

(This message has been edited by a staff member.)

If any part of a pitched ball passes through the imaginary box which defines the "strike zone" while in flight, it is a strike. A common foul is illegal contact which hinders the normal offensive or defensive actions of an opposing player. Technical fouls, intentional fouls and flagrant fouls are different beasts. Pretty simple, eh? Compared to the foul in basketball, a strike is easy. Try explaining to a new coach why a bump at the mid court line isn't a foul but a similar bump three feet from the basket is a foul. Are they called the same by every ump or ref? Not hardly, it varies from league to league and conference to conference. Should they be called the same all over the place? Sure but we're human and the expectations are different in different places. Should we strive for consistency within our expectations? Sure but as officials we are held to a different standard than players or coaches. As an official, I was expected to be right 100% of the time and even a 1% drop was cause for criticism. However, if a baseball player bats .300 he's doing pretty good. Differing standards for different groups. A brave Marine might quail at the idea of running into a burning building and a brave firefighter may well not want to charge down a street under fire.

NO IT ISN'T. It is an historical document sent back from the future.

Lem, long ago I was getting ready for a basketball game at a "Friends" school, you know, like the one that Chelsea went to. The scorekeeper, a student said to me, "I'm Becky, what's your name." To which I responded, "I'm Mr. Winger." She said, "What's your first name? At this school we call all the adults by their first names." I said, "My first name for you is Ref. You can call me Ref or Mr. Winger." Becky was a bit miffed. The AD was close by and told me that she was a bit surprised by the custom when she came to the school but it worked there. The kids were all respectful, polite and helpful. I'm not in favor of kids calling adults by their given names or even nicknames. Call me old fashioned but that is the way that I am. If if works for others, great but don't expect me to go along.

"Not that I'm all that interested in the squabble between you and Merlyn, but you could have used the 4 minute mile case." That's true, they once believed that the 4 minute mile would be run or that the sound barrier could safely be broken or that the atom could be sub-divided. However, back to Lardner, he sure was a crackpot and not at all a member of the science orthodoxy. A lecturer at the University College of London and was granted medals and prizes for his work in logic, physics and math. Not quite the Einstein of his day but close. As for the insults, I do them because they are fun.

you claim that it was just "one man" and now you can't back that up because "it don't make no sense." [personal affront] FScouter (This message has been edited by a staff member.)

I'm really wondering because this "urban legend" was reported in one of my high school text books as an example of how "scientific belief" changes. Horses are really irrlevant since the belief was that air would be sucked out of the train carriages causing the suffocation. [personal affront] FScouter (This message has been edited by a staff member.)

[personal affront], FScouter (This message has been edited by a staff member.)

Ahhhhh (heavy sigh), BSA patches are supposed to be small enough to fit on the shirt pocket but sometimes folks just forget about that. If you really want to wear the patches on your jacket, go ahead, the uniform police have no arrest authority. However, you can always get a nice red wool blanket and make it into a poncho and decorate it with your patches. Wear it when sitting around a campfire and I'm sure that it will stimulate some conversations.

Yep, that's one of the names for it. BP called it a cowboy hat. The army apparently adopted the dimpled top during the Spanish American war because the creased crown hat tended to hold water in a rain storm. Some call it a "Montana peak hat," that name came about after WW I. The Marines call it a "field hat." The Stetson of the Mounties as well as the British Scout hats differ from the American ones by having their dimples squarely at the front and sides

To be by the book, there are only a few patches that are authorized to be worn on the red jacket. They're buried in the insignia guide but basically you can wear a big one on the back, a program insignia on the left front, PTC on the right front, Philmont Bull or the Loon, and maybe a couple more. Just about any patch that you want to wear on the right pocket of the shirt may be worn there. I use the patch holders and switch that patch out every time I put the shirt on. "unless the commissioner paid for the uniform, he had no right to say what was and wasn't wrong with it." Not quite right. One of the duties of the Commissioner Corps is to do uniform inspections. Also, you son may have owned the shirt but he doesn't own the patches. Wazzat, you say? "All badges and insignia shall remain the propertyof the Boy Scouts of America subject to recall for cause by the Corporation or its duly authorized representative."

" I will agree with the literature being more plentiful and better written, training however still had a long way to go." And then it hit its zenith and started a rapid slide back down to the nadir.(This message has been edited by Gold Winger)