The perpetual calendar
in [Physics]
|
Prev: simple question power, resistance, current, etc
Next: OBSERVATIONS: Einstein's gravitational redshift measured with unprecedented precision
From: Brian M. Scott on 28 Feb 2010 18:32 On Sun, 28 Feb 2010 21:39:57 +1300, PaulJK <paul.kriha(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote in <news:hmda2a$uic$1(a)news.eternal-september.org> in sci.math,sci.physics,sci.astro,sci.lang,alt.usage.english: [...] > Objects with negative weight do not need escape velocity > to escape to space. They can ascend slowly with > impressive majestic grace. Shopping baskets have a hard time achieving impressive majestic grace, even when filled with negative watermelons. Brian
From: Peter T. Daniels on 28 Feb 2010 18:36 On Feb 28, 5:22 pm, Hatunen <hatu...(a)cox.net> wrote: > On Sat, 27 Feb 2010 06:57:41 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels" > > <gramma...(a)verizon.net> wrote: > >There's no such thing as "a Catechism." When I was little, the few > >Catholics I knew had to memorize something called "the Baltimore > >Catechism," which had no parallel whatsoever in either my Presbyterian > >church or my Episcopal school. > > The term may not have been explicitly used, but seehttp://www.pcusa.org/catech/studycat.htmandhttp://anglicansonline.org/basics/catechism.html > > >The Baltimore Catechism, however, was > >rendered obsolete by Vatican II. I don't know what "a Catechism" would > >be, fifty years later. > > Hm. See http://www.vatican.va/archive/catechism/ccc_toc.htm So can you find someplace in that document where the text of the Apostles' Creed is given? > Google reveals many, many more pointers to - catholic catechism - And would one of them be the "a Catechism" our conservative Catholic atheist referred to?
From: Hatunen on 28 Feb 2010 18:38 On Sun, 28 Feb 2010 18:14:54 -0500, "Brian M. Scott" <b.scott(a)csuohio.edu> wrote: >On Sun, 28 Feb 2010 15:59:23 -0700, Hatunen ><hatunen(a)cox.net> wrote in ><news:68tlo51lbskir5ingugspogfsu33pcguo9(a)4ax.com> in >sci.math,sci.physics,sci.astro,sci.lang,alt.usage.english: > >> On Sat, 27 Feb 2010 18:57:10 -0500, "Brian M. Scott" >> <b.scott(a)csuohio.edu> wrote: > >[...] > >>>That may be another point of contention: pleasantly cool >>>means about 25�, and really good weather starts at about >>>30�. And 5:30 or 6:15 is a nice time to go to bed. > >> I do hope you mean celsius degrees. > >I do indeed; Rob's posting from Oz. When mentioning temperatures I always try to remember to use "C" or "F". -- ************* DAVE HATUNEN (hatunen(a)cox.net) ************* * Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow * * My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
From: Hatunen on 28 Feb 2010 18:41 On Sun, 28 Feb 2010 15:36:41 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim(a)verizon.net> wrote: >On Feb 28, 5:22�pm, Hatunen <hatu...(a)cox.net> wrote: >> On Sat, 27 Feb 2010 06:57:41 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels" >> >> <gramma...(a)verizon.net> wrote: >> >There's no such thing as "a Catechism." When I was little, the few >> >Catholics I knew had to memorize something called "the Baltimore >> >Catechism," which had no parallel whatsoever in either my Presbyterian >> >church or my Episcopal school. >> >> The term may not have been explicitly used, but seehttp://www.pcusa.org/catech/studycat.htmandhttp://anglicansonline.org/basics/catechism.html >> >> >The Baltimore Catechism, however, was >> >rendered obsolete by Vatican II. I don't know what "a Catechism" would >> >be, fifty years later. >> >> Hm. See �http://www.vatican.va/archive/catechism/ccc_toc.htm > >So can you find someplace in that document where the text of the >Apostles' Creed is given? What does that have to do with your statement, 'There's no such thing as "a Catechism."'? >> Google reveals many, many more pointers to - catholic catechism - > >And would one of them be the "a Catechism" our conservative Catholic >atheist referred to? 'There's no such thing as "a Catechism."' Then what are all those pointers pointing to? -- ************* DAVE HATUNEN (hatunen(a)cox.net) ************* * Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow * * My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
From: Peter T. Daniels on 28 Feb 2010 18:44
On Feb 28, 6:29 pm, Hatunen <hatu...(a)cox.net> wrote: > On Sun, 28 Feb 2010 11:09:57 -0800, David Harmon > > <sou...(a)netcom.com> wrote: > >On Wed, 24 Feb 2010 09:56:25 -0500 in alt.usage.english, tony cooper > ><tony_cooper...(a)earthlink.net> wrote, > >>As far as I can tell, the only employers that are closed on > >>President's Day are government offices, schools, and banks. To the > > >There is no such holiday as "President's Day" to US government offices. > >http://www.opm.gov/Operating_Status_Schedules/fedhol/2010.asp > > Interesting. I had assumed there was. And I see that there is one > in some states. Certainly businesses think there is one in their > sales advertisements. The Post Office was closed for Presidents' Day in 2010. |