WordWolf

Darn those pesky discussions on topic. How dare they get in the way of an agenda, like derails with non-sequiturs like suburbia and charismatic practices?

"With most life forms I feel something. I may not be able to interpret or understand it, but I feel something, if only a presence. With him -- nothing. Something about this concerns me. I don't know what, I can't point out a reason... yet." "Stay concerned. Please! The safety of the Enterprise may be entrusted to those two!" "I'm sure it was fascinating, Wesley, and I look forward to hearing about it. But not right now!" "How basic shall I be?" "I leave that to you."

For me, just "the Wolf Man", with Lon Chaney Jr. Big surprise, eh?

Groucho, IF you somehow had found yourself in that position- having cared so little about others that you molested and raped some women, then heard one of them was in extreme emotional distress immediately following that, (can it POSSIBLY be related to what you did? Can't be-Oldies insists it can't. Then again, it's not like Oldies is a mental health professional or has any background of that type...) then you did nothing, and THEN she committed suicide, it would be expected that this would shock you into a sense of reality- of CONSEQUENCES of actions, of CAUSE and EFFECT. Harming others doesn't just go away- they remain HARMED, and some won't be able to recover without help. This would probably shock you enough to awaken your conscience, to stop you from molesting and raping the next time you wanted to. In this case, it's like cows looking at a passing train. Oh, she committed suicide? I hope that won't cause any trouble FOR ME, I hope this won't reflect on MY REPUTATION. And worse..... "He put extreme emotional distress on her, and she committed suicide shortly thereafter? It must have had nothing to do with what he did- she bears 100% of the responsiblity of the act, and he is BLAMELESS." If this is what a "Christian" can think and say, I can see why there's plenty of people with conscience and compassion who avoid or leave Christianity. This is a stain on Christianity.

"Something about this concerns me. I don't know what, I can't point out a reason... yet." "Stay concerned. Please! The safety of the Enterprise may be entrusted to those two!" "I'm sure it was fascinating, Wesley, and I look forward to hearing about it. But not right now!"

I just followed the quote backward. I recognized Lwaxana talking to Worf. She was talking about a DIFFERENT race of telepaths. That really cut the number of possible episodes down, although I didn't have it down to exactly one. That's why I asked if this was it-this was my best guess.

Since I'm sure a few people missed it, Oakspear was kicked out SPECIFICALLY for the "crime" of posting on the GSC.

Is this the one where Luwaxana Troi needs therapy because she's supressed a rather dark incident from before Deanna was born, and passes out when a child lingers at the edge of a pond?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_memory Virtual memory is a computer system technique which gives an application program the impression that it has contiguous working memory, while in fact may be physically fragmented and may even overflow on to disk storage. Systems that use this technique make programming of large applications easier and use real physical memory (e.g. RAM) more efficiently than those without virtual memory. Note that "virtual memory" is not just "using disk space to extend physical memory size". Extending memory is a normal consequence of using virtual memory techniques, but can be done by other means such as overlays or swapping programs and their data completely out to disk while they are inactive. The definition of "virtual memory" is based on tricking programs into thinking they are using large blocks of contiguous addresses. All modern general-purpose computer operating systems use virtual memory techniques for ordinary applications, such as word processors, spreadsheets, multimedia players, accounting, etc. Few older operating systems, such as DOS of the 1980s, or those for the mainframes of the 1960s, had virtual memory functionality - notable exceptions being the Atlas and B5000. Embedded systems and other special-purpose computer systems which require very fast, very consistent response time do not generally use virtual memory. ============= ============= http://computer.howstuffworks.com/question684.htm What is "virtual memory"? Virtual memory is a common part of most operating systems on desktop computers. It has become so common because it provides a big benefit for users at a very low cost. Most computers today have something like 64 or 128 megabytes of RAM (random-access memory) available for use by the CPU (central processing unit). Often, that amount of RAM is not enough to run all of the programs that most users expect to run at once. For example, if you load the Windows operating system, an e-mail program, a Web browser and word processor into RAM simultaneously, 64 megabytes is not enough to hold it all. If there were no such thing as virtual memory, your computer would have to say, "Sorry, you cannot load any more applications. Please close an application to load a new one." With virtual memory, the computer can look for areas of RAM that have not been used recently and copy them onto the hard disk. This frees up space in RAM to load the new application. Because it does this automatically, you don't even know it is happening, and it makes your computer feel like is has unlimited RAM space even though it has only 32 megabytes installed. Because hard-disk space is so much cheaper than RAM chips, virtual memory also provides a nice economic benefit. The area of the hard disk that stores the RAM image is called a page file. It holds pages of RAM on the hard disk, and the operating system moves data back and forth between the page file and RAM. (On a Windows machine, page files have a .SWP extension.) Of course, the read/write speed of a hard drive is much slower than RAM, and the technology of a hard drive is not geared toward accessing small pieces of data at a time. If your system has to rely too heavily on virtual memory, you will notice a significant performance drop. The key is to have enough RAM to handle everything you tend to work on simultaneously. Then, the only time you "feel" the slowness of virtual memory is in the slight pause that occurs when you change tasks. When you have enough RAM for your needs, virtual memory works beautifully. When you don't, the operating system has to constantly swap information back and forth between RAM and the hard disk. This is called thrashing, and it can make your computer feel incredibly slow. ================== ================== [Here's the technical one.] http://www.webopedia.com/TERM/v/virtual_memory.html (n.) An imaginary memory area supported by some operating systems (for example, Windows but not DOS) in conjunction with the hardware. You can think of virtual memory as an alternate set of memory addresses. Programs use these virtual addresses rather than real addresses to store instructions and data. When the program is actually executed, the virtual addresses are converted into real memory addresses. The purpose of virtual memory is to enlarge the address space, the set of addresses a program can utilize. For example, virtual memory might contain twice as many addresses as main memory. A program using all of virtual memory, therefore, would not be able to fit in main memory all at once. Nevertheless, the computer could execute such a program by copying into main memory those portions of the program needed at any given point during execution. To facilitate copying virtual memory into real memory, the operating system divides virtual memory into pages, each of which contains a fixed number of addresses. Each page is stored on a disk until it is needed. When the page is needed, the operating system copies it from disk to main memory, translating the virtual addresses into real addresses. The process of translating virtual addresses into real addresses is called mapping. The copying of virtual pages from disk to main memory is known as paging or swapping.

You know, taking a break from running- maybe a shorter, less exerting walk if you can't stop running- might be in order until your doctor's determined EXACTLY what happened. It could be one of MANY things. Some of them don't give you warnings, and that may have been your LAST warning. As George Carlin said about his Dad's heart problems, his Dad's FIRST sign that he had heart trouble was a trip to the cemetery. Let's not let that be your NEXT sign of trouble.

But your usage of the word "worship" is CONSISTENT with how twi used with some verses. Matthew 18:25-27 (King James Version) 25But forasmuch as he had not to pay, his lord commanded him to be sold, and his wife, and children, and all that he had, and payment to be made. 26The servant therefore fell down, and worshipped him, saying, Lord, have patience with me, and I will pay thee all. 27Then the lord of that servant was moved with compassion, and loosed him, and forgave him the debt. Surely, if he was reading Matthew 18, he wouldn't conclude the servant was an idolator and was idolizing his lord....

About anything that will divert the thread, of course! The post that, apparently, was so offensive that it needed to be diverged from, was this one:

What, no blah-blah-blah? And how can you respect Shatner after that line?

I've found that "wikiquote" comes in handy sometimes, as well. If you don't know how to find quotes, don't have an episode taped, and can't remember any, here's how you look them up online. Go to a search engine, like Google http://www.google.com In the searchbar, type, in quotes, the name of the show, and the word "quotes". The first 2 pages of results SHOULD give you plenty of quotes. USUALLY that works. For example, "House" "quotes" If you're not getting quotes from the show (like, your getting price-quotes on houses) get more specific. "House" "quotes" "television" You can throw in the name of a character as well.

Oh, and the continued and consisted DISTORTING of the posts of other people aren't "personal"? Here's one example: "These continued accusations of idolatry by you and others" Please link to the post where T-Bone just accused you of idolatry. These continued DISTORTIONS and personal attacks- while claiming your hands are clean- THOSE are getting old.

Since the idea is that we can name it from just the opening line, it should be a well-known song, from some timeframe or another. With lyrics, of course, or there's nothing to post. :) The "Name that tune" thread has an accepted rule that the songs should have received airplay at some point. Here, that's pretty much assumed, since the song needed airplay to be well-known...

Apparently, just post and go. We're not keeping score, so keeping the thread "in play" and "no cheating" are really more important than anything else.

*wild guess* "the Quick and the Dead"?

It has been pointed out that vp plagiarized most of the pfal class, from a variety of sources, in a melange that suited his purposes. That's DIFFERENT than WD's rather MISrepresentative claim here. He's changed it from what it was- a class where SOME accurate information (probably) existed, alongside some INaccurate information (like the LAW of Believing, and all the women belonging to the King TECHNICALLY) and alongside some information that was accurate when it was written, but then adulterated by being taken out of its original context, and put through vpw's filter. Thus, some of it might be fantastically accurate, some of it might be disgustingly egregious error. And both might exist in the same sentence. That's hardly the same as "the first 3 sessions are directly 3 chapters from Bullinger, the next 3 sessions are directly Leonard..." And NOBODY has claimed the plagiarism- which some people have spent a few YEARS DELIBERATELY distorting the meaning of- was WORD FOR WORD. The only time that claim comes up is when WD or one of a few other people have invented it to shoot it down and say that since THEIR DISTORTION of plagiarism is false, that the REAL plagiarism is false also. That's what we have here AGAIN. How ridiculous indeed. Nobody's made that claim-but supposedly, that's what those who disagree with WD say. I've never seen them post, but these people must be real idiots. If they ever post on the GSC, someone should let me know so I can read them.

Supposing there are truths there to begin with. However, when one is taking a class on the Bible, when one is getting advice from someone claiming to be godly and representing God, one normally takes for granted that the speaker or teacher is speaking from their best understanding of truth-and that truth is NOT adulterated by the AGENDA of the person. In the case of vpw, that came out in little ways as well as big ones. Men of God seemed to not get blamed for adultery whenever it came up- or be wrong for sexual impropriety. (David was ONLY at fault for killing Uriah- but taking his wife and having sex with her was fine, "TECHNICALLY." David and his cabinet had procured a young woman for David's bed, to be in while he was in it. vpw referred to the woman as a "sex fiend"- but the woman was the last person in the chain- why were David and the cabinet not "sex fiends"?) The sins of the teacher-if the teacher is not striving earnestly against sin- CAN and DOES ADULTERATE the truths in the teaching. When one is learning a truth ONE minute and a falsehood the NEXT minute and believing both, the truth isn't "negated" but it is affected by adulterating it with lies. And that's just in the classroom, or at the pulpit. In PRIVATE, when one is hearing advice, requested or non, the speaker's AGENDA becomes a bigger deal. What truth of God's was being communicated when lcm was being told that he HAD TO have sex with women other than his wife if he was going to be an effective man of God? What truth of God's was being communicated when the Corps sat through a video of human-animal pornography at vpw's order? What truth of God is being communicated when vpw was telling women their job and blessing was to service him sexually, or to service other men of God sexually? We all have sins. Many or most of us strive against them. However, people with AGENDAS, especially those in positions of authority who have AGENDAS, put others in harm's way, or just plain communicate falsehoods to them, to advance their AGENDAS. ALMOST everybody can see that one easily. Of course, there's going to be those who will skip my post, maybe grab one sentence, and try to make it sound like my original post didn't really address the topic or any issue, or change the subject. Tiresome, but for some, it's becoming TRADITIONAL.

I wanted to keep this simple, and directly answer the question asked. However, since you elected to bring this up again, I'll bring up one of the usual answers. See, there's Physics class and there's Bible class. In Physics class, if the teacher is an idiot, the worst thing that can happen can be learning incorrect Physics-which is partly negated with an accurate textbook. If the teacher is immoral or breaking the law, then the Physics shouldn't really be affected. Hard sciences aren't affected by morals. SOCIAL sciences, on the other hand, can be driven by an AGENDA. It's possible for a bad teacher to change the content of a class due to the teacher's bias, and the students will learn ERROR as a result. And when it comes to the Bible, morals and character COUNT. AGENDAS make an even BIGGER difference when it comes to those. Trust issues are major. We expect Bible teachers to be MORE moral than Physics and Psychology professors, not LESS moral. If a Bible teacher is immoral, their agenda will affect what they teach, in large ways as well as small ways. They will seek-consciously or subconsciously- to justify their wishes, like God permitting sins they approve of, or that anyone who disagrees with their doctrine is defying God, living in error, or pursing a personal agenda. (This is as honest as the hypocrites who accused Jesus of casting out demons by the power of demons.) If a science professor is immoral, one can generally come away with accurate science despite them. If a Bible teacher is immoral, everything they taught is suspect for reflecting ERROR that matches their agenda. Will it ALL be bad? Unlikely-but it ALL has to be checked. It becomes WORSE when one's advisors- personal, moral- are dishonest and untrustworthy. The answers they give will be the answers that serve THEM- not the questioner and not God. Once the subject is raised, this is not difficult to see.

So long as rivenbark is still in twi, let alone in the chiefest seat, we can prove that "all" the leaders who did that are not out.

Since you can't figure it out, I'll spell it out. If a pre-medical student is taking a Biology class, and finds out the teacher is selling the answers to the exams in exchange for money or sex, the student- who agreed to take Biology and WANTED to learn in it- would be expected to report the teacher to the law and to warn others. Someone who didn't SEE the teacher doing that, but liked his lecture style, might thing the first student was "wasting his time" "telling negative stuff."

It's obvious no "sola scriptura" type (those who make the Bible their textbook) would take that whitewash seriously. The Bible says one thing, the legends book says the opposite. They can't both be right (although both can be wrong.) I know which one I believe over the other...