Hamilton Saint

The correct form is downhill, not "down hill". And don't forget the full stop.

I'm more than that; I know I am; at least, I think I must be.

If we take MONEY out of the equation, then I would think that the environment at SFC is one of the best in the EPL. What WE can do as fans in creating a positive environment is to avoid the knee-jerk tendency (on here) to scapegoat one or two players who are in a bad patch of form. Belittling and insulting players and staff has to be counter-productive, eh?

"Time has changed ..." Now that's a mind-bender!

Not sure what you mean by that. The "red shift" observed by Hubble proved that the universe was expanding and that galaxies were accelerating away from each other. You have another explanation for that?

Hardly. But at least the scientists are arguing from observed data, and are constantly reviewing and revising their theories. Creationists are relying on the "received wisdom" of ancient texts that are supposed to be the revealed Word of God. As far as the basic history of the solar system goes, I'll go with the scientists.

... and probably just manage to end the season in 17th place.

Or that astronomers (Edwin Hubble, for example) observed that galaxies are accelerating away from each other at high speed.

Interesting question. The way a parent ought to respond depends on the age of the child and how persistent the child is— the number and depth of their follow-up questions. Children should first be given the scientific facts. This gives a parent the opportunity to talk about the sun, the night sky, the seasons, eclipses, phases of the moon, etc. At a beginner's level, the child could be told about solar systems—how planets form around stars. Children should understand that the universe behaves in an orderly, predictable way that can be summarized through a few basic laws. Instead of being told that this is the way it is, and the way it has always been, the child could be encouraged to observe the natural world and then come to ask increasingly more detailed questions as they move towards an understanding of the "laws" of nature. At the simplest level, I would avoid beginning from a "creationist" perspective—especially the fundamentalist view based on Bible literalism. Because that would lead, almost inevitably, to a perceived conflict between science and religion. If the child asks questions that bring up religious (especially creationist) perspectives, a parent ought to emphasize that human beings have different kinds of explanations for difficult and mysterious issues. In addition to the scientific explanation (based on facts and theories), there are mytho-poetic, religious explanations. One could even attempt (if appropriate) to put the evolution of these ideas into a historical perspective (e.g., "back in the olden days, when people didn't understand that the Earth revolved around the sun ... "). Ultimately, I would present first the scientific facts without religious bias.

shed

Vielen dank, mein Herr.

note

neck

glass

watcher

Bienvenue et bonne chance!

My point was not about the referendum, but the nature of the Heritage Foundation. It is naive of you to think that just because the Foundation self-identifies as being "conservative" on its website, that it actually makes them so. I suggest you do some research into the difference between conservatism and neo-liberalism. And if my residence in Canada means I can't comment on the referendum (which, as I said, was not the issue anyway), then your residence in the UK makes you ineligible to comment on the nature and activities of the Heritage Foundation.

Ah, yes, the Heritage Foundation. It is not a "conservative" think tank. It is a corporate-funded institute (the Koch brothers, for example) that pretends to use scholarly research to push a neo-liberal agenda. "Free trade" is free for whom? Free trade doesn't promote sovereignty—just the opposite. If you look at NAFTA (the North American Free-Trade Agreement), for example, the dominant power (the U.S.) uses elements of the Agreement to weaken the cultural and environmental sovereignty of the weaker signatories (Canada and Mexico)—on behalf of its multi-national corporations.

ranch

decanted

Les

Roll [Do I get extra points for a run of three?!]

Horrible crime. Condolences to her friends and family.

A few statistics for you from a magazine article in December, 2015: - Since John Lennon was shot dead in NYC in December 1980, more than 1,150,000 Americans (civilians) have died in gun violence - Since 1968, more American civilians have been killed in gun violence than all the casualties of all the wars in US history - 90 Americans die every day in gun violence; that's about 33,000 per year

Jolly