meangreendork

The guy and his staff weren't anywhere near qualified to do anything medically related short of putting on a bandaid. They operated an illegal business, and they should all go to jail accordingly. It's about as simple as that.

And yet, no one names a name.

"Ma'am, cut that out. You're the tree-hugger equivalent of the guy with the tinfoil hat on, the guy that thinks Obama's a muslim/anarchist, and the guy that thinks Bush was the living embodiment of Satan." Seriously though - while our environmental issues have really huge stakes on them, crying and screaming isn't going to help convince people to make better decisions about their everyday lives and who they vote for.

I kinda liked the pre-development, chain restaurant Fry Street. The lost of the Fry St. event was a big hit and that stupid, stupid mixup between the 1st round of developers and city that ended up with an empty lot was a killer. What's there now isn't bad, though. At least none of it is designed to infringe on the longstanding bars in that area. I do miss the old Chopsticks, though. It's alright now, but it's the sort of place where I go if I want okay food that's sort of Asian. There are much, much better places for Asian food in Denton than Chopsticks now, sadly. As much as old Fry. St was a loss, the hustle around the square in the last 5 years has been awesome, though.

Actually, there is. A gun for threats outside of about 20 ft. A knife for threats inside that range. To the thread's subject: How to stop a massacre? Try to build a society where the incentive to do so is a lot smaller than the incentive to not do so. Until then, a knife for threats inside 20ft, and a gun for threats outside of that.

The uncle's spot on. Those boys were wasted space and it's even worse because they were far luckier than many of the other Chechens who either didn't make it out of Chechnya or died in the fighting. Others from that same conflict came here and made good on the opportunity - these jackarounds look like they took it with them.

Thanks for clearing that up. I don't think the "more transfers than first-timers" stat has ever been correct in the last 14 years. Plus, the recruiting process is vastly different from when I was here as a freshman in 2000 to right now. Heck, it's been different since Apogee opened, both for transfer and freshman students.

For Higgs, probably not. He just wants to see how the universe works and what happened before it existed as we know it. But yeah, religion has always made it a goal to explain what humans don't know or don't currently know at the given time. I see it like this, if humanity lasts long enough without nuking ourselves to death or otherwise destroying our planet, we'll find definitive proof that a higher being does exist or doesn't exist.

While I'm in the Sagan camp that thinks science may eventually explain religion, that line is coming from the article writer, not Higgs himself. Besides, Higgs is probably looking at more than just the scientific mechanics of the universe's existence as it came to be, but the things that happened prior to its existence.

Welp, best of luck to her. But she is right - the team is a big drain and Mac and RV really have to do their part to raise the status of the team.

Seems like you're mistaking, "can a woman hit 175lbs of muscle?" with "will every woman hit 175lbs of muscle?" Because the answers are, "yes" and, "no." Could a woman hit that weight? Sure, but she'd be some sort of crazy stats outlier, and be built like a Siberian lumberjack. Will every woman hit that weight? No, hell, not every man will hit that weight. But none of this really has anything to do with Fox being in her weight class. She's won and been in two fights, one against someone that's 5'2" and one against someone 10lbs lighter. I think she's as likely to get her teeth knocked in as anyone else. Hell, I think the fact she won't try for UFC women's means she doesn't have the skill to win there. And Griner? She has the height and weight, but she doesn't have the muscle to keep from being a pinball. I mean, more power if she can do it, but odds aren't really in her favor.

You're right and wrong at the same time. My argument was about the same way. Trained at the same pace, starting at the same fitness level, the male will likely come out stronger at the end of a training period of however many months simply since his hormones will likely get him to 175lbs faster. But if the woman gets enough time to hit 175lbs (which will take a long damn time), she'll probably be the same strength level as the guy at the same weight. But in the case of Fallon Fox, she's in the right weight class of about 130-150. Idk what her height is, but since she was born a man, she's probably taller than most of the women fighters and that part is probably cheating.

Depends on the frame. For the sake of ceterus paribus, if we had a thing where a man and woman at 5'9" 120 were put through the same training program, starting at the same fitness level with the same trainers and the same nutrition, they'd probably be about the same strength. I mean, the assumption is that a man and woman of the same weight starting at the same base fitness level and same frame would end up with roughly the same muscle composition and muscle density.

Not really. If she's fighting in her weight class, then she's just as likely to get her jaw knocked out of place as anyone else. The only reason why gender would ever be a factor in a fight is physical size, and MMA sorts that out just like any other fighting league.

You kinda answered it right there, actually. That and a lot of the same level of persecution follows the transsexuals as the homosexuals as well.

"Build dorms so that students can live on campus." To me, that reads as, "Compete with the mother institution only about 45 minutes away."

How is ours not in here? I know it's like 10 years old, but it's far and above the student recs of a lot of other universities. I will say this: ours easily competes on most levels, but when another college lobs in an indoor beach, I mean, come on.

I'm not DT's greatest fan, but this isn't really doing anyone any favors.

UTSA is a corn nugget under the business end of a steamroller. Based on their last record, I don't expect them to do well against CUSA level competition. Will our guys do well? I don't know but I certainly hope they will. Seriously though, LA-Tech is definitely the new guy to beat.

Dr. Pohl, bar none. He did a lot to turn around the culture of UNT both as a campus and for its athletic programs. I'm sure that Dr. Rawlins would've done as good or better in the same position, but Dr. Pohl was here when things were far worse and that's why he gets the vote. Dr. Bataille would be a close 3rd on the list.

Our red zone scoring was awful last year. There are any number of games that would've been blowouts or wins had the team landed that touchdown.

I do have to fault the coaching a bit for not giving DT more chances to pass the ball, but looking at last year's record, there are a few games were an errant pass may have cost the team a valuable win or where a perfect pass might have stolen the victory for our guys. The FAU, Troy, South Alabama, and ULL games could've gone either way depending on what DT's passing may have resulted in. Considering he's 1:1 for INTs to TDs, it's quite a risk. If DT were more consistent, we might have had a different 2012 season. Instead of 4-8, we may have had a 6-6 season, or even an 8-4 season (had he not had so many INTs at MTSU and if KState had crumbled a bit more). He is really close to breaking through, but I don't think the coaches want to risk that, not without a backup plan at least. I'm expecting to see Berglund and Thompson fight it out early in the season during practices and early games. I just want more consistent QB play. It doesn't have to be high-flying, every-pass-goes-for-20 offense, but it has to be enough to get the defense from playing the run every down. Some of that is on the coaches to find new schemes to keep the defenses honest. Some of that is also on the line to keep doing a great job of pass blocking (which they did, DT only got 6 sacks last season), and it's also on the QBs to show it at practice and on gameday. I don't care who we end up with as long as they score.

Still doesn't make sense with or without your first post. Sounds more like blanket application of a rule and making sure everyone follows it, no exceptions.

I lived in Kerr hall's B-side, the square-shaped part during my first year here. It was also coincidentally when those foot-scooter things were all the rage, so we'd use the square hall as foot-scooter race track every so often. At first it was pretty tame, but it got serious when we would break out the pool noodles like some sort of low-budget, collegiate Ben-Hur.

I think it's a matter of presentation and less about the content. The Daily Show/Colbert are pretty obvious that they aren't news shows and they're more for laughs than anything else. But in that, they do actually present good, factual information from time to time. It's packaging occasionally decent information inside of comedy for the purpose of comedy first and information, far far behind. However, Fox, MSNBC and the like are trying really hard to convince us all that they report news, when in reality, it's sensationalized events, non-news, or factually wrong or mislabeled information with occasional, good factual information from time to time. This is sensationalized topics, wrong informaiton, and junk packaged inside of an outwardly serious and "authoritative" wrapper for the purpose of ratings and pageviews with actual information far far behind.