text:
Home > LAW > Global Studies
Welcome to the internet home of Washington University Global Studies Law Review. Building on Washington University's distinguished reputation, Global Studies presents outstanding articles, book reviews, essays, and notes from prestigious academics, practitioners and prominent students to expand the global community's knowledge and understanding of real-world issues. Global Studies Law Review publishes quarterly.
Current Issue: Volume 13, Issue 4 (2014)
Protecting Workers as a Matter Principle: A Latin American View of U.S. Work Law
Sergio Gamonal C. and César F. Rosado Marzán
The Problem of Risk in International Criminal Law
Mark A. Summers
The ICC Kenya Case: Implications and Impact for Propio Motu and Complementarity
Christopher Totten, Hina Asghar, and Ayomipo Ojutalayo
The Social Cost of Baseball: Addressing the Effects 0f Major League Baseball Recruitment in Latin America and the Caribbean
Emily B. Ottenson
Criminalizing Yakuza Membership: A Comparative Study of the Anti-Boryokudan Law
Edward F. Reilly Jr.


text:
Student Outreach Services (SOS) and Rosen College Apartments are hosting a fun-filled week of activities to welcome students for Summer B Semester. Check out all of the "Seven Days of Summer," including:
The library provides information on events on campus as a courtesy. For more information, please contact firstname.lastname@example.com or 407-903-8238.
Rosen Library Homepage | Ask a Rosen Librarian | Rosen Library Hours

subset: commoncrawl


text:
SUBSCRIBEWe will NOT sell your email address to anybody!
One year manufacturer's warranty on most items. Click for details
Orders received by 12 EST usually ship next business day. Click for details
Return any item in new condition for a refund or exchange. Click for details
Airgun or airsoft gun need fixing? Looking for peace of mind with our 10-for-$10 test or to save time with 20-for-$20 service? Our full service tech and repair shop can help! Click for details
Free ground shipping for orders over $150! Click for details
Shipping restrictions by location Click for details
|Sort by:
|Most Popular
Benjamin CO2 & Air FIll Adapter, Fits Benjamin Air Tank or Standard Paintball CO2 Tank
Add to Compare
Add to Wishlist
|About this product
Benjamin-FAH002 [PY-A-2153]
Starting at $69.99
4.5 (14 reviews)
Made specifically for the Dual-Fuel capability of the Benjamin Discovery and the Crosman Challenger...
Daisy Avanti 2.5 ounce refillable cylinder
Add to Cart
Add to Compare
Add to Wishlist
|About this product
Avanti-995862 [PY-A-334]
Starting at $69.99
4.5 (2 reviews)
From: Daisy
Avanti 2.5 ounce refillable cylinder for your Avanti 888 air rifle
CheckoutSubtotal (USD):
does not include shipping and tax


text:
Only hotels in Spruce Pine are listed below. Find cheap and/or discounted hotel rates in or near Spruce Pine, NC for your personal leisure or group travel. We show the best Spruce Pine North Carolina hotel rooms. Review the Spruce Pine hotel list below to find the perfect lodging. We also have a map of the Spruce Pine hotels. Group booking? Search Spruce Pine Group Hotel RatesThe Spruce Pine center is approximately 16 miles from MacRae Meadows and 19 miles from Grandfather Mountain.
Spruce Pine Hotels/Accommodations
Next 20 Spruce Pine Hotels > [1 - 20 of 50]
Next: See My Spruce Pine Hotels with Pricing >


text:
AUSTIN, Texas - A study says 60 public school districts across Texas now offer courses on the Bible. But at least a third aren't meeting state requirements to be unbiased and academically and legally sound.
Written by Southern Methodist University Professor Mark Chancey, the study found that many districts' courses favor conservative Protestant interpretations of the Bible.
Many also present "problematic treatment of Judaism" and promote "pseudo-scholarship" on science and U.S. history.
Chancey presented the study Wednesday. He completed it for the Texas Freedom Network, which monitors the State Board of Education from a progressive perspective.
Statewide, 57 districts and three charter schools offered elective courses on the Bible during the 2011-2012 school year.
Chancey listed 11 of them as having the most-successful classes, but concluded that 20 were the "most problematic courses."
We've placed a link to the full report at the bottom of this article.
To comment, the following rules must be followed:
Comments may be monitored for inappropriate content, but the station is under no legal obligation to do so.
If you believe a comment violates the above rules, please use the Flagging Tool to alert a Moderator.
Flagging does not guarantee removal.
Multiple violations may result in account suspension.
Decisions to suspend or unsuspend accounts are made by Station Moderators.
Questions may be sent to firstname.lastname@example.com. Please provide detailed information.


text:
10 September, 2013 | (01 hr)
Sign In to access this Webcast
Join us for this webcast as our guest, Ross Dawson, gives insights into how to build your business by tapping one of the most powerful trends in business today: Crowdsourcing.
Getting Results From Crowds provides practical, pragmatic, clear guidance on how you can draw on the power of crowds to grow your business. Filled with real-life case studies and useful examples, it gives you everything you need to know to create success in a world where talent can be anywhere.
To find out more before our webcast visit: http://www.resultsfromcrowds.com/
You may also want to check out:
Ross Dawson
Ross Dawson is globally recognized as a leading futurist, entrepreneur, keynote speaker, strategy advisor, and bestselling author. He is Founding Chairman of three companies: international consulting firm Advanced Human Technologies, future think-... Full Bio
Joseph Tatepo
Joseph Tatepo is a Council Manager at The Conference Board Europe. In his role Joseph supports the Corporate Leadership Practice and the Emerging Markets & Value Creation practice by managing the Economists' Council, the Council on... Full Bio


text:
Daily Sales Up to 70% OFF Limited-time deals start every day at 12 pm ET.
Petmate is America's first airline approved pet carrier, based on the idea that pets need a safe, comfortable way of travelling, Petmate was founded. Through the years and their success, Petmate has grown and developed new ideas including dog houses, including the always popular "Dogloo" as well as water bowls, litter boxes and play toys. If you're looking for a safe way to bring your pet with you while travelling and maybe a fun treat as a reward; Petmate is sure to have what you're looking for.
Today Petmate is the leader in kennel sales worldwide, Petmate is one of the most respected and trustworthy names in the pet business. Expanding past pet carriers, Petmate offers kennels, dog houses, pet bedding, feeding and watering, cat products and many other accessories for all your pet needs!
|• Arm & Hammer
|• Aspen Pets
|• Cider Mill
|• Compass
|• Curvations
|• Deluxe
|• Indigo
|• Microban
|• Navigator
|• Sky
|• Vari
Petmate Kennels (36)
Petmate Dog Beds (25)
Petmate Cat Beds (2)


text:
|Merrimack, Mass.
|High School:
|Central Catholic
|Pole Vault
2012: Competed in the pole vault at seven different meets…recorded a season-best height of 3.70 meters at the Patriot League Outdoor Championship (May 4) where she finished in second place overall…finished first at the Crowell Open (Jan. 6) with a height of 3.40 meters in her only indoor competition, and first at the Holy Cross Invitational (April 21) at a height of 3.50 meters…named team's Most Valuable Field Rookie…named second team All-Patriot League.
Before Holy Cross: Member of the Central Catholic High School varsity track and field team for four years under head coach Katie Sullivan as a pole vaulter…team won Division II state championship in 2007…team won MVC outdoor championship from 2007-2009…set the pole vault school record…MVC champion in 2009 and 2010…Division II state champion in 2009…also a member of the varsity gymnastics team for head coach Dunkan Gould for four years…served as captain senior year…set school record on balance beam…received Coaches Award in 2009 and 2010…team MVP in 2011…member of National Honor Society
Personal: Daughter of Michael and Patricia Arndt…has one sister (Madison)…has not yet declared a major.
Arndt's Top Performance
|Meet (Date)
|Pole Vault
|3.70 meters
|Patriot League Championship (5/4/2012)


text:
Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Humanitarian and Refugee Affairs(HRA) Patricia L. Irvin said the Department, in cooperation with othergovernment agencies and within the limits of its resources, understands andstrives to fulfill its responsibility to help alleviate suffering throughoutthe world.
She said the Humanitarian Assistance Program (HAP) is often themost economical means available to local charitable organizations to transportdonated goods to foreign countries for humanitarian purposes.
Under the 1986 DOD Authorization Act, HRA is authorized to transport non-lethalexcess property, relief supplies and privately donated cargo to meethumanitarian needs worldwide.
Over the past two years, 370 transportationmissions have been accomplished to more than 50 countries.


text:
March 14, 2014 | 5:52 p.m.
More in:
Featured Topics
- In an era overrun with nostalgia #KingsQuest is a thoughtful take on a classic. latimes.com/entertainment/… http://t.co/ph2tPLntfS 19 hours ago
- "The Wiz Live!" starts building a cast. latimes.com/entertainment/… 1 day ago
- Netflix and Marvel's "Jessica Jones" series won't be forced to fit in with the new "Daredevil" series. latimes.com/entertainment/… 1 day ago
- How will Disney bring the "Tangled" lantern scene to life on stage? fw.to/gWxuPsV http://t.co/5f2a7LS5cD 1 day ago
- RT @AmyKinLA: In case you were wondering, here was McAdams' full response to the "Doctor Strange" thang: http://t.co/mCmbhX1zh0 1 day ago
Back Issues
Who's Behind the Mask?
Our legion of super contributors includes Noelene Clark, Tracy Brown, Patrick Kevin Day, Blake Hennon,, Todd Martens and Jevon Phillips.


text:
20% Off Storewide ! DOG COATS & DOG JACKETS Our wide assortment of coats & jackets will cover dogs in all weather conditions and seasons. Expertly designed for a great fit and with safety in mind. Coats are adjustable for minor size changes. Choose from winter, rain, safety and cozy fleece jackets.
Bright Safety Light
Watertight & Durable
Breathable Fleece Jacket
Allows Full Range Motion
Recycled Polyester Fleece
Waterproof & Windproof
Breathable, Insulated
Sleeves Allow Full Motion
Great For Wandering Dogs
High Visibility Colors
Secure & Reflective
Superior Buoyancy
Built for Coldest Weather
Use with Climate Changer
Integrated Stuff Sack
Cooling Dog Vest
Designed for Full Motion
Low Light Visibility
Insulated Jacket
Inner Fleece Layer
Ruff Wear Rain Jacket
Waterproof, PVC-free
Easy On, Easy Off


text:
Latest from all the library blogs.
David Feldman is popular for his "Imponderables" books. Working as a columnist and sportscaster for a number of years, Dave has been asked questions during that time that he felt everybody wondered about from time to time, and decided to compile them into titles of his own.
Some of you might answer "Indiana," some might answer "America," while others might have strong ties to their cultural heritage and provide an answer that relates to places from which their parents and grandparents immigrated.
Those of us who love books know the money that can be made from developing the perfect perfume: the one that smells like our first book, our favorite book, or just old books in general.
When in Rome, do as the Romans do. Similarly, when visiting neighboring states in the U.S., do as their residents do, and that includes learning their lingo.
Words are a powerful thing, and using them in the right context can mean the difference between getting what you want or walking away empty handed, and maybe even a little red-faced.
National Library Card Sign Up Month. Get ready for a lifetime of adventure and Get Your Library Card Here! (visit your local library for more information).
Ahoy mateys! September is pirate month, and September 19 be Talk Like a Pirate Day.
We at JCPL invite you to raise the Jolly Roger and get yore sea legs with some pirate-related booty here and abroad on the high seas of the Internet.
September is National Library Card Sign Up Month, and in honor of this special occasion, all three branches of the Jasper County Public Library will be celebrating throughout the month by offering a small prize to everyone signing up for their first library card with JCPL.
School has started! Whether you're looking forward to the new adventure or you're already counting down the days until the year is over, there's one resource you should know about…Homework Hotline!
All year long the library has programs for book lovers of all ages, from infants to seniors. These programs are so ever-present that we just take them for granted. When do you have story time? Oh, there will be a new one any time now.
If you give a mom a muffin, chances are she'll want a cup of coffee to go with it, and as long as it doesn't get spilled, she'll probably want a good book, too.


text:
Membership Webinar: Exclusive Preview & How-To on the Annual Meeting Mobile App
Presenter: STLE Staff Member, Bruce Murgueitio, Digital Media Manager
Where: via WebEx, link will be provided upon registration
When: Thursday, April 18, 2013 at 12-12:30 p.m.
Cost: FREE for STLE members and non-members
Contact Us
Phone: (847) 825-5536
Email: Kara Sniegowski at email@example.com
Reminder: Computer speakers or headphones are needed to hear the audio.
Testing/Setup: Click here to test your system before the event to ensure a seamless experience. You will also need ActiveX installed on your computer to view the event.
Registration: click on the link below to register.
Click Here to register for this event.


text:
On the heels of a storm that's impacted the area, Monday's storm system brought in heavy rain, damaging winds, and power outages leaving Elkin residents wet and in the dark.
"I went to bed at 10 p.m., and my lights still were not on," said Lynee Brooks of Elkin.
According to Duke Energy spokeswoman Erin Culbert, the power outage was identified and noted at the Elkin retail sub station.
"A transformer blew, affecting 280 Elkin residents," said Culbert. "The first power outage happened at approximately 7:12 p.m. and all power was restored by 11:19 p.m.


text:
Wednesday, February 26, 2014
Bishop England seniors Michele Boykin and Mary Harriet Moore walked off their home court for the last time Tuesday, much in the same way they always left it, as dominant winners.
Bishop England blew past Battery Creek, 76-38, in the third round of the Class 2A state playoffs to earn its third straight bid to the Lower State championship game.
Boykin scored a game-high 36 points on 78 percent shooting with eight rebounds, six steals and eight assists. Moore added 16 points, 17 rebounds and three blocks. Just what you'd expect in the final home game from two of the best to don the Bishop green and white.
"They both went out in style," Bishop England head coach Paul Runey said. "It was a great last game in this gym for the both of them. It's remarkable. They're two of the most accomplished players I've ever coached and you just come to expect games like tonight from them."
The Lady Bishops (25-1) focused on limiting Battery Creek star Daisja Cannon and forcing the rest of the team to try to beat them. Jo Jo Tompkins, Anna Marie Penninger, Erin Rose and Montana Swanson took turns harassing Cannon in Bishop England's box-and-one defense. Cannon scored 14 of Battery Creek's 17 points in the first half but managed just four in the second half. Boykin scored 12 in the third quarter, Moore added eight and the Lady Bishops turned a 13-point halftime lead into a 26-point rout by the start of the fourth.
"It's hard to shut a player like (Cannon) down, but I thought we did a good job of wearing her out," Runey said. "We knew we were the deeper team so we were able to keep somebody on her the whole game.
"I thought all our kids played really well. We made the right plays with the basketball, ran the floor really well. We needed that going into these next games."
Bishop England advances to face undefeated Dillon (27-0) Saturday in the Lower State championship game at the Florence Civic Center. Dillon stole a win from Kingstree with a free throw in the final seconds Tuesday. A Bishop England win Saturday would mean the Lady Bishops' third straight Lower State title, Runey's 590th career win, and a chance at their second state championship in three years.
"These girls have already shown that they have the athletic ability to win these types of games," Runey said. "They're good about playing in these big games. They know how to win and that's a big deal. This isn't something new to them."
Moultrie News is pleased to offer readers the enhanced ability to comment on stories. We expect our readers to engage in lively, yet civil discourse. We do not edit user submitted statements and we cannot promise that readers will not occasionally find offensive or inaccurate comments posted in the comments area. Responsibility for the statements posted lies with the person submitting the comment, not Moultrie News.
If you find a comment that is objectionable, please click "report abuse" and we will review it for possible removal. Please be reminded, however, that in accordance with our Terms of Use and federal law, we are under no obligation to remove any third party comments posted on our website. Read our full terms and conditions.
© 2015 Moultrie News an Evening Post Industries company. All Rights Reserved.
Registration on or use of this site constitutes acceptance of our Terms of Service, Privacy Policy and Parental Consent Form.


text: Prev | Next Josh Duhamel, left, and Julianne Hough, cast members in "Safe Haven," pose together at the U.S. premiere of the film, Tuesday, Feb. 5, 2013, in the Hollywood section of Los Angeles. (Photo by Chris Pizzello/Invision/AP) Gallery: Premiere of "Safe Haven" Feb. 06, 2013 @ 03:24 PM Stars turned out in Los Angeles Tuesday for the premiere of "Safe Havens," starring Julianne Hough and Josh Duhamel. (u'nobuy',)


text:
Policy Briefs
Working Papers
Key Findings
Research Briefs
Research Q&A
Conference Papers
Other Publications
Documents Reprint Request
What We Do
Retirement Research Consortium
Contact Us
Research Projects
Research Priorities
Executive Committee
Board of Outside Scholars
Data Sources
UM Research Centers
MRRC Affiliates
Federal Government Sites
Personal Retirement
This paper compares a variety of measures of fatness (e.g. BMI, waist circumference, waist-tohip ratio, percent body fat) in terms of their ability to predict application for Social Security Disability Insurance (DI). This is possible through a recent linkage of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) III to Social Security Administration (SSA) administrative records.
Our results indicate that the measure of fatness that best predicts application for DI varies by race and gender. For white men, BMI consistently predicts future application for DI. For white women, almost all are consistently predictive. For black men, none predict application. For black women, waist circumference and waist-to-hip ratio are the only significant predictors of DI application. This variation across race and gender suggests that the inclusion of alternative measures of fatness in social science datasets should be considered, and that researchers examining the impact of fatness on social science outcomes should examine the robustness of their findings to alternative measures of fatness.


text:
Minoring in Psychology involves the study of the way humans and animals act, feel, think and learn. How are personality and social development influenced? What is the relationship between mind and body? How are statistical principles used to analyze social science data? You'll develop lifelong skills in scientific thinking and in understanding human thought, behavior and interaction as you take 20 credit hours toward a psychology minor in conjunction with a different bachelor's degree major.
BusinessCommunity EducationForensic PsychologyHuman ResourcesPsychiatryRehabilitationResearchResidential TreatmentSocial ServicesYouth Education
Additional education may be required for some careers listed
Responsiveto the needs of today's students.Relevantto the skills employers seek.Realpreparation for thoughtful living and service.
Schedule a visit today!
Transfer to CSP
Apply Now
Tuition & Financial Aid


text:
It happened, ironically enough, in a thread ("Broken Resolutions") where an Arminian Protestant, William Watson Birch, was accused of being a hypocrite, in some remarks of his about Bishop James White's treatment of yet another fellow Protestant (but alas, one of those clueless, wicked non-Calvinists!), Ergun Caner. Hays couldn't resist throwing out The Lie one more time:
Of course, it's always possible that he's a graduate of the Dave Armstrong School of Oaths, Vows, and Resolutions.
I shall now document the back-and-forth that then occurred in the combox. Steve Hays' words will be in blue; Peter Pike's in green; Turretinfan's (aka The Anonymous One or TAO) in red; Bishop James White's in purple; Gene Bridges' in orange; Eric Svendsen's in brown. All the biggest luminaries of the anti-Catholic world online wanna get in on this one, like moths flying into the flames of a campfire.
* * * * *
All the garbage spouted by anti-Catholics that I am a vow and oath breaker are bald-faced lies. Bearing false witness is a very serious sin, as Pilgrimsarbour stated above.
And we'll see if this comment gets censored, too, like several others of mine have been on this site recently. (2-16-10)
"All the garbage spouted by anti-Catholics that I am a vow and oath breaker are bald-faced lies. Bearing false witness is a very serious sin, as Pilgrimsarbour stated above."
Actually, these are easily documentable allegations.
"And we'll see if this comment gets censored, too, like several others of mine have been on this site recently."Some of your comments from a previous thread were deleted because, true to form, you wanted to change the subject from substance to a never-ending discussion of your all-time favorite topic–Dave Armstrong. However, the rest of us don't share your self-infatuation. (2-16-10)
Actually, these are easily documentable allegations.
Of course, I am assuming you actually know the essential difference between a vow and a resolution. With your record of sophistry and slander, that may be a very charitable, presumptuous assumption indeed.
Assuming that, now all you have to do is go to my blog, use the search function, and find any instance where I have ever made a "vow" or an "oath" (apart from my marriage), and have violated it.
I currently have 2559 papers posted. My blog is fully searchable. Certainly if I have made some imaginary "vow" or "oath" and have broken it, it is easy as pie to document. But for some strange reason, every time this scurrilous accusation is made, it never is documented.
Some of your comments from a previous thread were deleted because, true to form, you wanted to change the subject from substance to a never-ending discussion of your all-time favorite topic–Dave Armstrong. However, the rest of us don't share your self-infatuation.
Right; just like now, eh Steve? I have made the subject myself, out of the blue. I came here and wanted to talk about myself. I didn't come here and comment on your ridiculous blog because you have again lied about a simple matter of fact. You didn't bring up my name, I did. It's 1984 and doublespeak all over again.
I have no right whatsoever to protest against the lie, even though I know it to be untrue, since it involves me.
If I don't respond, the lie goes out (for the umpteenth time now) unopposed, and this is a form of gossip and bearing false witness. If I respond, then you use your usual tactic of diverting the discussion to the usual nonsense that I am full of myself, simply because I don't put up with lying that has no relation to fact.
Either way, you "win." But in reality, you have lost, because lying never does anyone any good. You are the one who has to stand accountable to God for lying.
The best you can do is pull up the old 2001 half tongue-in-cheek quote from me that White and others have used. This was, of course, a resolution, and I obviously changed my mind. That proves nothing whatever. All it proves is that I changed my mind. Big wow. That's a universe away from breaking a vow or an oath under God.
Mr. Birch is now defending himself against your charges, so obviously he must be a narcissist, too. When Edward Reiss (whom I have defended against your slanders) protested against your relentless calumnies, he was full of himself, as well. It is your standard reply to anyone who disagrees with your Profound Wisdom. It goes beyond your anti-Catholicism. Those two guys ain't Catholics, but they are fair game simply because they disagreed with you.
You can delete this if you like. It won't make any difference. I'll still put it up on my blog, and I get just as many hits as you do, so folks will be made aware once again that you have chosen the path of deliberately lying, because it is in the service of your ongoing attacks against me: the one who is "evil" and who has an "evil character." Anything goes against the EVIL person, right Steve? NT ethics no longer apply: they have no relevance. (2-16-10)
Some of your comments from a previous thread were deleted because, true to form, you wanted to change the subject from substance to a never-ending discussion of your all-time favorite topic–Dave Armstrong.
This is a lie as well. Here is some of what actually was deleted (because I noted it at the time). Let's see if you delete this as well, and pretend that it was just me talking about myself (as you think is all that I do). I described it in a post of mine:
Just now, I noticed that he deleted a reply I made responding to an atheist, who decried the Christian infighting (i.e., relentless attacks on Catholics, including myself) on Hays' blog. He had written:
"Atheists have no need to point out the supposed foolishness of Christianity: you guys do a great job of illustrating it yourself.
"I feel like I'm reading playground taunting games."
I wholeheartedly agreed, said that I decried it as much as he did and was trying to oppose it by condemning it, but that it is easy to get pulled down in the mud, when you try to pull someone out of a mud pit. I said that I had had many pleasant conversations with atheists, but could never manage to do so with anti-Catholics, because of the combination of ignorance, stubbornness, and hostility. I also stated that I would bet good money that his own ethical standards were considerably higher than Hays' own low standards, as proven by the latter's conduct on his blog. I predicted that this comment would make me even more unpopular on the blog than I already was.
Hays confirmed that by hitting the delete button . . . :-) :-)
I have now noticed that several other comments of mine are missing.
That was a criticism of you and your lamentable tactics and ethics, not "talking about myself."
This is part of what you chose to delete. Now you have to even revise that history and lie about the actual facts of the matter. (2-16-10)
I can't help noticing that Armstrong always "refutes" the charge of self-obsession by generating reams of self-obsessive denials. (2-16-10)
Right, Steve. You love playing this game, I know. Anyone with an IQ above that of a pencil eraser sees right through it.
I still await your compelling proof of the extraordinary charge that I have supposedly broken a vow. Where is it? You said it was easy to prove. Do it, then, or stand exposed as a liar (and an intellectual coward as well).
I already know you are a liar where I am concerned. I'm only doing this to prove it to everyone else who believes the claptrap you regularly churn out about other human beings. (2-16-10)
It appears Dave Armstrong has a significantly different view of what constitutes an oath than what Jesus and James did.
Let's play semantics. Suppose we agree that Armstrong's only vow he ever made was to his wife (note he has apparently never made a vow to God). He still repeatedly claims to be done with anti-Catholics and promises to never interact with them again because it's a waste of time, etc. I see that Steve Hays is on Dave Armstrong's page of Anti-Catholics (and somehow even *I* got there). Thus, Armstrong has said he would not interact with either Steve or me (amongst many others). Which makes it highly ironic that he's complaining that we deleted his comments. (How did we delete that which wasn't there to begin with?)
In any case, Armstrong is here now, which also disproves his promise to be done with Anti-Catholics. (2-16-10)
Okay, Peter, I'll play your game, too.
What is your position on what the Bible says about vows and oaths? What exactly are they? Are they different from resolutions or a "promise" (your word)? Is there any essential or qualitative difference there at all?
I am assuming you are familiar with dictionaries and their purpose, and also the fact that different words DO have different meanings. And I think you know what a Bible dictionary is. Utilize these resources. I think you have a lot to gain from them.
I know fine distinctions and nuance are not your strong suit but we gotta start somewhere.
You say I have made what you and Steve describe as a "vow" or an "oath" of a particular nature. Okay; where is it? Please produce this for me. 2559 papers online. 19 books: many of which are heavily excerpted online or can be accessed by Google Reader. No problem at all to prove this. Or do you not know how to operate a simple Google search, either?
If you can't, why do you make the charge? If you can, why the delay? Prove your point before the world once and for all. Put up or shut up. Empty words and lies don't cut it anymore.
If you're dense enough to actually want to jump on this bandwagon of a trumped-up charge that neither you nor Steve can document, then you, too, can be exposed as a liar. The choice is up to you. I sure wouldn't want to be in your shoes right now.
How ironic, given the original intent of this very thread. (2-16-10)
Oh, one more thing for Peter's sake. I believe he was the one who claimed here (being one of my biggest fans and lifelong supporters) that I delete lots of material in the cynical attempt to hide my past statements.
Yep; 2559 papers posted. Obviously I have heavily utilized the delete button.
But you obviously have me mixed up with Steve Hays. He is the king of the delete button lately.
You may think I have made such a "vow" and then covered it up by getting rid of the "evidence." There is also such a thing as Internet Archive. I'd be happy to dig up any old paper of mine you remember seeing in the past. Most of them are still available over on that excellent resource. In fact, one of your anti-Catholic buddies uses that resource quite a bit to find old papers of mine in areas where I have specifically stated that my views in one area have become fine-tuned and somewhat modified over time. He does it; so could you.
If you can't figure out how to use that, either, then I'll be more than delighted to aid you to find any old paper of mine that your heart desires, so you can locate my imaginary "vows" that you clowns regularly refer to in an attempt to smear my name.
You guys need to come up with your "proof" once and for all, that I am a huge liar, vow-breaker, along with being "evil" and nuts and all the rest that you nattering nabobs say and believe.
Here is your golden opportunity to absolutely prove one of your bogus charges and lies. Seems like you would jump at the opportunity. I am even offering to help you do it! (2-16-10)
Here is Pike making his "delete" charge, just for the record (I know I'm "weird" around here insofar as I actually document things, rather than assert them without evidence):
Armstrong's already "disappeared" a bunch of stuff that he posted on his own blog, and now we get to pretend it never happened (wink, wink, nudge, nudge).
It shows his caliber anyway. He writes knee-jerk screeds condemning other people for what he does himself, and after his hypocrisy is pointed out to him he apparently feels enough guilt to obscure the evidence, but not enough to actually change his behavior.
(comment of 1/21/2010 11:28 PM)
Again, Pike has it exactly wrong. Steve Hays is the one who has been doing this.
I not only not delete Hay's rantings; I help to broadcast them to the world on my site. I'm doing him a great service! His pearls of wisdom in saying, e.g., 732 times (in many different ways and styles) that that Edward Reiss or Scott Windsor are liars got plenty of coverage on my site!
When he says that I am "evil" and of "evil character" I put that on my site, so folks can benefit from learning those facts about my character. It's the very opposite of deleting. I even have a video of Howlin' Wolf singing Evil in honor of Hays' profound observations.
I'll be documenting this whole thread, too. So it is the furthest thing from covering up anything. (2-16-10)
Still waiting for the documentation of the charge. It ain't rocket science. I say I have 2500 papers online not to puff myself up, but to make the point that it is super-easy to find such a thing if I ever said it. Any fool could see the point there. But because the playbook dictates that everything I say must be from pride and narcissism, further dumb remarks are made. Rationality and factuality are thrown to the wind.
[I was responding above to yet another commenter: "Natamllc" -- who had written: Is not that a direct, "look at me and my accomplishments" statement about yourself, of course, distinguishing yourself as someone far more important than Steve or Patrick?]
You guys can play games and obfuscate and engage in obscurantism and evasion and sophistry all day long, but it won't change the fact that you are duty-bound to produce the goods to prove that I have supposedly ever broken a vow made under God, with all that that entails.
Your easiest way out is to simply admit that you don't know the difference between vows, oaths, and resolutions. But pride will probably dictate that even that route is unthinkable. Instead, it'll just be more personal attacks on my person.
Anyone can see through that. If you guys want to dig your own grave and set the noose to hang yourselves, be my guest. That doesn't further your cause.
The choir will cheer you on no matter what you do or say. But any halfway neutral observer whom you hope to convince will see the nature of what so often takes place in this sewer of a blog.
Even atheists can see that. (2-16-10)
I'll be ignoring you and other anti-Catholics (barring exceptional circumstances; particularly if it involves defending someone else from anti-Catholic smear campaigns).
When he breaks his near-promise to ignore his opponents, I expect him first to rely on the "exceptional circumstances" portion of his statement, and then later deny that this was ever a promise in the first place. Let's see what time will tell.
(my report) (2-16-10)
And that is what you call a vow or an oath? Just for the record . . . You, too, don't know the difference?
I'm here now because I was again called a liar publicly, and you guys are attempting to smear William Birch, just as you did with Edward Reiss and Scott Windsor (so it's now four of us just in the last month). And that is exactly what I said, didn't I?: "particularly if it involves defending someone else from anti-Catholic smear campaigns."
Likewise, I temporarily suspended my policy of not debating theology with anti-Catholics (which I have been faithfully following for over two years now), when I took on Jason Engwer, because David Waltz had cited his influence as one reason why he now rejects conciliar infallibility. That was more than enough good reason.
Rules are made for man, not man for rules. Jesus said this about rescuing the sheep in the pit on the Sabbath. The legalistic person would let the sheep suffer, but the compassionate person recognizes that the Sabbath was made for man, not vice versa.
Any man has a right to defend his name against public lies and character assassination and defamation. I can hardly not talk about myself when the very charge in question is whether I am a vow-breaker or not. How can I deny the charge, yet do so without talking about myself?
It would be like saying, "The Lions are the worst team in the history of football" (a claim I would be quite prepared to accept!) without talking about the Lions. Yet if I mention myself at all, then I am supposedly this huge narcissist.
This is why I don't play your game by the self-serving, lopsided, double standard rules that you guys set for the game, so you can continue on in your smear campaigns.
The first considerations for everyone ought to be truth and love. The truth has to do with what the facts of the matter are. If the charge is true, it can be proven. Love involves treating others with charity and not accusing them falsely, without even proper reason to do so. (2-16-10)
It's always double standards with you guys. TAO wants to cite an old post of mine? I'm delighted that he did so, because in that very post I cited some resolutions ("vows") that Bishop James White made. Why is it that he is not called a "vow-breaker" on the same grounds that you claim I am one? Here is what the good bishop wrote:
I have done all I could since then in light of certain aspects of your behavior to avoid interaction like the plague.
My website contains nothing about you for that very reason. . . . I apologize for even considering the idea of having any contact.
I have to trust God's Spirit to lead His people as He sees fit. I have had a number of folks contact me about your posting of my letters and actually warn me against "casting pearls before swine" in doing what I am doing even now. I had three people say to me this morning, "You are wasting your time." I will have to accept their counsel after this response.
Mr. Armstrong, I have no interest, whatsoever, in continuing this with you. I don't like you, and I don't believe you like me. Until a few weeks ago I had followed the path of wisdom and avoided every entanglement with you. I erred in moving from that path. . . .
Continuing to attempt to reason with you is likewise foolish: if you write an angry e-mail, like yesterday, and I reply to it, the next day you'll use the calm, rational response, and upbraid me for being nasty. No matter what I do, the end is the same. I knew this years ago. My memory must be failing or something for even making the attempt.
I'm going to ask you to join me in promising to stay as far away from each other as possible. I'm not asking you to not respond on your own website to what I write or doing whatever you want to do when speaking, etc. I am talking about personal interaction. Stay out of #prosapologian. Don't write to me. Don't ask to do dialogues, debates, or anything else. You just do your thing, and I'll do mine. OK?
White later challenged me to do an oral debate in 2007; in fact he did it again right before he wrote the above; when I declined, this was his "sour grapes" response.
This was from personal correspondence, and was dated 12 January 2001. Further details can be obtained by following the link in my paper above. We all know how White has studiously avoided mentioning my name or dealing with me since that time, over nine years ago. (2-16-10)
I've written about all this nonsense several times. There is no mystery as to my positions on it, and I've shown time and again that I never broke a "vow" at any time:
James White's Reply to My Recent Critique / The "Vow Breaker" Bum Rap (4-4-07)
Clarification of Why I No Longer Attempt Debate With Anti-Catholic Protestants (7-4-09)
My Basis For Refusing to Debate Anti-Catholics Any Longer Exactly the Same as James White's, For Refusing to Debate Certain Catholics (7-7-09)
In the latter paper I noted, for example, how James White used to say he would never debate Dr. Art Sippo, because of objections to his behavior. But sure enough, later on he did challenge him to debate, just as he did to me, twice (2001 and 2007) after he said he would never do so in 1995 because I was an insufferable dumbbell: so sez Mr. White.
I've done nothing that James White hasn't done himself, except that I am consistent with my principles, and I don't have to lie about other fellow Christians in order to live by them. I merely changed my mind on one extreme, half-humorous statement I made in 2001 that went too far. So what. James White has done far worse than that. I can't absolutely avoid all interaction whatever with anti-Catholics (sub-debate stuff) as a Catholic apologist.
For example, right now in documenting how you guys lie in order to supposedly further your goals, I'm "dealing" with you. But I am not debating theology. And that is what I decided to stop doing in October 2007. This is an ethical discussion, and an exposure of the almost non-existent NT ethics of anti-Catholics, where it comes to treating others, even fellow Protestants (Reiss, Birch et al; White's treatment of Caner, Craig, etc.; just about anyone who has a principled disagreement with him).
But I have engaged in an actual debate only once (recently with Jason Engwer, under special exempted circumstances) since October 2007 when I decided I was through with attempted debate, after my challenge to debate in a chat room about the definition of Christianity was turned down seven times by six anti-Catholics, including TAO and Gene "Troll" Bridges (twice by Bishop White). That was the final straw. If even that fundamental premise-issue can't be discussed, there is no hope for any intelligent discourse. This farcical "discussion" proves that yet again.
It's probably the best time-management decision I have ever made since starting my full-time apologetics ministry in December 2001. (2-16-10)
There's no pleasing Dave.
Dave then: "Still waiting for the documentation of the charge."
Dave now: "TAO wants to cite an old post of mine?"
Dave put it this way "there is no hope for any intelligent discourse" and perhaps we ought to leave it at that. (2-16-10)
And for a second time I ask: how does this thing you cite prove that I broke a VOW? Recall that the insinuation in this instance and many times through the years is that I have broken a VOW, not just a promise or a resolution.
You haven't shown that. I have shown that what I've done is not one whit different from what Bishop White himself has done.
But you want to ignore that. I know why you do, because you have no case.
You keep proving that the charge is groundless. Is this your "evidence"? (2-16-10)
Jesus said, "Simply let your 'Yes' be 'Yes,' and your 'No,' 'No'; anything beyond this comes from the evil one" (Mt 5:37).
Armstrong said: "Let your 'yes' be maybe or maybe not." (2-16-10)
Not at all. I refuse to believe that you can't comprehend the distinctions to be made here. I just don't believe it. Your personal dislikes blind you, if you are blinded at all. That is the most charitable interpretation possible.
Jesus was not simply about law and legalism (that was the Pharisees' thing); He was about intelligent application of law in conjunction with justice and mercy and love of God and neighbor: the "weightier elements" of the Law. Hence, like I said, He recognized that there can be exceptions to the rule(s): rescuing a sheep on the Sabbath if necessary; eating the showbread, like David did, even though only the priests were technically allowed to do so.
There are perfectly reasonable exceptions to rules. My own "rule" was self-imposed to begin with. So I made an exception to it. Everyone understands that. It is only anti-Catholics who have to smear the Catholic no matter what he does, who don't understand it.
Then there is the essential difference between vows and oaths on one hand, and resolutions and promises on the other [note: later (see below) I recognized after further reflection, that a "promise" is closer to an oath or vow]. Reasonable, intelligent folk understand that exceptions and even reversals can be made in the latter instances, whereas oaths and vows are far more serious and binding, and don't allow for such reversals. That is true both in the biblical understanding and in the cultural / dictionary-level understanding. No one holds a person to a new year's resolution to lose 15 pounds, as if to not do it is a "lie" or "breaking a vow." That's why vows are so utterly serious in the first place, and made only after the utmost consideration.
It's obvious to me (because these distinctions are so self-evident for anyone who does the least amount of study on it) that you guys want to deliberately blur the distinctions in the service of the smear campaign against Catholic apologists like myself.
You have to find a way to discredit what we do, and indirectly, Catholicism (or Arminians or Lutherans or whoever else the target is at the moment), so you do whatever it takes, including lying. You know that "breaking a vow" sounds far more serious than "changing a resolution" or "changing one's mind on a former resolution" so you simply repeat the charge no matter how many times it has been refuted and exposed for what it is.
Anything goes in service of "Mother Anti-Catholicism." Any lie against a Catholic or Catholicism is permitted because it is for a good cause. The ends justify the means. (2-16-10)
Moreover, you wink at and ignore it when people like James White make resolutions scarcely any different than my own and routinely break them as if they didn't exist. You wink and nod at his constant insults of others, and don't protest that. But as soon as one dares to speak out against that, then it is Chicken Little.
You wink at someone like TAO stating on White's own blog, about Steve Ray (on 4-10-09):
That makes you a liar. That's not an insult, that's not a personal attack, though it is a criticism of the way you've been acting. If we could clean up your act by giving you a nice fresh bar of antibacterial soap, we would, but the kind of truth-telling problem is a sin, and requires a stronger soap . . . clean up your act. Get right with Christ now. The soap that fullers used to use (think bleach) is not strong enough to remove your sins, . . .
Bishop James White can write about Dr. Art Sippo:
Art Sippo Lies About Thursday's Debate (post title of 6-12-05)
I honestly hope Bill Rutland will write to him and rebuke him for posting such outrageous lies, I truly do. . . . This is an outrageous lie. There is not a shred of truth in it, and I can document it. Sippo, of course, cannot, but documenting his outrageous claims has never been one of his strong points anyway. . . . This alone exposes Sippo's lie . . . After posting this abject lie, . . . You can see Sippo's aversion to truth extends to his theology as well as his dishonest relating of past events. . . . The only sad part of all of this is that once again folks . . . will blindly believe whatever Sippo says, despite the fact he could never prove his allegations and we have all the documentation.
[wow; how familiar that sounds!]
White also goes after Bill Rutland (8-8-05):
It is sorta hard to avoid the conclusion that maybe, just maybe, behind that is the idea that "Hey, maybe we should have the freedom to say anything we want in this forum and no one should have the right to expose what we say, even when it involves blatant, documentable lies about others, in any other way." Sorta sounds like that is the idea, but let's hope not. . . . I simply refer the reader to the unanswered documentation of the lies posted by Sippo (he has never retracted them) and the sad collusion of Rutland with his personal attacks here.I see that literacy isn't your strong suit. This is what I actually said (verbatim), in the very post you presume to comment on:
"…the Dave Armstrong School of Oaths, Vows, and Resolutions."
Then there's the title of my post (Hint! Hint!).
Of course I realize that you like to compartmentalize the obligation to keep your word into different, airtight categories with various escape-hatches. (2-16-10)
Now we have the sophistry and obscurantism of backing off the original accusation. Since I have easily shown that the charge itself is groundless, by challenging the liars to back it up and prove it with something I ever said, now you retreat to word games and the pretense that I have not been accused of breaking vows in the first place.
You know this not to be the case. It has been taking place for years. Eric Svendsen used this charge; James White often has; now TAO and Hays and Bridges and Pike have followed suit. It's the classic Big Lie: you simply repeat it enough times like a mantra and ignorant followers who trust your judgment will believe it. After all, it has been stated 179 times, right? It must be the truth! But when you and your fellow slanderers are called on it and challenged to put up and shut up, you can't do so, and have to retreat back to juvenile word games and sophistry.
So, e.g., on this blog not long ago, official contributor Gene "Troll" Bridges wrote, on 7-9-09:
You've also taken an oath to stop interacting with "anti-Catholics", and yet here you are wanting us to interact with you. I, for one, take the Law on making vows seriously, and I am not going to contribute to you sin before God in violating your word.
Ironically, Bridges knows full well what a real oath or vow is, because he also wrote about that on this blog (2-27-08):
From the Second London Confession:
23. Lawful Oaths and Vows(2-16-10)
1. A lawful oath is an act of religious worship, in which the person swearing in truth, righteousness, and judgement, solemnly calls God to witness what he swears, and to judge him according to the truth or falsity of it.
2. Only by the name of God can a righteous oath be sworn, and only if it is used with the utmost fear of God and reverence. Therefore, to swear vainly or rashly by the glorious and awesome name of God, or to swear by any other name or thing, is sinful, and to be regarded with disgust and detestation. But in matters of weight and moment, for the confirmation of truth, and for the ending of strife, an oath is sanctioned by the Word of God. . . .
3. Whoever takes an oath sanctioned by the Word of God is bound to consider the weightiness of so solemn an act, and affirm or confess to nothing except that which he knows to be true. For by rash, false, and vain oaths, the Lord is provoked and because of them this land mourns.
4. An oath is to be taken in the plain and common sense of the words. without equivocation or mental reservation.
5. A vow, which is not to be made to any creature but to God alone, is to be made and performed with all the utmost care and faithfulness.
Bishop James White wrote about me on 4-6-07:
He is not stable. He swings from pillar to post, and if we did, in fact, arrange a formal debate today, how could anyone trust that next week he won't have yet another change of heart, make another vow to avoid anti-Catholics, and bag out?
TAO wrote on 7-12-09 (also on this blog):
. . . he made the following vow: 'I'll be ignoring you and other anti-Catholics . . .' . . . since that vow was made. . . . But now the vow has morphed.
You play the same word-games, slipping back and forth between "vow" and "resolution" as if they were the same thing:
When he suspends a resolution, it's only temporary. . . . yet he remains resolute in his punctilious fidelity to every solemn vow. His word is his bond. He never ever goes back on his word, except whenever he happens to go back on his word–which, however, is not to be confused with breaking a promise.
This is what liars do, of course. The equivocation and ambiguities and word-games and so forth . . . this is what Bill Clinton did, with his playing around with what "is" means. That's your game. My position, on the other hand, is very straightforward:
1) A vow or oath made to and under God is far more serious than a mere self-imposed, self-referring resolution.
2) I never made a vow concerning anti-Catholics.
3) Yet I have been falsely accused of making such a vow.
4) Even what I did do is constantly misrepresented as supposedly ruling out all interaction whatever, when in fact I stated I was done with actual theological debate with anti-Catholics.
5) When I protest about being characterized as a vow-breaker, and challenge my accusers to put up or shut up and prove that I am guilty of this, they revert to the very sort of word games and obfuscation that they falsely accuse me of doing.
Witness the present case. When called on your having charged -- with your buddies -- that I have broken a vow, you revise the history and pretend that you have only objected to my breaking resolutions.
Just keep doing that, Steve. You're making a fool of yourself in front of everyone. Anyone with an ounce of fairness can observe what is going on here. You wouldn't have a prayer in a court case with a jury. They would see right through your nonsense and asinine word-games. (2-16-10)
It's always double standards with you guys.
This is an ethical discussion, and an exposure of the almost non-existent NT ethics of anti-Catholics, where it comes to treating others, even fellow Protestants (Reiss, Birch et al; White's treatment of Caner, Craig, etc.; just about anyone who has a principled disagreement with him).
So if we apply the very same standard to fellow Protestants, then that's a double standard? (2-16-10)
You apply it to Arminians, and slander them without cause. But you won't apply the same supposed standards to real instances of Calvinist and anti-Catholic hypocrisy and sins of bearing false witness.
The thing is to lie about and smear whoever disagrees with you: be they Catholic, Arminian, Lutheran, Orthodox, or three-toed, red-haired, blue-eyed Rastafarian dog catchers. (2-16-10)
Steve Hays, too, knows what a real vow is, and he thinks that even a vow is not absolutely absolute, if there are mitigating circumstances (precisely what I have been saying with my reference to the sheep on the Sabbath and the showbread):
1.Vows are not moral absolutes. They are not an end in themselves, but a means to an end.
The end is the point of principle, whereas the means are pragmatic.
A process is not a moral absolute. It is not a value in itself. Rather, a process is a means to an end.
This is not a question of morality, but prudence.
2.Even in the case of moral absolutes, in a fallen world we may often be confronted with conflicting obligations. In that event, a higher duty overrules a lower duty. . . .
As I said before, vows are not moral absolutes.
1.The Mosaic law distinguishes between lawful and unlawful vows (e.g. Num 30).
So we have the bizarre situation of Hays and others accusing me of breaking a vow. But Hays says sometimes vows can indeed be broken in extraordinary circumstances.
My position is that vows are binding, apart from extremely extraordinary circumstances. But I have not made any vow concerning anti-Catholics, anyway. I have made resolutions. And they certainly can be changed and modified, as circumstances warrant.
But Hays wants to deny that, so he continues on with his mocking, even though he has stated the above possibility of being non-binding, even about vows.
Don't try to find moral or even logical consistency on this site . . . It's a lost cause. (2-16-10)
It seems to me that there is no meeting of the minds between Dave and the Triabloguers as to the precise definitions of vows, oaths, resolutions and promises.
See what Thesaurus.com* has to say about the word "vow." I have put in bold the various words in question that have come up in the combox:
Main Entry: vow
Part of Speech: noun
Definition: promise
Synonyms: affiance, assertion, asseveration, oath, pledge, profession, troth, word of honor
breach, break
Main Entry: vow
Part of Speech: verb
Definition: make a solemn promise
affirm, assure, consecrate, covenant, cross one's heart, declare, dedicate, devote, give word of honor, pledge, plight, promise, swear, swear up and down, testify, undertake solemnly, vouch, warrant
The words vow, oath, promise all seem to carry the same meaning. The only word I don't see here is resolution which upon further study doesn't connect any of the three words above to it, but carries the meaning declaration, determination, intention.
While I think Dave's precise delineations of the three words are overwrought in relation to modern English usage, it seems to me likely that he had previously made a resolution (determination, intention) to not interact with "anti-Catholics" (unless by stated exception necessity) but not a promise, oath or vow.
* Roget's 21st Century Thesaurus, Third Edition
Copyright © 2010 by the Philip Lief Group. (2-16-10)
What a breath of fresh air. Whew . . .
And that is all I have been saying. But my friends here can't admit this simple fact because it goes against the playbook and spinning talking points for "Dear ol' Dave."
Admitting that a Catholic may be right around here (about anything) and that his critics may be wrong is itself a naughty no-no.
You, being a very fair-minded reasonable guy, can declare the obvious. Kudos and bravo to you for having the courage to do it in this environment. (2-16-10)
I do think that "promise" is more like an oath or vow than a resolution is, so upon reflection and seeing the above definitions I agree with pilgrim on that. I just threw it out in the midst of 10,000 words on this mess today.
All along I have stated that I made resolutions (the most recent in October 2007). The one in 2001 was too strong and I later changed my mind on it. Since it never was a vow or oath, there is no sin in that.
Besides, as I've shown, I have acted hardly any differently from James White, who said he was through with me in 2001, too. (2-17-10)
The person who is truly utterly confused about the proper distinctions between oaths and resolutions, is Eric Svendsen. In a post of 14 January 2005, devoted to blasting me up and down as a liar and oath-breaker, he shows an incredible ignorance of the distinctions, since he uses the two terms interchangeably (talking about the same exact thing, using these terms; my bolding):
1) Here are the statements from his many "solemn oaths" again.
2) If you don't think this constitutes a clear violation of a solemn oath, . . .
3) DA has adequately demonstrated that his oaths are meaningless.
4) Or are you in such a defensive posture that you fear "all would be lost" if you did the right thing by calling DA to task for his oath-breaking practices?
RESOLUTION or RESOLVE
1) Did DA "keep this resolve" . . .
2) Those were the terms of his resolution.
3) He has broken that resolution over and over again.
4) Indeed, the resolution itself was . . .
1) . . . a solemn oath resulting from a "RESOLUTION STATEMENT"—let alone three identical solemn oaths resulting from three separate "resolution statements" taken over a period of five short years!
He also used "swear" and "swore" once each: which to most ears, I think, have that feel of the courtroom or the "oath of office" and so forth.
We can only conclude, then, that Dr. Svendsen is unfamiliar with these basic definitions that were helpfully presented above. He doesn't know the difference between a resolution and a "solemn oath."
Furthermore, Jason Engwer, on Svendsen's blog, described my statements as "resolutions" (not oaths or vows):
Prejean's decision to "retire" probably is about as lasting as Dave Armstrong's "resolutions".
As I said in a previous article, Jonathan Prejean's recent claim to be "retiring" from "proselytizing" was about as credible as the "resolutions" of Dave Armstrong.
(8-24-05) (2-17-10)
TAO shows the same sort of confusion as to what in fact I have claimed (more proof that you guys are just "winging" this and have little idea what you are talking about, let alone knowledge of dictionary definitions):
You made the decision/vow/whatever to ignore Reformed apologists. That's no one's fault but your own. But I'll tell you what - I'd have a little more respect for your refusal to answer a simple question if you had something you yourself considered a "vow" not to do it. You draw a line between "vows" and something apparently equal so binding that it leaves you in between a rock and a hard place where you are a speudo-vow-breaker or a coward (by your own analysis).
Part of your on-going campaign in support of your resolution/promise/vow/whatever to be "ignoring you and other anti-Catholics".
(7-16-09) (2-17-10)
Note too that for all his wasted words, Dave actually does get around to admitting everything that Steve and I have said about him, not just in this thread but in many other posts.
Also, personal note for Dave: does your priest know that you wrote 1/10th of a novel on Triablogue comments during the course of a single day? I just wonder if you might consider telling him, so he can help you with your vow/promise/oath/resolution/suggestion/ideal/hypothesis/perhaps-yes-perhaps-no "I'm never gonna interact with anti-Catholics" pledge/affirmation/creed/hope/statement thing. After all, if you had put that much energy into Hail Mary's and Our Fathers, your Purgatory sentence could have been reduced to only several thousand years. But now you've squandered that time and it's forever irredeemable. (2-17-10)
It's remarkable that after all this, the supposed "proof" that I ever made a vow or oath about anti-Catholics and broke it remains nowhere to be seen. There is altogether good reason for that. It doesn't exist. Not even anti-Catholic myth-making and revisionist history can pretend that it does.
Instead we have mocking, evasion, and obfuscation.
One rational, fair-minded (Protestant) soul actually tries to bring objective sanity into the discussion and considers the dictionary definitions of words, and he is ignored.
We can't have that! We must play games with words and define them our own way, so that the despised Catholic apologist can't possibly ever be right about anything! That goes against the Playbook. It can't be allowed to happen. What would James White say??!!
Words don't matter; ethics don't matter; NT injunctions of how others should be treated, and how we ought to admit it when we are wrong, go out the window. Anything goes, because of the wicked "evil" Catholic who must never be right on anything whatever. (2-17-10)
Wait, Dave is seriously suggesting that we need to provide a source for where he said he wouldn't interact with anti-Catholics anymore, after he linked us to his article titled "Clarification of Why I No Longer Attempt Debate With Anti-Catholic Protestants"? And in that clarification, he nowhere says "I don't mean I won't ever do it" but instead repeatedly asserts "this is why I won't ever do it."
This is beyond hubris and deep into the realm of insanity.
I can't wait for DA's dodge that writing 6000+ word responses on a site he says is run by an anti-Catholic doesn't constitute "debate" because it's not conducted by a debate society or whatnot. . . .
So it's clear there is no clear-cut line between "debate" and "dialogue" in Dave's mind. I trust readers can see through his veneer and see that this simply means "I don't talk to anti-Catholics who won't let me win." (2-17-10)
Wait, Dave is seriously suggesting that we need to provide a source for where he said he wouldn't interact with anti-Catholics anymore, . . .
Nice try, and another excellent example of how what I say has been fundamentally distorted by anti-Catholic Protestants.
Of course, what I have been demanding throughout this thread is for my critics to show where I ever made a "vow" or an "oath" to do these things. Eric Svendsen is so clueless about definitions, that he can't even distinguish between a "solemn oath" and a "resolution," as I showed. Let him run that by his wife: that he made a "resolution" at their wedding rather than a vow, and see how well that goes over. But that is how stupid his reasoning was when it came to me.
It hasn't been shown that I made and broke a vow because it doesn't exist. That's why all the mocking and idiotic demeanor keeps taking place, precisely because it is indeed known that the proof is not to be had, and an anti-Catholic would rather be impaled than ever admit that a Catholic was right about anything. If it existed, surely it would have been produced by now, rather than every anti-Catholic in this thread making an ass and fool of himself (and John Calvin and Shakespeare both used the word "ass" [donkey] as I just did, so don't even start with that crap).
I have stated repeatedly that yes, in the past I have made statements that upon reflection were too extreme and impossible to abide by, being an apologist. One of these that has been cited was from 2001. I have no problem admitting that I made a mistake there. I'm not like the anti-Catholics on this thread who seemingly can never admit to being wrong about anything. It was no sin, but it was dumb in its extremity. I've done lots of dumb things in my life, and I suspect I will do many more before I leave this earth. I'm not perfect like anti-Catholics are. But it's one thing to do something dumb; quite another to be an alleged vow-breaker and oath-breaker, which I have never done.
It was no vow or oath, which is the main point, and the point under consideration. Thus, it is not a violation of a "solemn oath" (Svendsen) or breaking of a vow, to change one's mind on such a thing. It is exactly because of my high view of vows and oaths (following the biblical view) that I was very careful not to use those words, because that was not how I perceived what I did at all.
In that very statement, I specifically used the word "resolve". It's simply not a vow or an oath. My critics have been lying about that for now nine years and running. That is a serious sin. They continue to lie, even though I have repeatedly demonstrated that there is nothing to it, and that there is considerable hypocrisy and inconsistency among my critics on the same score.
Now the game is to be legalistic and ridiculous about what I have chosen to do and not do with regard to anti-Catholics, as if that is not my prerogative to decide in the first place. If I say I am not debating out of a principle (explained till I am blue in the face), I get the accusation that I am really doing it (wink, wink) because I am a coward. Or it is stated that I have run from anti-Catholics all along (a one-minute perusal of my Anti-Catholicism, James White, and Contra-Catholicism web pages puts the lie to that immediately).
If I decide to make an exception (for excellent reasons) to my usual policy to debate Jason Engwer, I am mocked for supposedly being untrue to my word, as if no exceptions whatever are ever justifiable. Then when I cease doing that and go back to my regular work (just as I said I would) I am mocked as a coward, as if no one is aware of my own resolution, that they mocked when I entered the debate. Absolutely nothing I do makes any difference. This is how bigots and those who despise other human beings act. (2-17-10)
But pilgrimsarbour [himself not an anti-Catholic -- like Peter Pike --, but a sensible Presbyterian Christian] raises a good point:
My advice--don't make "statements of intent" of any kind on your blogs. Just pray that the Holy Spirit leads you to do what is pleasing and honouring in His sight, and that He grants you the grace and strength to follow through as consistently as possible.
I think this is good advice, generally speaking. But it occurred to me that one of the reasons folks like myself have been led to make such statements (and I was goaded into my 2001 statement made on Steve Ray's discussion board by anti-Catholic polemicist "Ronnie" and it was partially in reaction to the similar resolution that James White had already made regarding myself, that I have cited above) is precisely because if we choose not to interact with anti-Catholics, because it is always a futile effort and nothing is ever accomplished, and it usually descends into pure insults on their side (just as we see in this thread), we are accused of being cowards.
That's not at all the case with me, since I have a proven track record of debating virtually all the leading online Catholics. James White has ignored (or, "run from," from one perspective) far more of my critiques than I have ever avoided of his.
So we feel led to make statements of this nature in large part to make it clear that it is a principled decision to avoid certain folks with whom we believe no constructive dialogue is possible. But if I say that I am called a liar; misrepresenting my true motives. Fine; say what you will. I am still responsible under God to make responsible use of my time and efforts, as a matter of stewardship. I happen to think it is pointless to engage at any length folks who say you are "evil" or "beyond hubris and deep into the realm of insanity," as Peter Pike just delightfully observed.
One thing that is obvious is that no one likes to be considered so unserious and lacking in intellectual acumen that others will decide they are not worth spending the time debating. That's a blow to human pride. I believe this is what is really at the bottom of the extreme disdain and insults thrown my way, because I have often (not always) abided by this policy in my 14 years online.
No one wants to think that their position is the mental, intellectual equivalent of a flat earth or geocentric cosmology, or Holocaust denial. But my view of the fringe movement of anti-Catholic Protestantism is scarcely any higher than my view of those things. I've always thought it was a viciously self-defeating system. I have dealt with it only because it was part of my job as an apologist, to oppose error.
Beyond that basic view of the position, there is the further fact of how anti-Catholics I have attempted to debate, when I had no resolution otherwise, have conducted themselves. And that is, of course, uniformly disgraceful behavior, that is an insult to the very notion of dialogue.
After years of trying off and on to try to have a rational discussion, I gave up. When I made an exception for Jason Engwer recently, he was a gentleman, as he usually is, but he systematically ignored much of my argumentation (as I demonstrated, to the tune of ignoring 87 and 88% of my words, when he cited them back to reply to). So that was no debate. He didn't offer insults outwardly, but in his utter disregard for his opponent's arguments, he showed quite a bit of disdain.
So which is better: pretending to debate without really seriously trying to do so, as he did, or stating upfront that you don't consider a certain strain of thought of sufficient seriousness to spend time debating and interacting with (which is my position)?
I spent yesterday and a small portion of today exposing the nefarious tactics used by anti-Catholics, the lack of ethics, and pitiful "logic."
That's enough. Now I need to get back to serious work. (2-17-10)
One thing that is obvious is that no one likes to be considered so unserious and lacking in intellectual acumen that others will decide they are not worth spending the time debating.Cf. http://socrates58.blogspot.com/2007/10/chat-room-debate-challenge-to.html
[this was my debate challenge on the question of the definition of Christianity] (2-17-10)
Exactly, TAO! Thanks for proving my point. The challenge was precisely to demonstrate that anti-Catholics are so unserious that they will refuse to defend their views, even in its most basic aspects. And so seven of y'all did just that. You wanted no part of a double cross-examination format.
I knew it was 99.99% certain when I made the challenge that no one would be willing to take me up on it (because no one had in the previous eleven years online), and sure enough, that is what happened. So, far from proving anti-Catholics are worth any time debating, it demonstrated the opposite. No one should take them seriously because they won't defend their fundamental premises, like any self-respecting intellectual does.
Just like this thread: even the most elementary requirements are scorned and mocked. No one cared about the definitions of the words in dispute, which is always fundamental to any serious discussion. The only one who did was Pilgrimsarbour, and he's not anti-Catholic. Because he isn't, and is a serious thinker, I can easily have good discussions with him (and have had several). Theologically, he is a Calvinist. He agrees with you guys. But he also cares about ethics and talking about basic premises in a way that no one else in this thread has.
The other basic thing lacking is the notion of "innocent until proven guilty." The anti-Catholic principle for a Catholic is "guilty until not proven guilty." So I supposedly am a vow-breaker and liar. When challenged to prove why this allegedly is the case, you clowns come up with absolutely nothing; zero, zilch, zip, nada.
Therefore, you thumb your nose at the basic requirements of what you need to do to prove your case: 1) define terms properly, and 2) produce solid evidence that the accused person did what was charged.
This is only one of 10,000 reasons that I don't take anti-Catholicism seriously. I never did. The only reason I have dealt with it at all is to show that it is gravely mistaken in many areas. I can still approach the anti-Catholic in the sense that he is a brother in Christ, which is huge common ground, but because I am not considered that, it never works. It's doomed from the outset. (2-17-10)
Now having inevitably reached the stage of the surreal and absurd, as always in the anti-Catholic fantasy world of nonsense, my powers of rationality have exhausted themselves, and we must descend to humorous satire.
In honor of the occasion, I present the classic Fiddler on the Roof scene with the engaged couple who "gave each other a pledge."
Now we can add "pledge" to the roster of oath, vow, resolution, and promise. Enjoy! ROFL (2-17-10)


text:
- Hide menu
When I created this recipe for Pecan Peach Granola I pondered a bit on what flavors would meld together in my mouth. I searched through my pantry to see what ingredients I had on hand and came up with this recipe. I had some Sucanat sugar on the shelf and decided to play with it a too. Sucanat (Sugar Cane Natural) is sugar in its most natural form. It is extracted from the sugar cane and the freshly squeezed juice is evaporated by a special Swiss process. Only the water is removed. This process preserves all the molasses. Sucanat is organically grown with no added preservatives and additives. However this sugar is not raw. Because of the deep flavor that it adds to the recipe you can substitute Yucan Syrup which is raw and has a distinct flavor that is semi-close to molasses.
Oat Soak
This was wonderful, even before dehydration!


text:
Top 5 math apps for iPhone and iPad
TiPb checks out the best, most must-have math apps to load up on your iPhone and iPad
Student enrolled in math classes? Have a job that requires the use of math? Simply someone with a love for mathematics? Whether it's arithmetic, calculus, or hacking the code of the universe, there are dozens of iPhone and iPad math apps to choose from. Read on for TiPb's Top 5, must have favorites to get you started!
WolframAlpha (Universal)
WolframAlpha is a much more than a math app, but the computational and mathematical abilities it possesses are phenomenal. Need to not only calculate a complicated integral, but know the steps to get the answer on your own? WolframAlpha can do it. Need to quickly solve a cubic equation? WolframAlpha will calculate all real and complex solutions. Or perhaps you want to look up Fermat's little theorem or the Riemann Hypothesis - WolframAlpha's got you covered. From basic mathematics to advanced calculus, statistics, physics and other topics, WolframAlpha is an excellent tool to have in your pocket.
[$1.99 - iTunes link]
Calcbot (Universal)
Calcbot is a beautifully designed calculator the iPhone and iPad. In addition to being UI candy, Calcbot offers many features that makes it a great candidate to replace the native calculator on the iPhone (and fill the gap on the iPad). The more advanced, scientific functions are accessible by a swipe and Calcbot records your history onto a tape that you can email or send values back into the calculator. And true to Tapbots' style, Calcbot comes to life with finely machined animation and sound.
[$1.99 - iTunes link]
Also Check out:
- PCalc is a very robust and feature-filled RPN calculator and is universal for both iPhone and iPad. [$9.99 - iTunes link]
Apollonius (iPhone)
Apollonius is a must-have application for Geometry students. With it, you can make geometric constructions as if you were using a straightedge and compass. While making constructions, you can move points around to adjust the sizes, angles, and distances to visually see how these changes affect your constructions. Even with complicated constructions, the app runs very smoothly. If you've had any experience with Geometer's Sketchpad, Apollonius is very similar. My only complaint it's not a universal app for the iPhone and iPad.
[$3.99 - iTunes link]
Math Ref (Universal)
Math Ref is an excellent reference app for mathematics that includes over 1,400 helpful formulas, figures, tips and examples of the equations, and concepts. It also includes example problems and solutions that you may see in specific subject areas. Math Ref doesn't have a fancy UI, but the information is there; it is clear; and it is easily searchable. Since the UI is basic, Math Ref is very snappy and runs smoothly. This is an app that deserves to be in every math student's pocket.
[$0.99 - iTunes link]
Also Check out:
- iMathematics! is a universal reference app that contains over 700 formulas in over 120 topics as well as 8 solvers and calculators. [Free, with in-app purchases iTunes link]
SkyNumbers (iPhone and iPad)
For a fun game that will refine your arithmetic skills, check out SkyNumbers. In this game, you're given a target number while other numbers fall from the sky. You must combine these numbers with addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division to reach the target number. If a single figure falls through the last cloud, the game is over. The speed at which the numbers fall increases with time making this game a fun challenge. SkyNumbers has Game Center support and you can also share your scores on Facebook and Twitter.
[Free for iPhone, with in-app purchases - iTunes link [$2.99 for iPad - iTunes link]
Your top math apps?
So there you have it, our top 5 best math apps for iPhone and iPad, but that doesn't mean there aren't some other great ones floating around out there. Also, be sure to check out our Picks of the Week and the TiPb iPhone App and Games Forum for more recommendations, and if we missed any of your favorites, leave them in the comments below!
Have something to say about this story? Leave a comment! Need help with something else? Ask in our forums!
Reader comments
Top 5 math apps for iPhone and iPad
I second SpaceTime.
Hi Leanna Lofte. Thank you for sharing your knowledge. It's helpful for me. Because i'm developing a website about Math Apps. Thank You!
This is my Website: http://www.coolmath-apps.com
How do you feel about it?
For me the best math app for iOS is Soulver. It is a very powerful calculator. It accepts phrases in plain English and even multiples variables. Thanks :)
I like Soulver a lot and my kids use MathTime, which my son developed and is a flashcard-style app for doing math fact drills.
I was a finance major and the BAII+ was invaluable for me. It's a direct copy of the actual handheld unit, but on my phone!
If you want to get really good and really fast at multiplication, try out 24x7digital's TimesTables app.
I spent a few days searching for a basic calculator. My needs were:
-A record tape that allowed me to view previous calculations
-A well designed interface
-Focus on arithmetic, so that I wouldn't have to wade through advanced formulas that I do not need
I wound up with Digits, and I've been very happy with it. Great design, and perfect for a guy whose formulas don't go past arithmetic too often.
How can you leave out GraphCalc? It is an algebraic input calculator that shows you the expression as you type it. Hit equals, and it evaluates it. The big deal is that it remembers the expression you typed and its result so you can scroll back and see what you did. You can use this to catch errors, and just tap and it grabs either the resulting value from an old expression or the complete expression itself. So if you typed in a big, bad formula and just want to change one or two numbers, just grab the old expression and edit it, then hit equals again. It's an amazing time saver.
LOVE Calcbot. Great app.
Just wish it loaded slightly faster when it it has been removed from the multi-tasking bar.
www.soolver.com - free, online, step by step calculator. Working with ipad and iphone. I`m waiting for theirs app!
I was searching for the good apps for making my calculation easy & here it is i got the apps.It is very nice, specially for the fraction methods & i liked the math ref apps too,which made calculation so easy.
Here is a review of Elevated Math: http://www.tekgadg.com/tekgadg/2011/8/12/elevated-math-for-ipad.html
Try JSCalculator: http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/jscalculator/id443347724
You can store your formulas and edit them in all possible ways.
Try MultiAlien - math flash cards meets alien space ships. Use the right answer to destroy the invaders! http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/multialien/id440136560
A great iOS app for Intro Stats is "Statistics 1″. It has Cliff Notes-like lessons, quizzes, flashcards, calculators, decision-trees, glossaries, and a bunch of other tools for learning basic statistics. The app is currently featured in Back to School section of the iTunes App Store (8/24/2011).http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/statistics-1/id339661480?mt=8
For an arcade style app that lets you practice your math skills, check out 'Meteor Math'. Here's a trailer: http://youtu.be/XPYxRIQmlBk and you can find it on the app store here: http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/meteor-math/id458612541?ls=1&mt=8
Also Trunky Learns Numbers is great for early school years http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/trunky-learns-numbers-early/id467089761?l...
Here's another flash card App for iPad and iPhone. However, this one spices up the drudgery of rote learning with the speed and excitement of a horse race.
Sound strange?
In, Flashmath Derby, you race your horse against the computer. Correct answers urge your horse forward, while incorrect or delayed answers cause you to start falling behind. It really adds a sense of urgency to the activity and helps to focus young minds. Check it out here...
try Drop the Wall, the great math games.http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/drop-the-wall/id443501074?mt=8
CAS Calc P11 1.0
Device: iOS iPad Only
Category: Education
Price: $11.99,
Version: 1.0 (iTunes)
There are good news for all those who are looking for a scientific pocket calculator with graphic abilities.
If you are the owner of an iPad, you can buy one of the most advanced scientific calculators, which is called "CAS Calc P11" for a few bucks.
with more than 1'200 mathematical functions, the ability to display up to 10 plots simultaneously and direct print via airprint most needs are covered, alternatively results and plots can be sent to any e-mail account with a simple click.
A Latex editor is included for easy editing of formulas, a QWERTY keyboard is included. An external keyboard can be connected via Bluetooth.
CAS Calc P11 may be a very powerfull alternative to any scientific pocket calculator, the included extras like direct Airprint, e-mailing and included Latex editor may make it even superior to many established pocket calculators.
'Math Master for kids' is a very helpful applications for students who wants to improve their math skills. It covers almost all topics from grade 1 to grad 6. It has a FREE version too.
It can be downloaded at http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/math-master-for-kids/id477685782?ls=1&mt=8
'Math Master for kids' is a very helpful applications for students who wants to improve their math skills. It covers almost all topics from grade 1 to grad 6. It has a FREE version too.
It can be downloaded at http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/math-master-for-kids/id477685782?ls=1&mt=8
Thanks for the list. Another cool math app is Butterfly Math and it is excellent for pre-schoolers and pre-kindergarten students. Do check it out: http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/butterfly-math/id478786384?mt=8
Great apps. I found an app that solves some complicated systems of equations. Link here: http://itunes.apple.com/app/xsolve-mobile/id474568091?mt=8
My favorite Math App for High School and College:
Calculus Curve Sketching App for iPhone
Simply insert your function into the Calculus Curve Sketching App.
- derivative
- second derivative
- third derivative
- antiderivatives
- zeros of the function
- singularities
- extrema
- inflections points
- limit as x approaches infinity
- limit as x approaches a specific value
- domain of a function
- asymptotes
- symmetry
Has anyone taken a look at Mathway?http://www.mathway.com/
Is there an ipad Math app that can do what that does?
I would really appreciate your help
Have you tried Math Pentagon mathpentagon.com ?
It mentions that it is a structured program for ultimate math practice using work sheets. With Math Pentagon, you solve math problems on the iPad and preserve your work in the app.
I guess they cover Decimals, Fractions, Algebra, Percent, Statistics, Geometry, Algebra, Trigonometry etc.
Have tried the worksheets, they looked very good to me.
nice post man i m die hard fan of iphone few app you havent mentioned here like http://www.techotalk.com/2011/12/17/top-5-cool-iphone-apps/
Here is another app that does basic matrix operations(*, +, -), solves linear systems and does some nice curves fitting (linear, hyperbolic, logarithmic, power regression)
iPad Versionhttp://itunes.apple.com/us/app/matri...1828?ls=1&mt=8
iPhone Versionhttp://itunes.apple.com/us/app/matri...1765?ls=1&mt=8
Here's a new one that's getting great reviews: Spirit of Math Drills app. A complete drills system for grades 1 to middle school (and unless you remember math facts from your school days, it's good for adults too). Appsforhomeschooling.com gave it 5 out of 5. http://itunes.apple.com/app/spirit-of-math-drills/id507239996?mt=8
Undeniably imagine that that you stated. Your favorite justification appeared to be at the net the simplest factor to be mindful of. I say to you, I definitely get irked whilst people consider issues that they plainly don't know about. You managed to hit the nail upon the top and defined out the entire thing without having side-effects , other people could take a signal. Will likely be back to get more. Thank you
Chek out this great app for linear interpolation with amazing graphics get it while its on sale. "Fast interpolation"http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/fast-interpolation/id518586568?ls=1&mt=8
Chek out this great app for linear interpolation with amazing graphics get it while its on sale. "Fast interpolation"
Gr8 for engineering tableshttp://itunes.apple.com/us/app/fast-interpolation/id518586568?ls=1&mt=8
This is really fascinating, You're an excessively professional blogger. I've joined your feed and stay up for searching for extra of your wonderful post. Also, I have shared your website in my social networks
Math game for kids and adults Math Attacks FREE, Featured in over 120 App Stores.
AppStore: http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/math-attacks/id506041667?mt=8&uo=4
Check it out here: http://mathattacks.wordpress.com/
Take a look at this app too, lots of fun and my 5 year old loves it...best part is its free!!!
I highly recommend Digitron:
They also have free version:
We like Multiplication! an app to learn the timestables, works on Iphone / Ipad.
Another math application, maybe not that useful but very addictive :)
Another great math app is called Math Write for the iPad. This app lets the kids solve the problems instead of just picking from multiple choice answers. Search for "Math Write" or here's the link:
This one I recently found. its really cool app for kids to learn some basic operations -http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/basicmaths/id565024534?ls=1&mt=8
I'd like to mention my latest math app: Tellcraft: Math and Arithmetic Reloaded. It's free on the App Store so please download it: http://tellcraft.com/appstore
There's a new app on the market which I absolutely recommend!
It's called "Math Lookup" and contains ALL those High School formulas it's so difficult to remember.
Every single formula is linked to an example, which makes this so much easier to understand!
You might also want to check out Calculus Quiz Game. It's a game that helps practice derivates and integrals. It's 99 cents in the app store. https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/calculus-quiz-game/id623788997?mt=8&ign-...
We just released a free Algebra Quiz Game also. Download it here: https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/algebra-quiz-game-simplify/id641930369?m...
The best one i've seen yet is MATH 42 (https://itunes.apple.com/en/app/math-42/id664457128?mt=8&at=10l3Vy&ct=d_im)
Here are some features:
• It shows you step-by-step solution to your math problems with explanations.
• It enables you to show as many substebs as you want depending on you personal level of knowledge.
• It allows you to check up on your progress on different topics with a Test/Quiz mode
• It sketches function and gives you the critical points of a curve
Best Math Formulas App for students is
iOS :
Heli Math - free math game covering addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division with a flappy bird-style gameplay.
iTunes link:
I also came across some of the best maths formulas apps on this new site you can try website http://vizz.co
Hi Leanna,
My wife and I have just created our first math app (Box Drop Math Addition) and I'd love to hear what you think about it. The focus is on improving basic addition skills by engaging kids in a challenging box stacking game. We've also included a graph that shows progress towards mastery for equations from 1 to 10. I can provide a promo code if you send me an email. Our website is http://www.twenda.com/


text:
Since the game is at 4pm today instead of 6, I figured we could get this party started a little early today. Dillon Peters is getting his first start, hopefully backed up by the bats we saw Friday and Saturday.
Texas (4-7) vs. Dallas Baptist (6-5)
When: March 6, 2012, at 4p.m. Central
Where: Austin, Texas (UFCU Disch-Falk Field)
TV: Longhorn Network (Kevin Dunn - play-by-play; Greg Swindell - color analyst)
Radio: 1300 AM "The Zone"
Internet Audio: TexasSports.tv
Live stats: Gametracker
All-Time Series: Texas leads 44-7
Coach Garrido vs Dallas Baptist: 8-1
Tuesday, March 6, 2012 - 4 p.m. Central
Texas: LHP Dillon Peters (0-0, 7.11 ERA)
DBU: RHP Jordan Staples (0-0, 4.76 ERA)
• After producing just a .195 batting average and 23 runs in the first eight games of the season, the Longhorns' bats showed life at the talent-laden Houston College Classic posting a .297 batting average and 18 runs in three games.
• A two-out, Kevin Lusson RBI single in the bottom of the fourth inning broke a tie game and sparked the No. 6 Texas Longhorns to a 3-1 win over the Dallas Baptist Patriots last season. Texas (25-8) used four pitchers who combined to four-hit the Patriots, allowing just one unearned run while striking out nine and finishing the game with eight consecutive scoreless frames. Nathan Thornhill (1-0) picked up his first career win after pitching 2.1 scoreless innings in relief of starter Sam Stafford.


text:
The Catfish Chef (1:58)
Mudcatting isn't the only thing Jerry takes pride in. He's also the fish fry chef in the Rider family when they host a party for their friends and family.
This video can be viewed when you log in with your TV provider.
Select your TV provider to log in to have full access to videos
- Select your TV provider
- See More Providers
Related Videos (11)
The Catfish Chef
The Catfish ChefVideo Clip (1:58)
Video Clip (1:58)
Mudcatting isn't the only thing Jerry takes pride in. He's also the fish fry chef in the Rider family when they host a party for their friends and family.
Outlaw Country
Outlaw CountryVideo Clip (42:48)
Video Clip (42:48)
Six hand-fishing teams compete in the Okie Invitational Tournament in Oklahoma. A severe heat wave and drought conditions make this dangerous sport all the more difficult.
Fall of Kings
Fall of KingsVideo Clip (44:12)
Video Clip (44:12)
"Catfish King" Marion Kincaid has dominated the last four tournaments, and the other competitors are gunning for his crown. The competition is fierce and the weather has turned blistering hot, pushing the competitors to new limits.
Gone Fishing
Gone FishingVideo Clip (2:18)
Video Clip (2:18)
Hand fishing for catfish is a way of life for the mudcatters of Oklahoma.
Meet Thomas Riggs
Meet Thomas RiggsVideo Clip (1:36)
Video Clip (1:36)
Thomas started hand-fishing as a means of survival but now it's his passion.
Meet Teddy Good
Meet Teddy GoodVideo Clip (1:54)
Video Clip (1:54)
Teddy learned to hand-fish from his grandfather when he was 3 years old, and he is dedicated to keeping that legacy alive.
Meet Scooter Bivins
Meet Scooter BivinsVideo Clip (2:04)
Video Clip (2:04)
Scooter Bivins is a fourth-generation fisherman and the reigning champion of the 2010 Okie Tournament.
Meet Marion Kincaid
Meet Marion KincaidVideo Clip (1:38)
Video Clip (1:38)
Marion started hand-fishing over 35 years ago and, for him, it was love at first bite.
Meet Katt Daddy Brewer
Meet Katt Daddy BrewerVideo Clip (1:41)
Video Clip (1:41)
Don "Katt Daddy" Brewer is known as one of the most competitive hand-fishermen in Oklahoma and he will go to the extreme to catch a catfish.
Hot Spots
Hot SpotsVideo Clip (44:13)
Video Clip (44:13)
It's week two of the competition and everyone is scrambling to find the best fishing holes. Marion Kincaid looses out on one of his favorite spots, while Scooter Bivins says his prayers before entering dangerous waters. Katt Daddy Brewer swallows his pride and allows himself to be blindfolded in order to be led to the promised land.
Nightmare Holes
Nightmare HolesVideo Clip (43:42)
Video Clip (43:42)
The pressure intensifies in week three of competition, and each team dives deeper in hopes of grabbing a giant catfish.
Related Speeches & Audio (1)
U.S. Financial Market Nears Collapse in September 2008
U.S. Financial Market Nears Collapse in September 2008Audio Clip (0:30)
Audio Clip (0:30)
In the wake of the worst financial crisis since the Depression, ABC News reports on September 14, 2008, on the impending collapse of the giant investment bank Lehman Brothers. Alan Greenspan, former chairman of the Federal Reserve, provides further analysis.
Most Popular Videos on History.com
Newest Videos on History.com
Vietnam in HD Preview
Two For the Road
HISTORY says Thanks
Shop HISTORY
Swamp People Choot Em T-Shirt - Grey
"Choot 'em, Clint!" This t-shirt is for the Troy fans. Own this exclusive T-shirt from the HISTORY Shop!
Swamp People King of Swamp T-Shirt - Charcoal
Become heir to the bayou throne in your very own Swamp People King of Swamp T-Shirt! Get more Troy and Swamp People merchandise at the HISTORY Shop.
Swamp People Gumbo Bowl with Spoon
Troy makes a mean gumbo, but does he have this ceramic Swamp People Gumbo Bowl with Spoon? Serve your chow up in style and take the title away from the "King of the Swamp".
Email Updates
Keep up with the latest History shows, online features, special offers and more.Sign up


text:
Zand combines the best of American and European herbal medicine with the wisdom of traditional Chinese practices to provide you with the most balanced formulas available anywhere. Zand has applied today's science and manufacturing technology to develop safe products using natural botanical ingredients to maintain a strong, healthy immune system. Zand herbal formulas and extracts combine the optimum potency of key ingredients with a blend of supportive herbs to restore and maintain the body's natural state of balance. Shop Zand products, including Oregano Oil, HerbaLozenges, Astragalus and more, at Swanson!
Need help? Call Us Now1-877-280-7781
†Ratings based on results of the 2015 ConsumerLab.com Vitamin and Supplement Users Survey. More information at www.consumerlab.com/survey2015.
Notice: The products and information found on www.swansonvitamins.com are not intended to replace professional medical advice or treatment. These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. Our dietary supplements are not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease or medical condition. Individual results may vary. SwansonVitamins.com urges you to seek the advice of a qualified professional for any health concern lasting more than two weeks, and to share with your provider any information pertaining to your health and well-being, including the use of supplemental nutrition. Read complete terms of service.
© 2015 Swanson Health Products