FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[andrew]

:rofl:

Really funny! But, in a way, I understand their decisions. It is, after all, unnatural and unproductive.

Vlad, crawl back under your rock and spend some time studying the issue before you make such ridiculous statements that have no leg in the truth department. Unnatural? Define natural first. And then check out the many species that regularly or occasionally enjoy a same schmex romp!

I think he means unnatural and unproductive in that the basic reason we hook up with a member of the opposite umpalumpa is to expand the population. Hooking up with someone of the same umpalumpa does not do this.

Perhaps Vlad can shed some light on his opinionbut I don't think there is any need for anyone to get upset.

[Jabberwocky]

I say live and let live. I don't fancy blokes, so I don't go after blokes. if you do then you do.

On a similar note, I am sure Mr/s DD can help with the answer here. As homosexuality is I am sure we can all agree none reproductive. How does evolution keep the homosexual gene going. If not at what point does the brain decide that it prefers same/different umpalumpa relationships?

[zurich_allan]

Before this gets into an argument, let me remind everyone of our forum policy, judgement* will be swift and harsh.

* Sexism, ageism, racism, including nationalistic, religious and sexual orientation intolerance.

*judgment

/pedantic

[What's Burning?]

Before this gets into an argument, let me remind everyone of our forum policy, judgement* will be swift and harsh.

* Sexism, ageism, racism, including nationalistic, religious and sexual orientation intolerance.

*judgment

/pedantic

It is a heavy burden to don a green jacket.

[darwin dali]

I say live and let live. I don't fancy blokes, so I don't go after blokes. if you do then you do.

On a similar note, I am sure Mr/s DD can help with the answer here. As homosexuality is I am sure we can all agree none reproductive. How does evolution keep the homosexual gene going. If not at what point does the brain decide that it prefers same/different umpalumpa relationships?

Don't forget, schmexuality is not an all or nothing thing - there are many shades on a spectrum between highly hetero to highly homo. Hence, there are plenty opportunities to pass on traits and spread the wealth...

[Jabberwocky]

I say live and let live. I don't fancy blokes, so I don't go after blokes. if you do then you do.

On a similar note, I am sure Mr/s DD can help with the answer here. As homosexuality is I am sure we can all agree none reproductive. How does evolution keep the homosexual gene going. If not at what point does the brain decide that it prefers same/different umpalumpa relationships?

Don't forget, schmexuality is not an all or nothing thing - there are many shades on a spectrum between highly hetero to highly homo. Hence, there are plenty opportunities to pass on traits and spread the wealth...

you mean greedy people liking both lol

[darwin dali]

Before this gets into an argument, let me remind everyone of our forum policy, judgement* will be swift and harsh.

* Sexism, ageism, racism, including nationalistic, religious and sexual orientation intolerance.

*judgment

/pedantic

Both are correct:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia: ... e/Spelling

[zurich_allan]

Before this gets into an argument, let me remind everyone of our forum policy, judgement* will be swift and harsh.

* Sexism, ageism, racism, including nationalistic, religious and sexual orientation intolerance.

*judgment

/pedantic

Both are correct:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia: ... e/Spelling

No they're not. The only correct spelling for a judgment in the context of a 'court' or 'trial' decision is 'judgment'. 'Judgment' or 'judgement' can be used interchangeably in a few countries relating to someone's own opinion, but in terms of a judge, sheriff, lord or justice handing down a decision, it can only be 'judgment'.

in the context discussed here - 'judgment' is the only correct term.

And wikipedia? Really?

[darwin dali]

Before this gets into an argument, let me remind everyone of our forum policy, judgement* will be swift and harsh.

* Sexism, ageism, racism, including nationalistic, religious and sexual orientation intolerance.

*judgment

/pedantic

Both are correct:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia: ... e/Spelling

No they're not. The only correct spelling for a judgment in the context of a 'court' or 'trial' decision is 'judgment'. 'Judgment' or 'judgement' can be used interchangeably in a few countries relating to someone's own opinion, but in terms of a judge, sheriff, lord or justice handing down a decision, it can only be 'judgment'.

in the context discussed here - 'judgment' is the only correct term.

And wikipedia? Really?

better?
http://www.beedictionary.com/common-err ... s_judgment

[What's Burning?]

This is the accepted definition (in countries that don't unnecessarily insert the letter u into a word) of the way I used the word.

judgement - (law) the determination by a court of competent jurisdiction on matters submitted to it

[Jabberwocky]

When I read the 1st post of this thread, I winced at what I thought was to come. Never in my wildest imagination did I think it would end up as a spelling argument.

[What's Burning?]

When I read the 1st post of this thread, I winced at what I thought was to come. Never in my wildest imagination did I think it would end up as a spelling argument.

We're avoiding the real issue I think. We're a resourceful group.

[andrew]

I think this thread is in danger of going off topic.

[Jabberwocky]

how is this for a new direction

Kirk: We are gathered here today to pay final respects to our honored dead. But it should be noted that this death takes place in the shadow of new life, the sunrise of a new world; a world that our beloved comrade gave his life to protect and nourish. He did not feel this sacrifice a vain or empty one, and we will not debate his profound wisdom at these proceedings. Of my friend, I can only say this: of all the souls I have encountered in my travels, his was the most... human.

[zurich_allan]

When I read the 1st post of this thread, I winced at what I thought was to come. Never in my wildest imagination did I think it would end up as a spelling argument.

Ah, but that's the thing. It's not a spelling argument. Depending on the intention they can be viewed as completely different words with completely different meanings, just with a similar spelling.

It's different to an argument about - say - colour / color, or emphasise / emphasize etc. Those are the same words that have different spellings in different regions.

In law, and legal decisions, the term IS judgment... only... (no matter what any generic online source tells you - ANY lawyer will tell you the same) - speaking from 14 years of experience in studying and researching law, and 6 years experience of teaching it.

In other contexts, the term can be regional specific, i.e. judgement or judgment. 'using your own judgement' etc.

Telling me otherwise is comparable to me telling a Doctor that they are performing their surgery incorrectly when I'm not a Doctor of medicine myself - i.e. a little bit on the silly side to put it mildly.