« July 2007 | Main | September 2007 »
August 30, 2007
Flying Cars?
Dr Paul Moller seems to think he has solved the problem.
"It is the M 200G, otherwise known as a "flying saucer", which is being built by a company in Davis, California called Moller International.
Go to BBC News for the scoop.
Posted by Carl at 09:52 PM | TrackBack
"A state report has concluded that lives could have been saved if Virginia Tech officials had acted sooner after student Cho Seung-hui's first killings in his shooting rampage."
Well, DUH.
Story here.
Posted by Carl at 09:01 PM | TrackBack
August 29, 2007
Wikipedia gets it wrong. Or, why you can't trust scientists who weren't there.
During the course of some reading relative to a short story I should like to write, I came across this little gem:
"The formation of the Moon is believed to have occurred 4.527 ± 0.01 billion years ago, about 30–50 million years after the origin of the solar system." (Source: Wikipedia: Moon.)
LOL!
"And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night...And the evening and the morning were the fourth day." (Gen. 1:14-19; See also Psalms 8:3, Psalms 104:19, and Jeremiah 31:35.)
Posted by Carl at 10:28 PM | TrackBack
August 27, 2007
Westside Middle School: Legally in error?
This is that last post I shall make on this issue.
It seems to me that Mr. Barrett broke the rules of the Whitfield County School System by showing a clip of the "R-rated" movie 300 to sixth graders without parental consent. That is, if "The Whitfield County school system's policy states that a movie must be on an approved list before it is shown in class. If it is not, then the permission of the principal is required. There are no R-rated movies on that list, including '300,'" then he clearly broke the rules.
I was reticent to continue looking into this matter because so many people on so many sites showed so much support for Mr. Barrett. And in all honesty, it seems quite reasonable to me that Mr. Barrett showed the clip in order to 'spark the kid's imaginations.' An error of judgment I was sure he had made; but was he also legally in error?
But now, since "Whitfield County school administrators defended the teacher's decision to show it. [A clip from the movie "300." And since] ...School officials say the teacher, Brad Barrett, made the right choice. [Saying] "We saw nothing in that clip that they would not see in a regular tv program," administrator, Richard Schoen said...Administrators say the clips were educational and fit in with Barrett's lesson. The teacher will not lose his job." Because of this, whatever legal responsibility Mr. Barrett had is now at an end. The "School Administrators" are now legally responsible; in my opinion.
"It shall be unlawful for any motion picture theater owner, operator, or projectionist to display to the audience within the theater scenes from a film to be shown at the theater at some future time when the viewing of that film from which the scenes are taken is restricted to adults or requires minors to be accompanied by a parent or guardian. Scenes of such restricted films may be shown within a theater if the audience has been similarly restricted as to viewing age and conditions." (Emphasis Mine; Source: TITLE 16. CRIMES AND OFFENSES; CHAPTER 12. OFFENSES AGAINST PUBLIC HEALTH AND MORALS; ARTICLE 3.; OBSCENITY AND RELATED OFFENSES; PART 1.; GENERAL PROVISIONS; O.C.G.A. § 16-12-85, 2007)
If it is illegal for this kind of occurrence in theaters, why should the "school administrators" be allowed to permit it? That is my question.
Logically, if the school's rules disallowed what was shown, Mr. Barrett is in the wrong. Logically, if the school administrators side with Mr. Barrett, they are more culpable. Logically if no child is allowed to view an r-rated movie in a theater, they should also not be allowed to view portions of it at school without parental permission.
Everything else that people have said on various other sites is mere cant. It is fine that Mr. Barrett is a good teacher. It is fine that Mr. Barrett had good intentions. It is fine that the "school administrators" found that nothing untoward was shown. But all of this is irrelevant. For the only cogent point at hand is this.
A rule was broken and the "school administrators" countenance and agree with the breaking of the rule. That is all.
Seems to me that the "school administrators" allowance of this is a "Willful neglect of duties." (O.C.G.A. § 20-2-940, 2007) But I may be wrong.
Every link I have found pertaining to this story:
Get that silver spoon out of your mouth.
Dalton Daily Citizen, Commentary
Military Photos.net (Near the bottom)
Posted by Carl at 02:01 AM | TrackBack
August 25, 2007
Brokeback Mountain vs. 300.
Given the choice, I guess I'd rather have my kids exposed to 300; but God Forbid that choice becomes necessary!
"This weekend I heard about the substitute teacher who showed an 8th grade class the "R" rated movie, Brokeback Mountain, but had not read the report saying the suit filed by a girl in the class claims the principal was aware that the teacher was showing the movie." (Source: Wizbang Blog)
What can I say?!
Yikes.
Money quote from the teacher who showed it: "What happens in Ms. Buford's class stays in Ms. Buford's class." (This quote is one allegation in the lawsuit.)
Posted by Carl at 01:16 AM | TrackBack
Westside 300, Once more.
Couple of News links and quotes:
(**Emphasis Mine. Source: Channel 3) "Friday, Whitfield County school administrators defended the teacher's decision to show it. [A clip from the movie "300."] ...School officials say the teacher, Brad Barrett, made the right choice**. "We saw nothing in that clip that they would not see in a regular tv program," administrator, Richard Schoen said.
Administrators say the clips were educational and fit in with Barrett's lesson. The teacher will not lose his job. "
Notwithstanding, I suppose, that the movie is Rated "R," and no one under 17 is allowed to view such movies. Notwithstanding, I suppose, that the Whitfield County School systems rules were broken: "The Whitfield County school system's policy states that a movie must be on an approved list before it is shown in class. If it is not, then the permission of the principal is required. There are no R-rated movies on that list, including '300.'" He made the right choice alright; that is, if breaking rules is the "right choice."
(Source: Channel 12) "Officials determined the first five minutes of the movie had been shown, but found nothing questionable about the content."
Irrelevant "determination." Whitfield County disallows unapproved movies without permission. If it cannot be proved that this movie was approved--and from what I have read, this seems to be the case--then the movie should not have been shown; period.
(Emphasis Mine; Source: Channel 3) "Also, a fellow bus rider, who has a sibling in Mr. Barrett's class, was talking about the incident and said that Mr. Barrett asked the students if their parents would object to their watching this clip and none of them spoke up. Had they done so, knowing him, he would've let them stand outside the door until the clip was over."
Apparently the teacher did seek permission to show the movie. Those dang newspapers! They get everything wrong. More from that comment thread.
Yet another blog post: The Theologians Cafe.
That about covers it for now.
UPDATE:
Just found this.
"Teacher Fired for Showing an R-Rated Film in High School: Sloan Roach, a spokeswoman for Gwinnett County Public Schools told reporters that Youngblood had failed to go through the proper channels. "Mr Youngblood did not ask for a local review of the film prior to showing it," he said. "Nor did he allow parents the option of opting their students out of the viewing." (Source: Guardian.co.uk, via World Magazine Movie Blog.
Now by citing that story, I am NOT saying that the teacher at Westside should be fired. I am simply observing the consequences to another teacher who acted in a similar manner. That teacher was also from Georgia.
UPDATE:
Yet another site carries the story.
Posted by Carl at 12:11 AM | TrackBack
August 24, 2007
Westside Middle School, "300," Again.
Found a few more links to the story. More fun quotes. I might comment on this later, but for now I'm just linking all the sites together. First a bit about the story.
(Source: Dalton Daily Citizen; Comments on this article here.) "A screening Wednesday of the first few minutes of the R-rated movie “300” in a Westside Middle School classroom has left more than one parent and some students upset.
Richard Schoen, executive director of assessment and accountability for Whitfield County Schools, said about five minutes of the movie was shown.
According to two parents, history teacher Brad Barrett showed the first 7-9 minutes of the movie as part of his class. Barrett could not be reached for comment."
(Source: The Dreamin' Demon) "How much you wanna bet me that at least half of those kids have seen any of the Lord of the Rings series?"
"The teacher's an idiot for showing any part of 300 to a bunch of middle school kids. The parents are more than a little irrational, though."
(Source: Comic Book Resources)
(Source: Wordforge; Best quote so far, unrelated though it is. And no, I cannot quite bring that passage to mind...lol!) "You don't remember the part in the Bible where Satan bets Jesus he can't eat fifty eggs?"
Posted by Carl at 11:19 PM | TrackBack
Whitfield County Social Studies Teacher Shows portions of the Movie "300," UPDATE.
People are talking. Some nice, some not so nice. Here are a few more links and a couple of quotes about what people think. I will get to some comments from Channel 9. Those are hilarious!
"Nothing wrong with the introduction, assuming that you want to give kids the grity (sic) version of the history and not the whitewashed, cleaned up version that most government schools seem to prefer. When I went to see it the first time in the theater, the family next to me brought their child who appeared to be six years old or so. Now THAT, is messed up." (Source: On a Sports Board)
"This teacher was trying to make this rather boring subject somewhat interesting and this whiny B**ch is having none of it." (Source: Get that silver spoon out of your mouth)
"I don't know how anyone else feels about this but I own this movie....bought it the day it was released......absolutely love it.......great movie.......any mother who protects her child to this extent should have her ass kicked..." (Source: Wicked Vixen)
The last quote would have satisfied me more if the author had explicated the degree of kicking necessary and a more precise location posteriorly. But that's just me.
Other links about 300:
"A technically exciting videogame (sic) of a film, 300 loses touch with a critical and moving event in Greek history...To judge this film's adherence to historical fact (insofar as we understand it) is to do it a disservice, for the film does not even pretend to be historically accurate. It is based on a graphic novel developed by Frank Miller and Lynn Varley, whose previous credits are mainly as comic book and graphic novel writers and illustrators." (Emphasis Mine. Source: Archeology.org)
Posted by Carl at 05:30 PM | TrackBack
August 23, 2007
Whitfield County Social Studies Teacher Shows portions of the Movie "300."
Apparently a teacher in Whitfield County thought it was appropriate to show portions of the movie 300 to sixth graders. The as yet unnamed teacher works at Westside Middle School. According to News Channel 9:
"The Whitfield County school system's policy states that a movie must be on an approved list before it is shown in class. If it is not, then the permission of the principal is required. There are no R-rated movies on that list, including '300.'" (Quote Link)
Story Links:
Until I read more about this, I have only three questions and a comment.
1. How much, and what portions of the movie were shown?
2. These are sixth-graders! Aren't "R-rated" movies for 17-year-olds and older?
3. Was legal permission from the copyright holder required to show this film in this venue?
4. My wife and I would not allow our children to watch this movie.
More later. Especially some commentary on those comments left at News Channel nine! They're great fun to read.
Posted by Carl at 10:39 PM | TrackBack
August 21, 2007
Ray Comfort is not necessarily a "liar."
These people--rubes, if you will--seem to believe that Ray Comfort is a liar. (Here's his website.)
In an effort to prove that Ray is a "liar"--and a blasphemer, apparently--they cite what can only be described as the supreme authority of the English language: The Random House Dictionary.
I guess they didn't realize that Princeton agrees with Ray:
LIAR: "a person who has lied or who lies repeatedly." (Emphasis mine; Link.)
YUP, reeeal "rational" if ya ask me.
Posted by Carl at 09:48 PM | TrackBack
Athiests.
What can be said about these atheists? For that matter, what may be said of atheists in general? Having done a very small amount of research--it being a topic quite prosaic--I have found a few quotes of interest. That is, you need not take my word about atheism; these quotes say it all.
"To be an atheist requires an infinitely greater measure of faith than to receive all the great truths which atheism would deny." --Joseph Addison, 1672-1719.
"If a man of sober habits, moderate, chaste, and just in all his dealings should assert there is no God, he would at least speak without interested motives; but such a man is not to be found." --Jean de la Bruyere, 1645-1696.
"Few men are so obstinate in their atheism, that a pressing danger will not compel them to the acknowledgment of a divine power." --Plato.
"God never wrought miracles to convince atheism, because His ordinary works convince it." --Francis Bacon, 1561-1626.
And Finally,
"The fool hath said in his heart, 'There is no God'." --Psalm 14:1, Psalm 53:1.
Posted by Carl at 09:33 PM | TrackBack
August 13, 2007
Polyamory is wrong.
And the simple reason is: God said so.
"Thou shalt not commit adultery." (Exodus 20:14)
Posted by Carl at 08:33 PM | TrackBack
August 05, 2007
I think GLOBAL WARMING is to blame.
Call me crazy, but that's what I think.
"Thick Arctic ice may be the reason for a precipitous drop in this spring's two-month gray whale count at Point Piedras Blancas." (Link)
Posted by Carl at 12:13 AM | TrackBack