Oh, I didn't realise you were writing in a super-modern shorthand?! I would have thought typing 'mentally' was quicker than 'menntally'?
Why not translate these then for us 'outdated' people -
don't see to earn points
and Indian brains are valued more accepted by Obama......
and mmind you child is the father of a man....
Everyone makes mistakes. That is my point. You were the one having a go at Rahul9194 for posting the same comment twice...it makes sense to me how someone can do that. The things you write on the other hand, are completely incomprehensible.
Posting a coherent message twice or a simple typo is understandable, but if you're going to become the forum police and pull people up about things...at least make sure people can understand what you write.
These are just some quick 'copy and pastes' of things you have written. Some of it, I can't even guess what you are trying to say.
menntally
and Indian brains are valued more accepted by Obama......
and mmind you child is the father of a man....
They are powerhouse of football....
what have the people gained through this activities only life have been lost
f they are given with trophies they become self-contented
I think this is what they mean when they wrote the bill of rights:
A straight comparison of goal records does not tell you which was the better player. Messi is a totally different type of player from Pele. Messi likes to get the ball wide, run at people create gaps and bring team-mates into play, whereas Pele was a target man, a finisher and an out and out opportunist goalscorer.
There is no evidence that shows cycling results in more injuries to the head than any other activity
Sometimes a study isn't really needed. I'd be pretty sure that cycling results in more head injuries than say yoga or playing poker. If your on the road, getting hit by a car or coming off your bike is a risk, which makes a cyclist a head injury risk...seems pretty simple to me.
There is no evidence that shows hat wearing helmets while cycling leads to any fewer injuries to cyclists than had been the case when helmets were not worn.
What negative impact do they have? If you're 'unsure' of their effectiveness doesn't it still make sense to wear them just incase. I don't understand why anyone would be so anti-helmet wearing.
It's common to believe a helmet will provide more protection than they are designed to give and it's not uncommon to find a helmeted cyclist seriously injured because the impact the cyclist has had is far beyond the helmets modest, protective abilities.
It's anecdotal to say that because someone wore a helmet but suffered an injury people shouldn't wear them. Regardless of how much protection they provide, if it is better than your bare skull hitting concrete then why not give yourself that advantage?
It builds confidence, it encourages them to participate in future games, it instils an element of competitiveness in them, it induces passion for a sport or event. Were you a child once? Do you remember playing in a sport and feeling a level of achievement or pride? If it made you happy and made you want that 'success' again then it served a purpose. Kids aren't there simply to be moulded into super-competitive realist machines. A bit of speculative ambition can be a good thing. I'm sure you wouldn't want your kids treated like adults all the time so your analogy doesn't really work.
Jeez, why not bring back the whip and compulsory military service. Life isn't just about success, and childhood isn't about moulding hardened competitive warriors. I think a bit of competition is healthy, but a little undue praise can induce confidence and passion in children. On top of that, some people simply will never succeed in sports regardless of how much you withhold prizes and trophies, so what good will it do them? Giving a kid praise can make them happy and for many people that is more important than drive to 'succeed'.
Don't get me wrong.. I agree with you, but don't you think there is a social obligation to discourage self destructive customs. In the same way that smoking and drinking have limitations on when and where they can advertise, shouldn't it be the same for plastic surgery? I'm not talking about banning it, just taking measures to stop the glamourisation of it and irresponsible and exploitative advertising campaigns.
This is an excellent way of putting it...what surprises me about these fundamentalists is that they genuinely believe that stating verses of the bible is an effective method for convincing us! WE DONT SUBSCRIBE TO THE AUTHORITY OF YOUR OLD BOOK - stop trying to get us to read it...it means nothing to us!
This is a flawed discussion. The length of sentence given incorporates the possible early release for good behaviour. Thus, if someone gets 10 years for a crime, the judge has consciously decided that 5 years is the minimum term that they should serve, and they should only get out in that time with immaculate behaviour and sufficient regret, remorse and exemplified rehabilitation.
Why does everyone state passages from the bible as if it hold some authority on the topic. Most people do not subscribe to the validity of your old books on any topic so please stop using it to try and convince people of your perspective.
