User talk:JacobB/Archive 3

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search

rant #50

Hello, JacobB, my name is WilsonB. And while we're both COMMITTED Catholics, I'm sorry to tell you that I have a beef with you over some actions you took over my work. A few minutes ago, you blocked my editing of this encyclopedia's page of the movie adaptation of Mulan. You blocked out my attempt to show that while it may be feministic and occultic, it may also be conservative, too. Now, I will, from now on, no longer allow anything from my blog to appear on any page or my opinion for that matter. But I am upset for a few reasons. I find the fact that no suggestion of conservative messages in the movie in question, yet suggestion that it's occultic, on the page in question is completely disturbing for several reasons. In my opinion, it is downright repulsive to offer evidence to suggest that "Mulan" is occultic without any evidence at all. By that I mean that there are no sources to back it up! Where are the references? If this is fact, and not opinion, that "Mulan" is occultic, don't we need to go out to a database of some kind and cite sources? Isn't that how all encyclopedia pages are done online? Yes, the idea that the film in question is occultic can still stand, but only if sources are cited next time around. I mean, I have been a good conservative all my life, and "Mulan", in fact, was my introduction to conservative thought. In this case, it introduced me to the fact that, despite the leftist delusion of "War Is Not The Answer", we really do need the "Mulans" of our time. That is, we need men and women who are willing to go out and serve their country and die if necessary. "Mulan", if properly viewed, can be an excellent way of teaching that to children. So forget the occult and feminism. (We, of course, have our own "feminists", even thought they're not really that, such as Sarah Palin.) Therefore, I just find it troubling that personal opinion would be put on in onw scenario and ignored in another. I mean, just imagine what would happen if someone on Wikipedia called "Mulan" occultic to produce another side. Jimbo's in-box would start lighting up like a Christmas Tree-oh, wait, maybe I shouldn't say that; it might offend someone. Remember, I am not mad at you for ruining my work. I'm just livid about this. If I could bring you to my house one day, get the film on DVD, and bring you to watch it with me, I would. But since I don't have a DVD copy, and since I'm probably not going to give complete strangers my home address to bring them here, all I'll just do is tell you of what needs to be done for this encyclopedia to be both conservative AND based in a non-partisan format. Again, "Mulan" is not occultic, in my opinion, but you're free to decide. Sincerely, User: WilsonB

I'm quite capable of reading your talk page, there was no need to reproduce this here. Apparently, you are not able to read the your talk page, as I gave a calm and rational response there, in which I explained I had never seen Mulan and don't care in the slightest what content you wish to add to that page, though others might.
I even assumed the issue had been cleared up when an Admin came to offer his services to back me up, I said, no, not necessary, because I assumed you were rational enough to read my response. I will not make this mistaken assumption with you in the future. Take some time to cool your head. JacobB

Math lectures

Just fantastically cool! Just wondering, should the derivative of d/dx log(x) = x^-1 in 3.1 read d/dx ln(x)? Or is log(x) always assumed to be loge(x) unless specified or something? DouglasA 11:50, 4 January 2010 (EST)

Not to butt in ahead of JacobB, but it was pretty much assumed in the calc courses I've taken. It might be good to add a note to that effect, though. --EvanW 11:52, 4 January 2010 (EST)
Okay, good to know. DouglasA 11:53, 4 January 2010 (EST)

My experience is that mathematicians use log or ln ("lawn") for natural logs, since we never use log10 at all, and physicists use ln for natural log and log for log10. It would probably be best to use ln for natural log to avoid confusion - my consistent use of log is a result of my long-time use of it for natural log, and the thing is, it's too ingrained of a habit to break now, so I'm probably going to keep using log. If it matters so much to somebody, they're welcome to change it. JacobB 19:33, 4 January 2010 (EST)

Welcoming new users

I've been inactive for a while, so I may have missed this: is it a custom around here to welcome new users by placing a template on their user page? --Ed Poor Talk 19:48, 4 January 2010 (EST)

TK does it, but if this is only for admins to do, I'll stop. JacobB 19:55, 4 January 2010 (EST)

Multivariable Calc course

Jacob, this is very doable. I have nearly 50 students in my Economics course and nearly all stuck with it. It's college-level material and many of them are taking the CLEP to earn credit.

We can do the Multivariable calculus course and I developed that entry as an overview. Please feel free to use or link as you think best to your developing material.--Andy Schlafly 20:34, 9 January 2010 (EST)

That's great! I'll make sure to hit all of that material in the lectures. Like I've said, I'm incredibly busy at work this week and I'm taking it home with me, but next week I'll have four days to just work on calc lectures. Expect a lot of material to go up Tues-Fri! JacobB 20:42, 9 January 2010 (EST)
The Economics course that just completed is a successful model. But Multivariable calculus may be more advanced than anything the CLEP offers! No problem ... our students are doing this to learn, not merely to impress institutions. The reality is that a conservative approach is far superior for learning.--Andy Schlafly 23:27, 10 January 2010 (EST)
I'm looking at the CLEP exams right now, and once I finish these Multivariable Calc lectures, I don't see any reason why I can't put up lectures which would prepare the student for this exam and this exam. JacobB 23:45, 10 January 2010 (EST)

Please check your email, I am awaiting a response..

Thanks! --ṬK/Admin/Talk 01:48, 10 January 2010 (EST)

Riemann picture

I tried linking the Riemann Integral page to the new picture, and it doesn't seem to work. I tried both "File:Riemannsums.gif" and "Image:Riemannsums.gif". Can you try to see if you can use your extra privileges (or extra intelligence, or extra knowledge, or extra common sense, or whatever it takes :-) to fix this? SamHB 23:34, 18 January 2010 (EST)

Best of luck

I held hope that our compromise would allow astronomy articles on this site to go forward, but duke of this fiefdom has decreed there will be no compromise and that even having an "Old Universe View" is forbidden. I know we had our disagreements, many of them, but I hold no ill will or bad feelings towards you. Good luck on your endeavors and if you ever wish to say hello by email, please feel free. --BMcP 11:51, 11 February 2010 (EST)

The future

I can see why a YEC would object to the assertions about the age of stars, but why do you object to long predictions about the future? DanG 12:44, 11 February 2010 (EST)

People will differ in their views. I'm actually totally ok with predictions about the distant future, since all such predictions carry the implicit caveat, "If the universe lasts that long." Other Christians will disagree with me.JacobB 12:46, 11 February 2010 (EST)
You're "ok with predictions", yet you're deleting all of BMcP's. Are you that annoyed by his "rudeness"? Even if so, destruction of an encyclopedia yields, at best, a Pyhrric victory. If you leave the words today they will still be there to be deleted tomorrow, should a sleep not soothe the hurt.DanG 12:50, 11 February 2010 (EST)

I am deleting material which Andy has demonstrated he objects to. As for there always being vandalism, that's true. There will always be nonsense added to the project, vandals constantly attacking and constantly growing more malicious. And always, we are watching, ready to ban these vandals, to delete the nonsense added by a vandal who has been banned. The future of this encyclopedia is us deleting nonsense and banning vandals - forever. JacobB 12:59, 11 February 2010 (EST)


My apologies for the Genesis reference, was only trying to remember a story I was told by my godparents. How do I merge articles? I noticed that there is an article for Chromosome and another article for Chromosomes. --Chromosome2Telomere 13:56, 11 February 2010 (EST)

Hmmm, I would suggest talking to TK about that. He's always eager to help out. JacobB 14:00, 11 February 2010 (EST)
I would also ask that you make a request on an administrators page to have your name changed to your real first name and last initial. JacobB 14:05, 11 February 2010 (EST)


I assumed that your deletion of a talk section from Talk:Andromeda galaxy‎ was accidental, and hence I reverted it in order to respond. My apologies if I misread that.--Andy Schlafly 15:44, 11 February 2010 (EST)

I deleted it because with BMcP gone, I didn't think it was necessary to have his dissent on-site anymore. I'm sorry about that, I see now that you wished to respond. My bad! JacobB 15:47, 11 February 2010 (EST)
Unless discussions like that are angry, insulting, or downright full of lies, I think it's probably better to keep them on, to avoid having to have the same conversation over and over. When another liberal/evolutionist/relativist/whatever-the-case-is comes to argue the same point, you can just point them to the previous discussions. DouglasA 15:52, 11 February 2010 (EST)
Yes, it was a mistake on my part. Overzealous, I guess. JacobB 15:53, 11 February 2010 (EST)

Vector 0

I noticed at the end of calc3.6 that you used . Does this mean a vector with 0 magnitude and direction? Can a vector have direction without magnitude, for that matter? I'd never seen an actual number with the vector sign over it before. DouglasA 20:49, 11 February 2010 (EST)

Yes, it's important to remember that when we talk about a vector of zero length, we don't mean just the number 0, which is a number, ie, a member of , we mean the vector . Or, in the plane, we may mean . Notably, we cannot add a number and a vector: is undefined, but . We can't take the dot product, or cross product, of a number and a vector, but . JacobB 21:39, 11 February 2010 (EST)
Hehe, I made a similar error to thinking above when I wrote . Can't take the cross product of a two-vector! JacobB 23:48, 11 February 2010 (EST)

We've missed you

Jacob, we've missed you! Where should I work next on the math entries?--Andy Schlafly 21:59, 25 February 2010 (EST)

Yes, things have been quite hectic for me, but I will always come back when things settle! As for the math entries, I'd really like your thoughts on the Calc syllabus: specifically, Sam and I are beginning to think the differential equations at the end, though useful from a scientific or engineering standpoint, may simply be too advanced for the course, and that those lectures would be better spent explaining previous concepts in more detail. As for anything else, I'll have to take a look around and see what's going on with our math articles, but as always, anything you wish to contribute will be most welcome! JacobB 22:02, 25 February 2010 (EST)

Online colleges

Great blocks! By the way, I made some interesting additions to online colleges based on a startling approach described in the Washington Post.--Andy Schlafly 21:21, 27 February 2010 (EST)

That's certainly interesting! If only I'd known 5 years ago, huh? I wonder if a company like StraigherLine would be interested in the courses that are already up, and in development, here on Conservapedia? JacobB 21:26, 27 February 2010 (EST)
The trick seems to be in obtaining transfer credit from another online university, which the student can then use to transfer (if desired) to a brick-and-mortar college. Sounds very feasible. I'm sure our courses are as good or better than the StraighterLine courses!
The next step would be to email inquiries to some of the online colleges listed in Online colleges (and perhaps there are more can be added to the list).
I know so many students where the main obstacle to obtaining a college degree is its exorbitant cost at brick-and-mortar schools.--Andy Schlafly 22:10, 27 February 2010 (EST)

math in subpages, yet again

The saga continues; we learn something else about how math markup doesn't work in subpages!

Apparently, math markup not only doesn't work in any subpage, but doesn't work in any normal page that was reached by a redirect through a subpage!!!! Your recent move of the cross product proof out of a subpage was, of course, the right thing. But the link you left behind fails. That link was just pro forma, right? So the lesson is: don't depend on such links. SamHB 00:00, 28 February 2010 (EST)

You're right! ouch. ugh hassle hassle hassle! JacobB 00:01, 28 February 2010 (EST)
It appears the issue is spaces in the title. JacobB 00:04, 28 February 2010 (EST)
What about using transcluded pages....create a template for the formulas and insert them? --ṬK/Admin/Talk 00:17, 28 February 2010 (EST)