Difference between revisions of "User talk:JacobB"

From Conservapedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
 
(152 intermediate revisions by 36 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
−
For older discussions, see [[User talk:JacobB/Archive 1]].
+
For older discussions, see the archives:  
  
−
<!-- MESSAGES GO BELOW THIS LINE -->
+
[[User talk:JacobB/Archive 1|July 7 - Nov. 20, 2009]],
 +
 +
[[User talk:JacobB/Archive 2|Nov. 28 - Dec. 31, 2009]],
  
−
== Blocking ==
+
[[User talk:JacobB/Archive 3|Dec. 31 - Feb. 28, 2010]],
  
−
Please be aware of our [http://www.conservapedia.com/Conservapedia:Guidelines#Assistants Guidelines] regarding blocking.  Non-Administrators should not be blocking for reasons of policy, or subjective reasons such as user name, unless such name is blatantly obscene. Communications from blocked users should be passed on to one of the Admins as well.  Thanks. --[[User:TK|'''ṬK''']]<sub><small><small>/Admin</small></small></sub><sup>[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]]</sup> 20:51, 28 November 2009 (EST)
+
[[User talk:JacobB/Archive 4|Feb. 28 - May 29, 2010]]
  
−
== Relativity and MemeShock ==
+
-----------------
  
−
Jacob:
+
<!-- MESSAGES GO BELOW THIS LINE -->
  
−
"You continue to address the same points over and over in your objections to Conservapedia's content on relativity,"
+
== [[Barry Farber]] article ==
  
−
Well the debate has gone back over several points. I tried to explain that this was begging the question, and move the discussion forwards, but for some reason the same points are brought up again and again.
+
The first paragraph is fine, but I noticed that the last 6 paragraphs of the [[Barry Farber]] article are '''identical''' to the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barry_Farber Wikipedia] article of the same name, as of June 3, 2010. I'm currently busy with meetings and won't have time to research any changes for almost a week, but I wanted to bring it to your attention since it is a ''verbatim copy of the article text from Wikipedia'', and I believe this sort of behavior should be avoided. If you're the user at Wikipedia who wrote that article, I apologize for the inconvenience, but please state so on the talk page. In Christ, [[User:Tzoran|Tyler Zoran]] <sup>[[User talk:Tzoran|Talk]]</sup> 07:28, 4 June 2010 (EDT)
  
−
"just to bait other editors into responding to you - a classic internet troll."
+
{{cquote|'''What do you mean--plagiarism? Plagiarism means taking false personal credit for academic gain, which is not at issue here. Nobody is gaining any academic credit for their writing at CP. RJJensen'''  <small>00:11, 17 January 2010 (EST)</small>}}
  
−
No, I'm having a debate with Andy. You can read my posts they are not rude. I am merely trying to explain to him why the stuff he has there is wrong. Let me show you something. The page contradicts itself:
+
:I think you should examine the text in greater detail, Tyler. There are only so many ways to say the same thing, and occasional duplication of phrases can occur, but I don't see they are identical.  In any event, something like this should be handled discretely, rather than posted publicly as you did. Your doing so makes me suspect your judgment and goodwill. Dr. Jensen should know a thing or two about writing, and his statement stands as a good hallmark. --<big>[[User:TK|'''ṬK''']]</big><sub>/Admin</sub><sup>[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]]</sup> 08:11, 4 June 2010 (EDT)
 +
::TK is right. Tzoran, you should realize that articles here are a work in progress.  When an article is created, it is important that it is presentable. I draw from numerous sources, some of which may draw from Wikipedia. If you ever have a problem with an article, fix it yourself - complaining loudly until other people do your work for you is not an admirable trait. [[User:JacobB|JacobB]]<sub>[[User talk:JacobB|Shout out!]]</sub> 16:28, 4 June 2010 (EDT)
  
−
In one section it argues that relativity lacks evidence:
+
== Delete article ==
  
−
http://www.conservapedia.com/Relativity#Lack_of_evidence_for_Relativity
+
When you get a second, think you can delete [[State sovereignty, national union‎]]? I put a merge template up, but there really isn't much information to merge ... -- [[User:JLauttamus|Jeff W. Lauttamus]][[User_talk:JLauttamus|<sub>Discussion</sub>]] 20:17, 8 June 2010 (EDT)
 +
:Thanks for the heads up, JLatt, I'll take a look. [[User:JacobB|JacobB]]<sub>[[User talk:JacobB|Shout out!]]</sub> 20:18, 8 June 2010 (EDT)
 +
::That was a good call.  We're not big fans of uninformative stub articles. [[User:JacobB|JacobB]]<sub>[[User talk:JacobB|Shout out!]]</sub> 20:19, 8 June 2010 (EDT)
 +
:::Yeah, I try and throw a '''<nowiki>{{speedy}}</nowiki>''' or '''<nowiki>{{delete}}</nowiki>''' up anytime I see them. Most of them were created by parodists or trolls, anyways. -- [[User:JLauttamus|Jeff W. Lauttamus]][[User_talk:JLauttamus|<sub>Discussion</sub>]] 20:23, 8 June 2010 (EDT)
 +
::::Thanks.  But just be sure to check to see who created an article before nominating it for deletion.[[User:JacobB|JacobB]]<sub>[[User talk:JacobB|Shout out!]]</sub> 20:27, 8 June 2010 (EDT)
  
−
In the very next section it gives evidence for relativity!:
+
== Promoting Multivariable Calculus ==
  
−
http://www.conservapedia.com/Relativity#Time_dilation
+
I wonder how we cam promote your marvelous course in Multivariable Calculus.  Perhaps with a certificate of completion for successful students?  Other ideas? --[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 12:43, 19 June 2010 (EDT)
 +
:That's not a bad idea, but a certificate is more of a payout - I think the real payout will be when the students take their BC Calculus exams, which would give college credit for Calculus 1 and 2!  How we should advertise it to students is a good question - I'll think on his, and I'll get back to you.  I know Conservative is good at promoting things, I'll also shoot him an email.
 +
:The course is just about ready to go, btw, I just have to re-organize some lectures and add some problems at the end.  It's something I keep meaning to do, but it's easy to put on the back burner with summer courses and a full-time job. Maybe I can get it done tomorrow night?  Yeah, I think I'll make that my Sunday evening project. [[User:JacobB|JacobB]]<sub>[[User talk:JacobB|Shout out!]]</sub> 14:07, 19 June 2010 (EDT)
  
−
You can't tell me this is unreasonable debate.  
+
::Maybe we could set up a track for helping students skip a year of college with AP or CLEP credits, with tips on which colleges accept which credits. Saving a year's tuition can help students enormously.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 14:59, 19 June 2010 (EDT)
  
−
P.S. And I have not suggested any changes to the page and/or tried to change the page after you lifted the block.
+
:::I'm going to start a new entry outlining how ''Conaervapedia'' can help students obtain college degrees for less money, by taking courses here and earning credits with AP or CLEP exams.  Our guide can include specific college policies.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 00:06, 20 June 2010 (EDT)
  
−
"and, by your own admission, try to use Conservapedia to push your agenda and your preferred vocabulary."
+
===REPONSE TO MESSAGES===
  
−
Yes, that was meant to be a contribution to Conservapedia. Here, I've greatly contributed to your new conservative words page and created stubs for many of these: http://www.conservapedia.com/Essay:Best_New_Conservative_Words
+
==The Nature of Greek and English==<br />
  
−
Look at the links above in about MemeShock in the talk section on my page. I think you'll like what I have to offer.
+
Greetings,  <br />
  
−
"Please contribute constructively and stop violating 90/10 on the relativity pages."  
+
There is no such thing as "the original English." I assume that you just made an accidental slip in writing that in your message to me.  I hope that does not mean that you just took the KJV and rewrote it without reading Greek.  That would not be a translation at all.
  
−
I'm sorry I got distracted with the relativity page. I originally came here to add to the conservative lexicon -which I figured would be appreciated. I got sidetracked with the relativity page because I happen to be a physics major and couldn't help but object to what I was seeing.
+
'''Are you saying that English is more precise than Greek?  If so, what leads you to believe that?'''<br />
  
−
I intend to produce a number of pages on different topics and edit pages in a way you would find constructive. Don't I'm not a troll.
+
How much Greek have you had?
 +
Perhaps you are an expert in math and physics.  Though I took calculus and physics at Georgia Tech, I am not a major in those areas, and I would be wary of posting articles on those subjects.  If Bible and Greek are not your majors, you ought to back off from translating the Bible. Pardon me if indeed you have a graduate degree in Greek.
  
−
P.S. Tell me what you think of the MemeShock program on facebook. I hope you will find that useful.
+
'''How do you know that "concepts which are only vaguely expressed in Greek can be made crystal clear in English."'''
 +
If the Lord gave us passages which have studied ambiguity, who are we to change that?  Greek is to theology as math is to science. Now don't tell me that concepts which are only vaguely expressed in math can be made crystal clear in English.
  
−
[[user:jfraatz|Johanan Raatz]]
+
My colleague, you are in the process of producing a product which is not a translation at all, and which will bring Conservapedia into ridicule.  Students of Greek will disparage the product as the product of uneducated hybris.  The only service you can do to readers is to enable them to read God's word accurately, if you know Greek.  Of course you could do them a service by giving them something to roll on the floor laughing at, including the entire Conservapedia.  But I don't think you want to do that.
  
 +
I am concerned about a distortion of God's word and also sincerely about your stance regarding translation.
  
−
If you came here to contribute, contribute.  Stop putting walls of text on talk pages and make new articles or improve existing ones.  Plenty of people have objected to relativity on here before, and rest assured, plenty will in the future.  The fact of the matter is, unless you have some new bombshell up your sleave, you're not adding anything new to the conversation.  Stop talking about relativity, stop arguing about minor details in pages you disagree with, and contribute usefully. [[User:JacobB|JacobB]] 23:53, 28 November 2009 (EST)
+
If you are a born-again Christian and know the Lord Jesus as your only and sufficient Savior (no works), then please give my comments prayerful consideration.([[User:Thunkful|Thunkful]] 15:19, 19 June 2010 (EDT))
  
−
== Block ==
+
: I'm discussing this on [[User talk:Thunkful]] and will only add here that the claim that "Greek is to theology as math is to science" does not withstand scrutiny.  Math is precise.  Language is not.  Greek lacked many concepts developed in modern English, terminology often developed to better express the original intent of Christ.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 00:52, 20 June 2010 (EDT)
  
−
In checking, I think the block was justified, and not the product of someone hijacking the account.  I base this on my earlier editing concerns with the user, Jacob.  Good job! --[[User:TK|'''ṬK''']]<sub><small>/Admin</small></sub><sup>[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]]</sup> 17:09, 30 November 2009 (EST)
+
== CLEP Math ==
  
−
== Promotion ==
+
Jacob, increasingly I'm hearing that the [[CLEP]] exams are the pathway to low-cost college credit.  There are 4 CLEP math exams, but no advanced ones.  I'm describing them in the CLEP entry.  I wonder if there is another exam offered for demonstrating proficiency in multivariable calculus.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 11:27, 22 June 2010 (EDT)
 +
:Yes, I recently advised somebody (mistakenly) that the multivariate calc course would aid with the Calc BC exam.  That's why I'm starting on these Calc I and II courses.  Now that I think about it, I'm not sure that there is a college-credit exam for calc III.  Which is unfortunate, given the time I put into that, but we can have these calc I and II courses up soon, I hope. [[User:JacobB|JacobB]]<sub>[[User talk:JacobB|Shout out!]]</sub> 20:23, 22 June 2010 (EDT)
  
−
Now you don't have to be burdened by Captcha! Thanks for your superb edits and blocks.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 21:26, 10 December 2009 (EST)
+
::The multivariable calculus course can still be a pathway to credit even though the CLEP exams do not yet include this advanced topic. A student could take our multivariable course in conjunction with a low-cost community college course and obtain credit by passing the final exam.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 22:12, 22 June 2010 (EDT)
−
:Thank you!  This will make vandalism reversion that much faster. [[User:JacobB|JacobB]] 21:31, 10 December 2009 (EST)
+
:::Oh, absolutely!  It's a good course and I'm not disparaging my own work at all! [[User:JacobB|JacobB]]<sub>[[User talk:JacobB|Shout out!]]</sub> 22:14, 22 June 2010 (EDT)
  
−
== I answered your question on my user talk page ==
+
::::More students would take multivariable calculus for credit at low-cost community colleges if they could have some explanatory material on the internet, which your course offers.  Some community college students cannot afford to skip work to attend all the classes, but with online material could pass the exams.  The Khan Academy also offers supplemental material by video, but I don't find it to be as effective as good textual explanations.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 23:26, 22 June 2010 (EDT)
  
−
I answered your question on my user talk page. [[User:Conservative|conservative]] 04:11, 11 December 2009 (EST)
+
== My MV Calc stuff ==
  
−
== Thanks for your Herculean efforts! ==
+
Please see the bottom of my talk page.  [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] 22:25, 30 June 2010 (EDT)
  
−
Jacob, thanks for your Herculean efforts the past few days!  You may have set a new individual record for blocking ... and correcting a few blocks.  Well done!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 18:41, 11 December 2009 (EST)
+
== More of Same ==
−
 
+
Jacob:
−
== Rude emails ==
 
−
 
 
−
You've experienced this too?  I've been getting far more emails of that sort in the last week than before. [[User:DouglasA|DouglasA]] 19:10, 13 December 2009 (EST)
 
−
:Yes, I've had quite a few. [[User:JacobB|JacobB]] 20:33, 13 December 2009 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
== Stubs ==
 
−
 
 
−
Can I just enquire as to why you are removing a number of articles from the stub category? Most do indeed appear to be very short, even on sentence, and surely the point of that category is to make it obvious to contributors which articles need improvement. [[User:DWiggins|DWiggins]] 17:13, 14 December 2009 (EST)
 
−
:The stub template has been deleted. [[User:JacobB|JacobB]] 17:13, 14 December 2009 (EST)
 
−
::Why?  I think the stub template is a good thing, for the same reasons as [[User:DWiggins]].  I'd prefer to restore the template. --[[User:EvanW|EvanW]] 17:15, 14 December 2009 (EST)
 
−
:::That's not up to us.  An admin deleted the template, therefore, I'm removing the redlink from articles.  If you dispute the deletion of the template, take it up on Geo's talk page. [[User:JacobB|JacobB]] 17:16, 14 December 2009 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
Concerning the ongoing template removal, what's the suggested procedure for uses on talk pages, such as [[Talk:Plant]]? Just remove it, or nominate the otherwise empty talk page for speedy deletion?
 
−
 
 
−
As an aside, taking it up on [[User talk:Geo.plrd|Geo's talk page]] may not be the easiest solution given that his talk page is protected. [[User:Yoritomo|Yoritomo]] 18:21, 14 December 2009 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
:If it's on a talke page, just remove it.  Nominate or not, that's your call.  I think I've nominated a few for deletion just out of habit for pages with only stub on them, but on the whole, I don't see why a talk page would need deleted.  Just my opinion. [[User:JacobB|JacobB]] 18:25, 14 December 2009 (EST)
 
−
 
 
−
== Email ==
 
−
 
 
−
Did you get my email regarding the project uploads? [[User:DouglasA|DouglasA]] 22:24, 14 December 2009 (EST)
 
−
:Yes, I did, check your email. [[User:JacobB|JacobB]] 22:34, 14 December 2009 (EST)
 
  
 +
I have been continuing my MV calc work over at Wikiversity, using the "natural vector" as opposed to "unit vector" method&mdash;the issue we were arguing about.  (Apropos: your "Oh, is that a sig sauer over there? Hand it to me? Great, thanks. *blows brains out*." comment on my talk page.  :-)  I'm still trying to do the "natural vector" stuff, though it's pretty daunting, and I may just decide that it wasn't right.  So save a bullet for me, OK?
  
−
==CBP==
+
I have cut way back on the overall scope of the project, leaving out the earlier "single variable calculus review" stuff, for example, and leaving out the later stuff about the wave equation and diffusion equation and ODE's and PDE's.  We were really going after an incredibly ambitious goal!  So it's just 3 lectures, going up to Stokes' theorem.  At least, that's the not-yet-attained goal.  But the first 2 lectures are in pretty good shape.
  
−
I note that you seem to be someone of authority at this site.  Perhaps you could help me, or direct me to someone who can assist in my dilemna in translating 2 Thessalonians 1.10.  --[[User:PThomson|PThomson]] 19:58, 15 December 2009 (EST)
+
There is definitely something appealing about saying that the length of a vector is ''always'' the square root of the sum of the squares of its components ("unit vector" method.) I have to admit that.  But there is also something appealing about saying that I can choose ''any'' coordinate system I want, even if it isn't orthogonal, and the formulas will always work. For example, I give the parametric definition of a helix by making artificial "helical coordinates" in 3 dimensions, and then just holding two coordinates constant to get a 1-dimensional curve.  And the arc length along that curve just comes from the 1-dimensional induced metric.  ''That'' is why I wanted to use "natural" vectors.
−
:Aschlafly and TerryH are both better translators than I, but I'll go take a look and see if I can't make a suggestion. [[User:JacobB|JacobB]] 20:04, 15 December 2009 (EST)
 
−
::I think your commentary is right on the money. Change "saints" to "faithful" and I believe we'll be set. Good work! [[User:JacobB|JacobB]] 20:23, 15 December 2009 (EST)
 
  
−
== Surely you weren't afraid? ==
+
Anyway, you might want to have a look.  And I'd appreciate any comments you might have.
  
−
We don't want to prevent stimulating conversation, Jacob, even by people who seem to be confused by the facts.  Talk pages are traditionally far more lenient for the liberals to spout their misinformed clap-trap, per Mr. Schlafly's wishes. --<big>[[User:TK|'''ṬK''']]</big><sub>/Admin</sub><sup>[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]]</sup> 14:41, 23 December 2009 (EST)
+
[[User:SamHB|SamHB]] 23:53, 22 September 2010 (EDT)
  
−
:I had to revert Jacob's edit in this case, but not because of Jacob.  There had to be a response to that idiot.  [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 14:45, 23 December 2009 (EST)
+
== Teaching newbies ==
−
::Very well.  To me, it seemed clear that user was only here to make comments which had been made many times before, to waste the time of valuable editors by prodding them into response, and to attack our pages.  However, I will of course defer to the wisdom of established sysops on this. [[User:JacobB|JacobB]] 14:56, 23 December 2009 (EST)
 
  
−
:::Thanks, Jacob, for humoring us old codgers. ;-) --<big>[[User:TK|'''ṬK''']]</big><sub>/Admin</sub><sup>[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]]</sup> 15:07, 23 December 2009 (EST)
+
[http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Essay:Best_New_Conservative_Words&curid=84605&diff=803084&oldid=803073&rcid=884749 Well put.] --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 17:54, 15 August 2010 (EDT)
  
−
== Promotion to uploading ==
+
== Barry Farber ==
  
−
Congratulations on your promotion to uploading!  Merry Christmas!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 23:02, 24 December 2009 (EST)
+
JacobB, hope you're well.  Your edits to [[Barry Farber]] are being questioned.  Could you respond? Thanks.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 00:35, 27 November 2010 (EST)
−
:Thank you so much! This is quite a pleasure. And merry Christmas to you as well! [[User:JacobB|JacobB]] 23:03, 24 December 2009 (EST)
 
  
−
== Thanks ==
+
== Welcome back ==
  
−
Thanks for your edits!  I hope to tackle some more math entries this Christmas Day ....--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 15:15, 25 December 2009 (EST)
+
Welcome back, Jacob!  It's good to see you online here again.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 16:43, 19 June 2011 (EDT)
−
:I look forward to reading them!  I'm glad to see you're on, there's been a bit of trouble.  Now that another blocking user is here, I can take a rest.  I'll be back tonight! [[User:JacobB|JacobB]] 15:16, 25 December 2009 (EST)
 
−
::And merry Christmas!!! [[User:JacobB|JacobB]] 15:19, 25 December 2009 (EST)
 

Latest revision as of 20:02, June 20, 2017

For older discussions, see the archives:

July 7 - Nov. 20, 2009,

Nov. 28 - Dec. 31, 2009,

Dec. 31 - Feb. 28, 2010,

Feb. 28 - May 29, 2010



Barry Farber article

The first paragraph is fine, but I noticed that the last 6 paragraphs of the Barry Farber article are identical to the Wikipedia article of the same name, as of June 3, 2010. I'm currently busy with meetings and won't have time to research any changes for almost a week, but I wanted to bring it to your attention since it is a verbatim copy of the article text from Wikipedia, and I believe this sort of behavior should be avoided. If you're the user at Wikipedia who wrote that article, I apologize for the inconvenience, but please state so on the talk page. In Christ, Tyler Zoran Talk 07:28, 4 June 2010 (EDT)


“ What do you mean--plagiarism? Plagiarism means taking false personal credit for academic gain, which is not at issue here. Nobody is gaining any academic credit for their writing at CP. RJJensen 00:11, 17 January 2010 (EST) ”
I think you should examine the text in greater detail, Tyler. There are only so many ways to say the same thing, and occasional duplication of phrases can occur, but I don't see they are identical. In any event, something like this should be handled discretely, rather than posted publicly as you did. Your doing so makes me suspect your judgment and goodwill. Dr. Jensen should know a thing or two about writing, and his statement stands as a good hallmark. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 08:11, 4 June 2010 (EDT)
TK is right. Tzoran, you should realize that articles here are a work in progress. When an article is created, it is important that it is presentable. I draw from numerous sources, some of which may draw from Wikipedia. If you ever have a problem with an article, fix it yourself - complaining loudly until other people do your work for you is not an admirable trait. JacobBShout out! 16:28, 4 June 2010 (EDT)

Delete article

When you get a second, think you can delete State sovereignty, national union‎? I put a merge template up, but there really isn't much information to merge ... -- Jeff W. LauttamusDiscussion 20:17, 8 June 2010 (EDT)

Thanks for the heads up, JLatt, I'll take a look. JacobBShout out! 20:18, 8 June 2010 (EDT)
That was a good call. We're not big fans of uninformative stub articles. JacobBShout out! 20:19, 8 June 2010 (EDT)
Yeah, I try and throw a {{speedy}} or {{delete}} up anytime I see them. Most of them were created by parodists or trolls, anyways. -- Jeff W. LauttamusDiscussion 20:23, 8 June 2010 (EDT)
Thanks. But just be sure to check to see who created an article before nominating it for deletion.JacobBShout out! 20:27, 8 June 2010 (EDT)

Promoting Multivariable Calculus

I wonder how we cam promote your marvelous course in Multivariable Calculus. Perhaps with a certificate of completion for successful students? Other ideas? --Andy Schlafly 12:43, 19 June 2010 (EDT)

That's not a bad idea, but a certificate is more of a payout - I think the real payout will be when the students take their BC Calculus exams, which would give college credit for Calculus 1 and 2! How we should advertise it to students is a good question - I'll think on his, and I'll get back to you. I know Conservative is good at promoting things, I'll also shoot him an email.
The course is just about ready to go, btw, I just have to re-organize some lectures and add some problems at the end. It's something I keep meaning to do, but it's easy to put on the back burner with summer courses and a full-time job. Maybe I can get it done tomorrow night? Yeah, I think I'll make that my Sunday evening project. JacobBShout out! 14:07, 19 June 2010 (EDT)
Maybe we could set up a track for helping students skip a year of college with AP or CLEP credits, with tips on which colleges accept which credits. Saving a year's tuition can help students enormously.--Andy Schlafly 14:59, 19 June 2010 (EDT)
I'm going to start a new entry outlining how Conaervapedia can help students obtain college degrees for less money, by taking courses here and earning credits with AP or CLEP exams. Our guide can include specific college policies.--Andy Schlafly 00:06, 20 June 2010 (EDT)

REPONSE TO MESSAGES

==The Nature of Greek and English==

Greetings,

There is no such thing as "the original English." I assume that you just made an accidental slip in writing that in your message to me. I hope that does not mean that you just took the KJV and rewrote it without reading Greek. That would not be a translation at all.

Are you saying that English is more precise than Greek? If so, what leads you to believe that?

How much Greek have you had? Perhaps you are an expert in math and physics. Though I took calculus and physics at Georgia Tech, I am not a major in those areas, and I would be wary of posting articles on those subjects. If Bible and Greek are not your majors, you ought to back off from translating the Bible. Pardon me if indeed you have a graduate degree in Greek.

How do you know that "concepts which are only vaguely expressed in Greek can be made crystal clear in English." If the Lord gave us passages which have studied ambiguity, who are we to change that? Greek is to theology as math is to science. Now don't tell me that concepts which are only vaguely expressed in math can be made crystal clear in English.

My colleague, you are in the process of producing a product which is not a translation at all, and which will bring Conservapedia into ridicule. Students of Greek will disparage the product as the product of uneducated hybris. The only service you can do to readers is to enable them to read God's word accurately, if you know Greek. Of course you could do them a service by giving them something to roll on the floor laughing at, including the entire Conservapedia. But I don't think you want to do that.

I am concerned about a distortion of God's word and also sincerely about your stance regarding translation.

If you are a born-again Christian and know the Lord Jesus as your only and sufficient Savior (no works), then please give my comments prayerful consideration.(Thunkful 15:19, 19 June 2010 (EDT))

I'm discussing this on User talk:Thunkful and will only add here that the claim that "Greek is to theology as math is to science" does not withstand scrutiny. Math is precise. Language is not. Greek lacked many concepts developed in modern English, terminology often developed to better express the original intent of Christ.--Andy Schlafly 00:52, 20 June 2010 (EDT)

CLEP Math

Jacob, increasingly I'm hearing that the CLEP exams are the pathway to low-cost college credit. There are 4 CLEP math exams, but no advanced ones. I'm describing them in the CLEP entry. I wonder if there is another exam offered for demonstrating proficiency in multivariable calculus.--Andy Schlafly 11:27, 22 June 2010 (EDT)

Yes, I recently advised somebody (mistakenly) that the multivariate calc course would aid with the Calc BC exam. That's why I'm starting on these Calc I and II courses. Now that I think about it, I'm not sure that there is a college-credit exam for calc III. Which is unfortunate, given the time I put into that, but we can have these calc I and II courses up soon, I hope. JacobBShout out! 20:23, 22 June 2010 (EDT)
The multivariable calculus course can still be a pathway to credit even though the CLEP exams do not yet include this advanced topic. A student could take our multivariable course in conjunction with a low-cost community college course and obtain credit by passing the final exam.--Andy Schlafly 22:12, 22 June 2010 (EDT)
Oh, absolutely! It's a good course and I'm not disparaging my own work at all! JacobBShout out! 22:14, 22 June 2010 (EDT)
More students would take multivariable calculus for credit at low-cost community colleges if they could have some explanatory material on the internet, which your course offers. Some community college students cannot afford to skip work to attend all the classes, but with online material could pass the exams. The Khan Academy also offers supplemental material by video, but I don't find it to be as effective as good textual explanations.--Andy Schlafly 23:26, 22 June 2010 (EDT)

My MV Calc stuff

Please see the bottom of my talk page. SamHB 22:25, 30 June 2010 (EDT)

More of Same

Jacob:

I have been continuing my MV calc work over at Wikiversity, using the "natural vector" as opposed to "unit vector" method—the issue we were arguing about. (Apropos: your "Oh, is that a sig sauer over there? Hand it to me? Great, thanks. *blows brains out*." comment on my talk page. :-) I'm still trying to do the "natural vector" stuff, though it's pretty daunting, and I may just decide that it wasn't right. So save a bullet for me, OK?

I have cut way back on the overall scope of the project, leaving out the earlier "single variable calculus review" stuff, for example, and leaving out the later stuff about the wave equation and diffusion equation and ODE's and PDE's. We were really going after an incredibly ambitious goal! So it's just 3 lectures, going up to Stokes' theorem. At least, that's the not-yet-attained goal. But the first 2 lectures are in pretty good shape.

There is definitely something appealing about saying that the length of a vector is always the square root of the sum of the squares of its components ("unit vector" method.) I have to admit that. But there is also something appealing about saying that I can choose any coordinate system I want, even if it isn't orthogonal, and the formulas will always work. For example, I give the parametric definition of a helix by making artificial "helical coordinates" in 3 dimensions, and then just holding two coordinates constant to get a 1-dimensional curve. And the arc length along that curve just comes from the 1-dimensional induced metric. That is why I wanted to use "natural" vectors.

Anyway, you might want to have a look. And I'd appreciate any comments you might have.

SamHB 23:53, 22 September 2010 (EDT)

Teaching newbies

Well put. --Ed Poor Talk 17:54, 15 August 2010 (EDT)

Barry Farber

JacobB, hope you're well. Your edits to Barry Farber are being questioned. Could you respond? Thanks.--Andy Schlafly 00:35, 27 November 2010 (EST)

Welcome back

Welcome back, Jacob! It's good to see you online here again.--Andy Schlafly 16:43, 19 June 2011 (EDT)