Results 46 to 60 of 60
Thread: Revenge
-
26th July 2015, 09:58 AM #46SENIOR MEMBER
- Join Date
- Dec 2013
- Location
- Mt Waverley Vic 3149
- Age
- 81
- Posts
- 199
I just had to do it !!!! I was getting very concerned for Grumpy's well-being and became quite upset
I have read his earlier post again .... and again .... and again ....
I need more information:
Was George with them, if so did he walk or was he carried?
Was Charlotte with them, if so what diameter are the wheels on the pram, and how many times do they turn per kilometer?
and I just cannot start to understand the torment and demons he was dealing with ....
What was causing him to image that George Mavridis would be walking around the estate with Kate & Will AND that Kate would be carrying him.???
I mean ----well ---- Kate's not a very big girl
-
26th July 2015, 11:29 AM #47
Did they stop to:
1-take any photos,
2-smell the roses
3-pick flowers
4-whateverregards
Nick
veni, vidi, tornavi
Without wood it's just ...
-
26th July 2015, 11:49 AM #48GOLD MEMBER
- Join Date
- Jun 2003
- Location
- Sunbury, Vic
- Age
- 85
- Posts
- 632
-
26th July 2015, 12:44 PM #49Senior Member
- Join Date
- Nov 2011
- Location
- Adelaide
- Posts
- 10
-
26th July 2015, 01:36 PM #50GOLD MEMBER
- Join Date
- Aug 2005
- Location
- Queensland
- Posts
- 613
No one has mentioned the security detail - police, MI5/6, military, security sniffing dogs, overhead choppers - did the downdraft have an effect?
You need to look at all of the variables.Regards,
Bob
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
-
26th July 2015, 02:49 PM #51
and was Kate really trying to keep up with William or were the Corgi's nipping at her heels
The person who never made a mistake never made anything
Cheers
Ray
-
28th July 2015, 12:47 AM #52
-
28th July 2015, 12:54 AM #53
but your problem is missing a vital piece of data
the couple walked ROUND the estate holding hands
which implies walking side-by-side around a perimeter so one party will have walked a measurable distance further than the other
so answer (e) can only be approximately right.regards from Alberta, Canada
ian
-
28th July 2015, 08:09 AM #54GOLD MEMBER
- Join Date
- Jun 2003
- Location
- Sunbury, Vic
- Age
- 85
- Posts
- 632
-
28th July 2015, 12:53 PM #55
-
28th July 2015, 11:02 PM #56
were we told what the prevailing weather conditions were
regards
Nick
veni, vidi, tornavi
Without wood it's just ...
-
28th July 2015, 11:45 PM #57which is heavier, a pound of feathers or a pound of gold?
A. The same.
B. The feathers.
c. The gold.
a kilogram of feathers will be a package around the size of a two or three pillows.
you expect a package that size to weigh some kilos, so when lifting it you exert enough oomph to lift 5 or more kgs
the density of gold is 19.30 g/cm3 so, a kilogram of gold occupies a volume of approximately 52cm3 -- imagine a box 25 x 25 x 83 mm -- unless you know for sure that the box is solid gold, your mind expects that a box that size will weight less than 100 g so your body only exerts enough oomph to lift 100g.
example: if you cut a 250g pack of butter into quarters lengthways, each quarter will weigh around 65g but the dimensions of each quarter will be greater than those of our (we wish !) 1kg gold bar.regards from Alberta, Canada
ian
-
29th July 2015, 12:15 AM #58GOLD MEMBER
- Join Date
- Aug 2005
- Location
- Queensland
- Posts
- 613
To answer the original question, the key is post #35.
Which is heavier, a pound of feathers or a pound of gold?
A. The same.
B. The feathers.
C. The gold.
Answer is B
Gold, precious metals etc are traditionally weighed in Troy measure which has 12 ounces to the pound. Feathers would be avoirdupois and 16 ounces to the pound.Regards,
Bob
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
-
29th July 2015, 12:35 PM #59.
- Join Date
- Feb 2006
- Location
- Perth
- Posts
- 1,174
It's neither. Educationally speaking the question posed by the OP is a joke. For a start there is far too much to read for a multiple choice test. It's been well established that multiple choice questions should also not include too many elements that create confusion - the question should be clear and obvious. It's WAY too easy to create these sorts of supposedly "tricky" questions and I have written many myself. They have very poor discrimination between the students that can achieve the subject objectives and those that don't, and do little except stress students. I've seen too many smart teachers (including myself when I first started) doing this to try usually to assert their so called intellectual superiority over students. There is no need to create such a long winded question to test if students can separate valid from invalid information. As a Uni head of department I often asked lecturers to remove questions like this every time I saw them on draft exam papers.
The ultimate question for the lecturer was did he/she actually teach students how to separate valid from invalid physical information in the first place or did he/she just think they did? During my stint over 10 years as a university course accreditor this was one of the many things that came out. Too many lecturers not clearly even stating subject objectives, not teaching the objectives that were listed in their subject outlines (just teaching their pet stuff) and then even assessing something completely outside the subject objectives. The students should not have to guess "what is in the lecturers head".
-
29th July 2015, 01:32 PM #60
....bump....
The person who never made a mistake never made anything
Cheers
Ray
Similar Threads
-
Revenge Is Sweet
By Barry Hicks in forum JOKESReplies: 2Last Post: 15th July 2008, 04:28 PM -
revenge
By durwood in forum JOKESReplies: 1Last Post: 6th December 2006, 04:37 PM -
Revenge
By vsquizz in forum JOKESReplies: 14Last Post: 2nd July 2004, 02:02 AM -
Blonds revenge
By Gino in forum JOKESReplies: 0Last Post: 15th January 2001, 09:41 PM
Bookmarks