DrW

Things are actually more complicated. It depends whether you consider paints and pigments in art or for printing, or work with lights as in a projector. From Wikipedia: "RYB is a subtractive color model used in art and applied design in which red, yellow, and blue pigments are considered primary colors. The RYB color model relates specifically to color in the form of paint and pigment application in art and design. Other common color models include the light model (RGB) and the paint, pigment and ink CMY color model, which is much more accurate in terms of color gamut and intensity compared to the traditional RYB color model, the latter emerging in conjunction with the CMYK color model in the printing industry. This model was used for printing by Jacob Christoph Le Blon in 1725 and called it Coloritto or harmony of colouring,[8] stating that the primitive (primary) colors are yellow, red and blue, while the secondary are orange, green and purple or violet."

And these are experts at work...

In and around the German city of Hannover, where I grew up, we have a very unusual way to consume beer, called the Lüttje Lage. You have two glasses, a larger one (still pretty small) with 0.1 liter (about 4 fl. oz.) of a brown beer, and a shot glass with 1/10 of the volume of "korn" (grain brandy). What makes this combination so special is that you drink the beer while the korn is flowing in your beer glass. Sounds complicated, but do not fret - there are many instructions to be found on the internet. https://www.luettjelage.com/tutorial What I found especially interesting is that they have instructions in languages of countries not allowing the use of alcohol. One advantage I see from drinking this way - it is difficult to get really drunk. Once your coordination is compromised, you will spill most of the drink. Amy specific traditions in your location?

No, wrong Copeland, but it seems he became a televangelist... Kenneth Copeland

Thank you for your detailed explanation. It does not affect my preference for the outdoor version of lacrosse (which seems to align with the fact that I also love watching soccer).

Some might do, especially in Southern Germany. However, it is not a general custom. I had my first beer with 16 or 17 on our high school class trip to (at that time) West Berlin.

I would suggest to return to Butker's speech.

While I may not agree with their stance, for the NFL the two situations are different. In the "far worse" cases the player is accused of a crime or behavior generally condemned by society. Thus, there is no need for the NFL to confirm "We do not tolerate violence against women" or "Rape is a capital crime". However, in Butker's case there was the (admittedly, very remote) possiblity that the NFL would like women to stay home and serve their husbands wings, pizza and beer during a game. Thus, they had to state their point of view on this issue.

I had really intended to stop responding to "intelligent design" viewpoints, as this discussion is mostly useless. However, can you please explain to me how you see this as a "zero-sum argument"? Solution 2 just requires time, of which there was plenty. Solution 1 needs an "intelligent creator". Don't you see how this complicates everything? Did he/she organize everything as it is today from the beginning, or are they still working on it today? Going back to my example of the Orkney sheep. Had they always been designed to live on seaweed and they just had to be brought into the right environment? Otherwise, how did their digestive system adapt? And please do not tell me that you accept evolution as response to immediate environmental changes (the Orkney sheep, adapting in a few decades), but reject it as a long-term solution.

As I probably explained before, because of my German heritage, I am rooting for the Mavericks in the NBA (Dirk) and the Oilers in the NHL (Leon; although I would be much happier if the Sabres ever reached this level). Chance had it that during the recent weeks their games alternated from day to day. Today was the first time both teams played an important game on the same day, even starting on the same time. As I find hockey more interesting basketball, my original plan had been to watch the Oilers and occasionally have a look at the Mavs. However, it turned out that the Oilers were handling the Canucks easily (at least tonight), while the OKC-Mavs game turned into a real nail biter. Thus, most of my time I spent on the NBA game. In the end, both "my" teams won. For the NBA conference finals: "Go Luka!!"; for the NHL playoffs: "Go Leon and the Oilers!! Repeat today's performance, and you will get past the Canucks!" And a nugget from ESPN: Draisaitl became just the fourth player in NHL history to record 60 assists in 60 playoffs games and the third in league history to get to 100 points — behind Wayne Gretzky and Mario Lemieux.

Let me thank you for the detailed response to my post. And please forgive me - I will not respond to most of your points because whatever I say will not change your mind. Just an anecdote: When I was looking for a tenure-track assistant professor position 20 years ago, one of the possibilities was Baylor, possibly the largest Christian university in the country. I looked up their web site, and the first hit in my research area of biochemistry was a biology professor who taught microbiology lab. In his syllabus he clearly stated (I paraphrase here, because that was 20 years ago): To be successful in this class, you have to accept the principle of evolution. One thing that made me curious: Do you have examples of MCAT questions you found problematic?

Sorry, for me it is just the other way around. There is neither a part of a cell nor a biochemical reaction in an organism that could not have generated by evolution. One factor adherents to intelligent design generally overlook is time. Nature had millions of years of testing what works and (much more frequently) what does not work. And please do not tell me that you believe the World was created just about 4000 BC. There is NO scientific fact supporting this notion. But let's go back to evolution vs intelligent design. I am a biochemist working on an enzyme called ATP synthase. It converts electrochemical energy stored in a proton gradient (imagine the water behind the Hoover dam that would like to escape the dam) into chemical energy in form of a molecule called ATP (imagine gas for your car). For a long time, it was not known how the enzyme would do that - the intermediate is mechanical energy. The protons flowing down the gradient (i.e. the water down the Hoover dam) powers the rotation of a part of the enzyme (like a turbine) which then allows the synthesis of ATP (the generation of gas). As you can see, the mechanism of the enzyme is pretty complicated. In fact, Ken Ham's "Answers in Genesis" gives it as example of intelligent design, as there seemed to be no precedent of an enzyme where a part of it rotates to facilitate a chemical reaction on the other protein subunits surrounding the central protein in ring-like fashion. Well, it turns out that there are much simpler enzymes using the same basic mechanism. DNA helicases unwind DNA that occupies the center of the protein ring; some protein transporters use the center of the ring for substrate transport. Thus, evolution could have easily taken these simpler proteins as precursors to ATP synthase. A much more recent example. There is a breed of sheep on one of the British Orkney Islands that had been confined to an area close to the sea for a number of decades. They "learned" to live on seaweed as main food source. Seaweed is very low on copper, an essential mineral. Thus, their digestive system had to adapt to extract copper more efficiently. How do you think that happened? (Interestingly, it is now dangerous for these sheep to feed on regular grass, as they take up too much copper which is toxic.)

Same here. I like to watch outdoor lacrosse, but IMHO it does not translate well to indoors. The same applies to a number of sports. Indoor soccer is an atrocity, unless you need a sport for your kids in winter. Perhaps someone can come up with ideas for indoor polo - that would be a hoot.

I hope everything goes well for mom and the baby (and the dad, of course).

Please do not get upset - you got this all wrong. I was in no way insinuating that you were incorrect. I was actually more concerned about the accuracy of the web site.

In his final home game for the Bundesliga side Borussia Dortmund, Marco Reus (who had also been playing for the German national team) bought beer for everyone of drinking age in the stadium (total attendance 81,000). By the way, Reus is considering a move to US Major League Soccer.

According to https://driversed.com/driving-information/driving-techniques/making-right-and-left-turns/ it depends on the state if you can change lanes on a left turn. According to the web site, FL does not allow it.

First, let me clarify a misunderstanding. I was serious and not mocking you when I thanked you for the detail; I truly appreciated it. Second, see the bolded. How do you know about Butker's reasoning behind ignoring stay-at-home dads? Is it possible that he does not see being a stay-at-home dad as an appropriate role for a man?

Thank you for explaining your thoughts in so much detail. It also shows that sometimes/often we hear what we want to hear and not what was actually said (this applies to both sides in this issue). You added a few words (highlighted) that I could not find in Butker's speech. Where does he address the stay-at-home dads? From the context it is clear that this omission is not an oversight; it is intentional.

He got a degree in industrial engineering. He also owns a business. Just looking at his credentials on paper, there could be worse choices.

He might be their only alumnus with a Superbowl ring.

In the end, everybody or every couple has to decide what is best for them, and going with Mr. Butker's suggestions is not always optimal. My wife and I both have a career in science and still managed to successfully raise two kids. On the other side, my sister had planned to return to teaching geography after her second child. Sadly, the child was severely handicapped, and she and her husband decided that he would continue working because he had a high-ranking position as a mathematician, while she would be saying at home. On the other side, several years ago I was awarded a rather large research grant by the NIH (National Institutes of Health). Looking for a scientist to help me running the lab, I put an ad in Science, one of the leading journals. I got about 400 responses, but only two came close to what I expected. I hired one of them, a postdoc from Armenia, Nelli. It was a full success. We have published more than five papers based on her work. Her husband is a carpenter (an excellent one, judging by the work he did for us), and is supporting her for every step in her career, although, admittedly, initially it was not easy for him to give up the role as the major breadwinner as suggested by Armenian customs. Nelli is now an associate professor at Penn State; her daughter graduated from college, her son is still in high school.

This is where on the Autobahn in Germany you use your high beam, flashing them on and off. Even if takes a minute, eventually the slow driver will notice you and let you pass.

To set things straight, my daughter would like to emphasize that the rhetoric degree is not a minor, but her second major. Her first major is in the STEM field.

Hey, I beat you by two minutes. But you gave the much more detailed explanation. Well done.