Yeah, the discovery institute is just another creation science cover front. No science, just 'truth'. They try hard to look legit. And a fascinating fact is they are in Seattle of all places. It's a 'the earth is 9000 years old somehow' place and "let's cast suspicion on all science that contradicts the bible".
so what should they do? explain how they should think about inviting your kid to events that they might worry would be too much? It's an awkward conversation for them to have too. What is the consideration? is this different for every autistic kid?
No 2 autistic people are the same. For example, my girlfriend is sensitive to certain sounds. Our daughter appears to have the same issue, but we don't know for sure yet. I learned to get less sensitive to it over the years.
As for your question: invite the kid and take their needs into account? Is it really that hard to grasp? I don't get it. Some kids have an allergy. Some kids have lice. Some kids have tamper tantrums. Some kids have farts. Some kids have skin infections. Some kids pee in their pants. Some kids have ADHD. Some kids have.. well I guess you get the point by now.
Try out the children playing at your (or their) premises, see if they get along with each other without too much hassle. Make clear rules. Explain things in a positive way. If it doesn't work out, be honest about it to the parents. Don't make it as if "you want to do your kid a favor". You're doing it for selfish reasons because you cannot handle the kid. That's fine (though not ideal), but do say that. Cause that's actually what you're really saying in a kind of nice package which is as fake as you can make it.
Yeah, I don't want kids with lice, skin infections or temper tantrums over at my house. So I'm not sure the burden is on me to take their needs into account.
What they should do is invite the person and the person can decide if it’s too much for them. In this case, my wife and I are perfectly capable deciding if she’s not going to handle it well. If she was older she would be perfectly capable of deciding if she can handle it or not. The thing that makes me the most upset is that the person having the party decides that it’s too much for another person, and then acts like they’re doing you a favor. Don’t take the decision away from the person.
Since the patlive service and all those 'answering services' that you get are basically faciliating a scam, I'm sure a serious prosecutor could get a court order telling them to pass the information on that they had about the underlying person.
If it was a reloadable card, you can still figure it out with more effort. You threaten to sue them into oblivion as facilitating criminal actions, and you get them to get you on a real phone number with the scammer, and then you track them down that way. You just have to try harder.
A reporter could pursue this by getting a job with that firm and tracking backwards.
I can't imagine why this ever would make sense. Only scammers would benefit would accept this, because of the lack of clarity in ownership, it's like a deliberate attempt to circumvent normal financial transactions, which only benefits scammers.
It strikes me as the same thing as the fake-check auto purchase scams that infest different on-line auto sales channels.
You should read more on seller/owner financing to understand why one would use it in a transaction before dismissing it as a scam. To think only scammers would benefit is an ignorant position to hold if you don't understand why counterparties in a real estate transaction would elect this financing mechanism over conventional financing. Ownership interest is still recorded with the local jurisdiction, so nothing is hidden (although with a land trust, you can hide beneficial interest [it's treated as personal property and handled with trust docs; you could think of it as tracking real estate ownership "off ledger" since it's not recorded with a deed] so people don't know who own a parcel).
I hate your business helping middlemen scalpers. Middlemen scalpers are just barely different than phone scammers. It may not be technically illegal, but it's a detriment to society.
When (probably not an if at this point) there are meat substitutes that are palatable to carnivores, will vegetarians accept them, meaning eat them? It's an interesting question, but I expect there will always be people that like the current vegetarian no meat lifestyle, even if there are non-meat but meat-like substitutes they'll avoid them.
I do love a burger, even though I feel like I'm moving toward the veggie lifestyle for health and environmental reasons. I do have one vegetarian friend who likes meat-like substitutes :-).
Honestly I see no reason to eat this stuff ever unless I'm in a pinch. If I want a burger I'm not wanting something that looks or smells like meat just something with the same form factor as a burger.
Lately it's lentils and kidney beans with walnuts. Smash em all up and you got yourself a nice lil patty.
I make sliders this way with all the fixings and I just don't ever see myself wanting something more "realistic" haha
helm was $300 for a time - $100 a year service fee after. I see they are now showing out of stock. And they started to add other services, including hosting some services on it with nextcloud.
Ever read Larry Niven's "Ringworld"? Don't forget that the Puppeteers destroyed the Ringworld's technological civilization by creating a substance that destroyed their superconductors. If we ever invent them it will be fantastic, but it will also be a central vulnerability to our civilization - but I guess we have other ones already.
Correlation is not probability. You can't compare them at all. Flipping a coin for each student would produce a correlation of 0, far lower than the correlation of 0.56 cited above. Have a look at some plots of data [1] with different correlation coefficients to see how dramatic it can be. Note the difference between r = 0.00 and r = 0.60. That's about what we're dealing with here.
