There are two kinds of school shooters:
1. The ones who kill people who have seemingly somehow harmed them (like that Alabama proffie who mowed down her colleagues after they denied her tenure).
2. The ones who kill people who have never harmed them or even met them (like that Newtown man last December).
Q. What distinguishes these two kinds of people? And how can we avoid them (because, frankly, we already have too much goddamned misery on our plates)?
A. __________________________________
Extra credit: Name the book and page number whence this image came.
Cal once told me not to bother trying to address Bubba's font choices. Nobody seems to make use of color and size as much. And that's his own avatar, just to be clear. Texas? Do you know dear Walter? I think his primary mode of transportation is a Firebird, right?
ReplyDeleteThe other image.
Delete:-)
I don't know about the 1st question, but I can answer the 2nd.
ReplyDeleteNone of these shooters, of both types, have ever been in my kitchen.
So, I could avoid them by remaining in my kitchen.
My logic is undeniable.
Hmm ... The image ...
ReplyDeleteScientific but not clearly written. Temperatures in Farenheit. Must be engineering. Google found nothing so I doubt that it even exists.
What distinguishes those people? How tenuous their grasp is of reality. Neither really groks the motivations of others, but the first is merely narcissistic or at least grandiose while the second is completely out of touch and perhaps terrified. (This is not a defense of the second group, but an indictment of how hard it is to get them mental health care compared to how easy it is to get guns.)
ReplyDeleteExtra credit: That's a patent book and it's on page 216. How many points is that worth?
....And now for some random kvetching commentary from Nando's "Third Tier Reality" anti-law school blog:
ReplyDelete"Anonymous" December 10, 2013 at 5:23 AM
"Academics are the most dishonest professionals out there. They are only liberals because it gives them cover to say they believe in "educational empowerment" but its really just to keep the spigot of federally-backed loans on. If the government got out of student loan business and let the markets decides, you'd see enrollment plummet because students wouldn't get financing and none have the money upfront for tuition. This goes for law schools and undergraduate alike. Thus, the federally-backed student loans keep enrollment artificially high with cheap money that goes right into "professors" pockets. The other alternative, cutting tuition down to affordable prices, is out of the question given the greed of the law school pigs.
The Association of American Law Schools (pig lobby) and Higher Education lobbies the federal government and Department of Education to keep the gravy train running. Politicians who maintain the status quo are usually rewarded with lucrative positions in universities and law schools when they leave office. And it makes the liberals feel warm and fuzzy and gives them good PR that they are in academia instead of working for Wall Street. But instead of screwing investors, they're just screwing students. People complain about bailing out the banks, how about over $1 trillion in student loan debt nationally? Most of it federally-backed? I'm not some arch-type conservative, but the liberals and democrats are disgusting because they are the main protectors of this filthy scam.
And you expect the ABA to regulate law schools? They are just another part of the same moving object. Academia is part of the revolving door. The only way to end it is to starve the beast, but since they won't end the student-loan gravy train, we have to educate people through the internet to choose not to enroll.
Keep it up Nando."
Oh, Nando! Yes, he came here and insulted us and then left. Thanks for keeping his writing in the mix!
DeleteNando didn't write that; it was one of his legion of no-name commenters.
DeleteHe did write the following linked comments:
http://thirdtierreality.blogspot.com/2013/12/rutgers-university-school-of-law-camden.html
The extra credit question came from a furnace catalog. I'll say page 17.
ReplyDeleteIt's almost impossible to avoid them, but one can minimize the chance of anything happening. Tenure-track faculty that seem to be on the path to denial of tenure should be contacted by their department heads, who should also contact their union reps., and be given advice about how to remedy the situation if possible, what options they have for postponement of their tenure application, choosing favorable referees, etc. If they seem clearly headed for denial anyway, they should be directed to where they can get other career advice and, finally, counselling to deal with the great emotional burden that comes with denial of tenure. I know my comments are normally flippant here, but this is a serious matter. I speak as someone that had a serious breakdown under the pressure of my looming tenure application.
ReplyDeleteWe can also work towards ensuring the tenure process is as open and fair as possible. Where I am, an awful lot of it is nebulous, leaving room for bias and partiality.
DeleteThermax 11A? I think that's the model of 6 burner gas range Walt has in his office.
ReplyDeleteLying sack of shit. It's a Bertazzoni. And it's the big one.
DeleteThat's from my book! It's on page xxvii. I haven't published it yet, but I did mail a copy to myself in 1993 to prove I wrote it. I'll be filing a take down request with RGM and suing for lost income.
ReplyDeleteWoldman's Engineering Alloys, 4th Edition.
ReplyDeletePage 629.
You all get 100 bonus points because you're all special.
Incompetent engineers maybe, but still worthy of much love.