You are right. It is one of our favorite benefits.

Heck, at least Kissinger won after actually reducing nuclear weapons, decreasing tension, and opening up China.

Listen to this person. They know their shit. Moving through project management does help with the transistion, but depending on your org, it might not help. All that MBA bs that people complain about actually has purpose.

Well cited, very informative. I love it. Hey, what is with the helicopter over the hou0u8409ulksfd['OQ#([No Carrier]

Usually has at least two. We keep two v-8 generators on standby and have a massive ups battery bank and even then many devices come with their own built in ups.

We have a lot of cable, considering the campus with quite several 4 or more floor buildings with three seperate networks, with redundant run cable. We buy the patch cable in bulk, but the long lenths, we pay someone to run and make. It is just cheeper and we get higher quality. Most people, without a lot of experience, will make crappy cable.

I, for one, welcome our new Blood Ice Masters... at least until I get the blow torch out. It is neat to see where life will thrive.

The skull of the last person to fudge a project report, you insensitive clod.

Being a IT PM in health care, I usually have some of the best war stories among my fellow IT PMs from non-health care. Having to crowbar a door to an Labor & Delivery OR because of door control micro going bad while a women went into labor crisis makes for a great story at the bar... at least until the nuke engineer goes, 'Let me tell you about the time I set the radiation detectors off... dramatic pause... from ten feet away'. However, leaving through that stress sucks.

Talk with you doctor about antifungal medicines and testings. If you have an accute fungal infection, antibiotics can make it worse.

The worst place I had to code is when I had to reprogram a microcontroller in place using a laptop while waste deep in sewage. We had to fix an issue and didn't have enough time to pull it out of the controller box and put it into a test box. So I coded and tested the patch on an emulator then trudged across in waders and types as fast as I could into the terminal window. Thank goodness it took the first shot. Other places we had to code micros... 110 degree utility shaft and a 20 degree roof in high winds. I love my office job now.

I don't think that a full discourse on the basics of theory is required. In sociological work, which is funny to say because I am more of an economist and game theorist in approach, we have to state the strengths, weaknesses, and appropriateness of theory we apply to our research. For example, I use the powers approach in organization analysis, which is considered revolutionary in health care. (All you financial analysts, stop laughing) I have to state why the powers approach of financial analysis is appropriate, what the weakness of that approach, and what benefits it gives. Another example is when I use game theory approaches. I don't have to justify the math, just the method of analysis. Most of my other doctoral cohort is struggling with it at our stage, but I am overloading and progressing faster then the others. I am almost caught up with the next cohort.

What I find that is better about the social sciences in comparison to the hard sciences is that a good slice of us training in dealing with people. I think it improves presentation skills.

That's because they didn't handle the ice core at all. They simply applied a newer computational algorithm to the data collected from the ice core by other scientists years before they published. In fact, the second to last sentence in the paper says "We thank C. Genthon and J. Jouzel for performing the CO2 spectral analysis..." Their papers are, of course, listed at the end with all the other references.

Are you talking about: J R Petit, J Jouzel, D Raynaud, N I Barkov, et al. (1999). Climate and atmospheric history of the past 420,000 years from the Vostok ice core, Antarctica. Nature, 399(6735), 429-436. Retrieved April 7, 2009, from ProQuest Medical Library database. (Document ID: 42351682)? Because the phrase is not in there. The paper reads like the researchers were involved in the drilling.

It might be a good idea to read at least the next few sentences before hurling accusations of plagiarism around. When you do, notice that the sentence you quoted is the "topic sentence" of the paragraph. Other sentences in that paragraph serve to expand on individual points in the topic sentence, and they're all referenced. In fact, there are no less than 14 references you can read (they're all listed at the end of the article) to catch up on the science contained in that sentence.

Actually, the statement is "leads it reading as opinion or possible plagerism" which is really close to the truth. The section is clumsily written, almost like they are trying to shove two thesis statements into the same flow. It goes warrant one, warrant two, evidence one, evidence two, synthesis two, synthesis one, closure. Since it is hard to track its flow, the section is a difficult read, which causes the warrant to come across badly, removing support from the general thesis.

Really? How about...

That is data analysis and synthesis. I am asking about the appropriateness and validity of the approach, not the data. If a research does not discuss the appropriateness of their approach, then it is impossible to validate the reasons for the approach.

Limiting the data set in what sense?

I would read p. 430-431 if I were you. They limited the ice core due to volcanic activity without discussing the impact. None of my editors would allow me to get away with that.

Really? how about...

If you want someone to research something, you state 'This study raises these questions for further research' or something similar. Another method is to state 'We suggest... but it would require further research'.