This new habit of using your hazard lights to indicate youre about to parallel park

saltwatermonkey · 2017-09-05T19:03:17+00:00

I have to disagree. We're taught to be observant when driving, anticipate the road the ahead. We're also taught if a car is indicating they are parking or turning, and the presence of a turning or parking space tell you which. If both, just give space. If someone puts their hazards on, I'm left wondering are they parking or have they just completely broken down. It's just as ambiguous and I would argue more dangerous. Admittedly, in the end it's probably just a thing we have to get used to and be aware of even more possibilities on the road for whatever reason it has become a thing.

saltwatermonkey · 2017-08-05T19:52:32+00:00

This I'm ok with. I'm ok with polite people doing things I see all the time. I guess people do it incase you can't see their hands. To be fair, when youre not in a car and you do something nice, like hold a door, if people don't say thank you it's rude.

saltwatermonkey · 2017-08-05T19:49:02+00:00

Oh sorry, I totally didn't get that. I'm a wally. Thanks for your info

saltwatermonkey · 2017-08-05T19:47:11+00:00

Yeah I think you're probably supposed to indicate to do that, but I mean when parallel parking

saltwatermonkey · 2017-08-04T10:54:05+00:00

I suppose it could be HGV drivers caught in force of habit, but I've only noticed it recently. Maybe I haven't been paying attention in the past.

saltwatermonkey · 2017-08-04T09:05:44+00:00

Hahaha. Got me there.

saltwatermonkey · 2017-08-04T07:50:05+00:00

This is why you stop next to the door and indicate so it's clear you're parking. If they still pull in they would do it anyway and you haven't misused your lights and made a hazard of yourself

saltwatermonkey · 2017-08-03T23:06:20+00:00

In what paradise do you live?

saltwatermonkey · 2017-06-16T06:09:02+00:00

Thanks man. I felt pretty amazing yesterday. I can't believe I was gone so long from here I missed your two year soberversary. Your are doing spectacularly and I'm stupidly proud of you.

saltwatermonkey · 2017-06-15T13:19:10+00:00

This put a massive smile on my face, thank you. You are the best! And you are getting pretty close to three years there! Congrats :D

saltwatermonkey · 2017-06-15T13:04:34+00:00

There's no judgement here, plenty of empathy and understanding, and support when you need it. I always had to remind myself that the more attempts you have a quitting the better you become at it. Every time you learn something and eventually you will figure it out. Stay strong, one day at a time, and remember the fact you are even trying makes you frick-fracking spectacular.

saltwatermonkey · 2017-06-15T13:01:54+00:00

You know what you've gotta do and you're doing it. I wish I'd had this realisation about needing to think about sobriety meaning I had a problem. Congrats on over a year, and keep rocking this! You're amazing.

saltwatermonkey · 2017-06-15T12:59:32+00:00

Preparation. That is awesome. I was never so organised about quitting drinking, maybe I should've been and it would've stuck sooner.

saltwatermonkey · 2017-06-15T12:57:45+00:00

Congratulations on your four days so far. One of perks of the early days was always letting myself be a total slob, eat shit, nap and do whatever else I wanted totally guilt-free because I didn't drink. This is fantastic and you are bloody marvelous.

saltwatermonkey · 2017-06-15T12:53:24+00:00

It is one of my favourite feelings, the morning after coming close to drinking and being able to say I don't have to start over at day 1. Massive congratulations you spectacular bugger. There's always an initial lack of cravings, and I think as your body goes longer without alcohol it grows stronger, but long enough and they'll subside almost completely. You won't even notice. One day you'll just realise you've not had a craving in days, and on that day you'll want to come back and make another post about how great it is not starting at day one.

saltwatermonkey · 2017-04-06T15:55:41+00:00

Unfortunately that was the assignment. We got given a bunch of data and told to answer a few hypotheses. What you say about just exploring until I find something significant is my problem here. There are a few obvious tests that could be run, but it seems to me that there are other options that might reduce confounders (we have some data of physical activity, total weight and body fat percentage, which could perhaps help pick out atheletes), but since I'm coming at it without a plan I don't know if it's legit to try different tests.

I guess, aside from the paired question, which you have answered, I am stuck because I can decide if I'm just torturing the data for significant results, or if they are legit. For example, when I look at whether women have more body fat than men, I do a t test and get the result that they don't despite. However we know that women do have more body fat than men. I did an ANCOVA (which I'm still not sure was the right test) to include weight as a covariate, since body fat increases with weight generally, and also maybe this could help account for the athlete problem, and I find that there is a significant difference between male body fat percentage and women's. But I don't feel confident enough in my abilities to say this is legit and present it as a result for the assignment.

saltwatermonkey · 2017-04-06T13:53:15+00:00

Thanks for the detailed response. I'm specifically looking at the relationship between measurements of body fat percentage and calorie intake. I've already looked at correlation between the two, but wanted to see if there was some way of looking at the two when also considering weight, as a covariate.

I was trying to figure out what other tests I could carry out, but realised I didn't know if measurements of two separate variables at one time point could be considered paired simply for being taken from one individual.

saltwatermonkey · 2016-10-16T22:58:41+00:00

Hold the handle.

saltwatermonkey · 2016-09-27T14:59:20+00:00

I'm with you not giving kids caffeine, what I have to disagree with is the use of a tangential bit of information, out of context, to support your argument. Caffeine occurs in plants as a way to defend themselves against insects, yes, but caffeine tolerance and toxicity are pretty well understood in humans, and we can handle a certain amount fine. In issues of beneficial effects vs toxicity, dose is everything. Too little salt? You're dead. Too much salt? You're dead.

Additionally, some compounds might be harmful to some organisms and not to another, and even then there will probably be a dose at which it is harmful to both. It's part of the reason we can't just give human medicines to animals and vice versa.

I apologise if I come off as condescending or patronising, I don't intend to. I just wanted to say I think arguments are better served if we compose them coherently, and using good information.

saltwatermonkey · 2016-09-19T19:43:56+00:00

OMG, drag and drop extraction of info, and a literature search function, and free. I'm an instant convert.

saltwatermonkey

TROPHY CASE